[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 226 (Friday, November 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 72482]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25725]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-045]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed November 14, 2022 10 a.m. EST Through November 18, 2022 10 a.m.
EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make
public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's
comment letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20220172, Draft, USACE, OR, Willamette Valley System Operations
and Maintenance, Comment Period Ends: 01/19/2023, Contact: Nicklas
Knudson<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220173, Final, NOAA, PRO, Surveying and Mapping Projects in
U.S. Waters for Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition, Review Period
Ends: 12/27/2022, Contact: Jay Nunenkamp<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220174, Final, BIA, DOI, WA, Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation Integrated Resource Management Plan 2015, Review
Period Ends: 12/27/2022, Contact: Tobiah Mogavero<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220175, Draft, BIA, DOI, OR, Coquille Indian Tribe Fee to
Trust Gaming Facility Project, Comment Period Ends: 01/09/2023,
Contact: Tobiah Mogavero<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220176, Final, FERC, ID, GTN XPress Project, Review Period
Ends: 12/27/2022, Contact: Office of External Affairs<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220177, Final, DOE, LA, ADOPTION--Commonwealth LNG Project,
Contact: Amy Sweeney<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Department of Energy (DOE) has
adopted the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Final EIS No.
20220134, filed 9/9/2022 with the Environmental Protection Agency. The
DOE was a cooperating agency on this project. Therefore, republication
of the document is not necessary under Section 1506.3(b)(2) of the CEQ
regulations.

    Dated: November 18, 2022.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2022-25725 Filed 11-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Page 1 of 1 Memorandum From: Tom Born USEPA/ OW/ OST ph: ( 202) 566 1001 born. tom@ epa. gov To: 304( m) Record ( EPA Docket Number OW 2003 0074)

Date: September 4, 2003 Re: 303( d) Impaired Waters Analysis: Waters that may be Impaired because of Industrial Point Sources The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the analysis that I conducted of six pollutants that were identified by the states as reasons for 303( d) impairments. These six pollutants were selected by EAD from the 193 some reasons for impairment because they are most likely discharged from point sources rather than contained in stormwater discharges or non point source runoff.

The six pollutants include: chromium, nickel, antimony, beryllium, selenium, and PCBs. EAD determined that these six pollutants are commonly released from point sources based on the August 1998 " Urban Storm Water Best Management Practices Study" which characterized common point and non point source toxic pollutants.

The attached Excel Workbook file " Priority Impairments for 304( m) Point Sources Summary Table 9 4 03" shows the number of PCS facilities by SIC on waterbodies impaired because of the six pollutants. SIC 4952 " Sewerage Systems" has the most number of facilities on waterbodies impaired for the six pollutants, followed by SIC 8731 " Commercial Physical Research," SIC 5541 " Gasoline Service Stations," SIC 4911 " Electrical Services," SIC 2911 " Petroleum Refining," SIC 5171 " Petroleum Bulk Stations and Terminals," and SIC 2844 " Perfumes, Cosmetics, Toilet Prep."

The attached Excel Workbook file " Priority Impairments for 304( m) Point Source Analysis 8 21 03" was use to compile the facility count summary data. It contains a separate Excel Worksheet for each of the six pollutants. Each worksheet contains five columns: the four digit SIC code, the facility NPDES ID, the facility name, an indication whether the facility is a major facility, and the name of the impaired waterbody to which the facility discharges.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 27, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45036-45046]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16139]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0891; Project Identifier AD-2022-00585-A,E,R]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Airplanes, Helicopters, and
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for turbocharged, reciprocating engine-powered airplanes and
helicopters and turbocharged, reciprocating engines with a certain v-
band coupling installed. This proposed AD was prompted by multiple
failures of spot-welded, multi-segment v-band couplings at the tailpipe
to the turbocharger exhaust housing flange (also referred to as ``spot-
welded, multi-segment exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling''). This
proposed AD would establish a life limit for the spot-welded, multi-
segment exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling and require repetitively
inspecting the spot-welded, multi-segment exhaust tailpipe v-band
coupling. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 4,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0891; or in person at Docket
Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Teplik, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 S. Airport Road, Wichita, KS
67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected] or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0891; Project Identifier
AD-2022-00585-A,E,R'' at the beginning of your comments. The most
helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain
the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The
FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent Thomas
Teplik, Aviation Safety Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 S.
Airport Road, Wichita, KS 67209. Any commentary that the FAA receives
which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the
public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    Since the mid-1970s, failures of v-band couplings that attach the
exhaust tailpipe to the turbocharger exhaust outlet have resulted in a
significant number of incidents and accidents (fatal and non-fatal) on
both airplanes and helicopters. Since 1974, National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) accident and incident investigations have led to
the issuance of 7 NTSB Safety Recommendations concerning exhaust
systems and/or exhaust v-band couplings; 20 FAA ADs to address the
unsafe condition with exhaust systems and/or exhaust v-band couplings;
and 10 FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins (SAIBs).
Industry has also taken action to raise awareness of the concerns
associated with v-band coupling failures.

         NTSB Safety Recommendations Affecting V-Band Couplings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  NTSB Safety recommendation       Description           Make/model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A-90-166......................  Exhaust system...  Piper PA-32RT-300T,
                                                    PA-32R-301T.
A-90-165......................  Exhaust system...  Piper PA-32RT-300T,
                                                    PA-32R-301T.
A-90-164......................  Exhaust system...  Piper PA-32RT-300T,
                                                    PA-32R-301T.
A-88-151......................  Exhaust system...  Piper PA-32RT-300T.
A-88-150......................  Exhaust system...  Piper PA-32RT-300T.
A-88-147......................  Exhaust system...  Piper PA-32RT-300T.
A-74-099......................  V-band engine      Textron (Cessna)
                                 exhaust clamp      turbocharged 300/400
                                 failures.          series.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You may examine these NTSB Safety Recommendations in the AD docket
at www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2022-0891.

                         ADs on V-Band Couplings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              AD                               Make/model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AD 2018-06-11, Amendment 39-   Textron Aviation Inc. Model A36TC and
 19231 (83 FR 13383, March      B36TC airplanes, all serial numbers,
 29, 2018).                     equipped with a turbocharged engine;
                                Textron Aviation Inc. Model S35, V35,
                                V35A, and V35B airplanes, all serial
                                numbers, equipped with the Continental
                                TSIO-520-D engine with AiResearch
                                turbocharger during manufacture; and
                                Textron Aviation Inc. Model S35, V35,
                                V35A, and V35B airplanes, all serial
                                numbers, equipped with StandardAero
                                Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
                                SA1035WE.
AD 2014-23-03, Amendment 39-   Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA-31P
 18019 (79 FR 67340, November   airplanes, serial numbers 31P-1 through
 13, 2014).                     31P-80 and 31P-7300110 through 31P-
                                7730012.
AD 2013-10-04, Amendment 39-   Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA-31, PA-31-
 17457 (78 FR 35110, June 12,   325, and PA-31-350 airplanes, all serial
 2013; corrected September 5,   numbers.
 2013, 78 FR 54561).
AD 2010-13-07, Amendment 39-   Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA-32R-301T
 16338 (75 FR 35619, June 23,   airplanes, serial numbers 3257001
 2010; corrected July 26,       through 3257311; and Model PA-46-350P
 2010, 75 FR 43397).            airplanes, serial numbers 4622001
                                through 4622200 and 4636001 through
                                4636341.
AD 2004-23-17, Amendment 39-   Mooney Airplane Company Inc. (currently
 13872 (69 FR 67809, November   Mooney International Corporation) Model
 22, 2004).                     M20M airplanes, serial numbers 27-0001
                                through 27-0321.
AD 2001-08-08, Amendment 39-   Raytheon Aircraft Company (previously The
 12185 (66 FR 20192, April      Beech Aircraft Corporation; currently
 20, 2001).                     Textron Aviation Inc.) Model 35-C33A,
                                E33A, E33C, F33A, F33C, S35, V35, V35A,
                                V35B, 36, and A36 airplanes, all serial
                                numbers, with Tornado Alley Turbo, Inc.
                                STC SA5223NM and STC SE5222NM
                                incorporated and with a Teledyne
                                Continental engine equipped with a
                                turbonormalizing system.
AD 2000-11-04, Amendment 39-   Commander Aircraft Company Model 114TC
 11752 (65 FR 34941, June 1,    airplanes, serial numbers 20001 through
 2000).                         20027.
AD 2000-01-16, Amendment 39-   Cessna Aircraft Company (currently
 11514 (65 FR 2844, January     Textron Aviation Inc.) Model T310P,
 19, 2000).                     T310Q, T310R, 320, 320A, 320B, 320C,
                                320D, 320E, 320F, 320-1, 335, 340, 340A,
                                321 (Navy OE-2), 401, 401A, 401B, 402,
                                402A, 402B, 402C, 404, 411, 411A, 414,
                                414A, 421, 421A, 421B, and 421C
                                airplanes, all serial numbers.
AD 91-21-01 R1, Amendment 39-  Textron Lycoming Model TIO-540-S1AD
 9470 (61 FR 29003, June 7,     reciprocating engines installed on, but
 1996; corrected September 6,   not limited to, Piper Aircraft, Inc. PA-
 1996, 61 FR 47051).            32 series airplanes.
AD 81-23-03 R2, Amendment 39-  Cessna (currently Textron Aviation Inc.)
 4491 (47 FR 51101, November    Model P210N airplanes, serial numbers
 12, 1982).                     P21000001 through P21000811
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These ADs require v-band coupling replacements (life limit) and/or
repetitive inspections, or changing the type design of the v-band
coupling. This proposed AD would not apply to airplanes that have
complied with one of these ADs. You may examine these ADs in the AD
docket at www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2022-0891.

                        SAIBs on V-Band Couplings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               SAIB                                Subject
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CE-18-21..........................  Exhaust Turbochargers; Announce the
                                     availability of the ``Best
                                     Practices Guide for Maintaining
                                     Exhaust System Turbocharger to
                                     Tailpipe V-band Couplings/Clamps''.
CE-18-07..........................  Exhaust Turbocharger; V-band
                                     Couplings Used in Engine Exhaust
                                     Systems on Turbocharged
                                     Reciprocating Engine Powered
                                     Aircraft.
CE-13-45..........................  Engine Exhaust; Tailpipe V-band
                                     Couplings [for turbocharged,
                                     reciprocating engine-powered
                                     airplanes].
CE-13-07R1........................  Engine Exhaust; Tailpipe V-band
                                     Couplings [for Cessna Aircraft
                                     Company (currently Textron Aviation
                                     Inc.) Model T206H airplanes].
CE-13-07..........................  Engine Exhaust; Tailpipe V-band
                                     Couplings [for Cessna Aircraft
                                     Company (currently Textron Aviation
                                     Inc.) Model T206H airplanes].
CE-10-33R1........................  Engine Exhaust [for reciprocating
                                     engine-powered airplanes].
CE-10-33..........................  Engine Exhaust [for reciprocating
                                     engine-powered airplanes].
CE-09-11..........................  Turbocharged Engines [for
                                     turbocharged engine-powered
                                     airplanes].
CE-05-13..........................  Alternative method of compliance
                                     (AMOC) to AD 91-03-15, Amendment 39-
                                     6870 (56 FR 3025, January 28, 1991)
                                     for Mooney Aircraft Corporation
                                     Model M20M airplanes.
CE-04-22..........................  Exhaust System Components for
                                     reciprocating engine-powered
                                     airplanes.
CE-03-46..........................  Mooney Model M20M airplanes with
                                     turbocharged engines using v-band
                                     clamps
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You may examine these SAIBs in the AD docket at www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0891.
    In spite of these efforts, failures continue to occur and the
number of significant safety events continues to increase. As a result,
the General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GA-JSC), which is
comprised of both the FAA and industry, developed a working group to
study v-band coupling failures associated with turbocharged
reciprocating engine-powered aircraft and develop recommended
corrective actions. This v-band coupling working group was comprised of
aviation industry manufacturers, type/user groups, and government
entities. The working group was tasked to examine the turbocharger to
tailpipe interface and develop recommendations to enhance the safety of
the fleet.
    The working group recommended mandatory corrective actions that are
tailored to each specific coupling type (spot-welded, riveted, or
single piece), thereby minimizing the impact to owner/operators. The
working group recommended a mandatory coupling replacement time (life
limit) and annual inspection. The working group also recommended non-
mandatory actions to aid and educate maintenance personnel in
appropriate v-band coupling removal, installation, and inspection
practices. Finally, the working group recommended actions for new
designs, which incorporate lessons learned from review of the in-
service fleet. For new designs incorporating a V-band coupling
immediately downstream of the turbocharger exhaust discharge, the
working group recommended that a replacement interval (500 hours for
spot-welded and 2,000 hours for riveted and single-piece) be
incorporated in the Airworthiness Limitations sections of the
maintenance manual.
    In January 2018, the working group published a final report titled
``Exhaust System Turbocharger to Tailpipe V-band Coupling/Clamp Working
Group Final Report'' (final report). Appendix B of the final report
contains the Best Practices Guide. The final report may be found in the
AD docket at www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2022-0891.
    The final report concluded that the common denominator in the
incidents and accidents reviewed is the spot-welded, multi-segment
exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling (see Figure A). These couplings come
in either two or three segment varieties. The segments are the number
of v-retainer segments, which are attached to the outer band via spot
welds. Although multi-segment exhaust tailpipe couplings can also be
riveted, the riveted couplings do not create an unsafe condition.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY22.001

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    The majority of the events studied by the working group indicated
fatigue failure of spot-welded, multi-segment exhaust tailpipe v-band
couplings as a result of stress corrosion cracking that originated at
or near a spot weld. This is the same unsafe condition identified in
the other v-band coupling AD actions previously referenced. The data
studied by the working group contained evidence of pre-existing
cracking of the couplings, known embrittlement at the spot weld
locations simply due to that manufacturing method, and outer band
cupping on the multi-segment couplings (which is the result of age,
over-use, and potential over-torqueing). The working group also found
that many of the couplings had safety wire across the bolt end. The
safety wire could be helpful if there was a bolt or nut failure
(extremely rare events) or the nut was missing. However, the safety
wire was of no value when the failure was transverse band cracking and
total separation at the spot weld. The data studied by the working
group indicated many accidents were due to v-band couplings that were
of the multi-segment, spot-welded design, when used in a specific
location (the tailpipe to the turbocharger exhaust housing flange on
turbocharged reciprocating engine-powered aircraft).
    After the working group published the final report, the FAA issued
SAIB CE-18-21, dated July 13, 2018. This SAIB announced the
availability of the Best Practices Guide from the final report and
recommended the public apply the best practices in the maintenance of
turbocharged reciprocating engine powered aircraft. The FAA also
assessed the recommendations contained in the final report and
determined an unsafe condition exists in turbocharged reciprocating
engine-powered aircraft with a spot-welded, multi-segment v-band
coupling installed. Because these v-band couplings are widely used by
many design approval holders on various models (engines and aircraft),
several Aircraft Certification Office Branches were involved in the
decision to propose a single AD. The FAA also determined that the
corrective actions recommended in the final report were appropriate to
address this unsafe condition.
    This condition, if not addressed, could lead to failure of the
spot-welded, multi-segment exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling, leading to
detachment of the exhaust tailpipe from the turbocharger and allowing
high-temperature exhaust gases to enter the engine compartment. This
could result in smoke in the cockpit, in-flight fire, and loss of
control of the aircraft.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would apply to all reciprocating turbocharged
airplanes, helicopters, and reciprocating engines that have a spot-
welded, multi-segment v-band coupling installed at the tailpipe to the
turbocharger exhaust housing flange. The proposed AD would apply
regardless of whether the turbocharger is installed as part of the type
certificate or under an STC, parts manufacture approval, or field
approval. The proposed AD would not apply to airplanes that have
complied with certain ADs listed in paragraph (d) of the proposed AD.
    This proposed AD would require the following actions:
     Repetitively inspecting the spot-welded, multi-segment
exhaust tailpipe v-band couplings annually, regardless of the hours
time-in-service (TIS) accumulated on the v-band coupling; and
     Establishing a life limit for the spot-welded, multi-
segment exhaust tailpipe v-band couplings by removing them from service
every 500 hours TIS.
    As an alternative for the first time the spot-welded, multi-segment
exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling must be removed from service due to
the 500 hour life limit, this proposed AD would allow doing the
repetitive inspections every 6 months or 100 hours TIS, whichever
occurs first, for a period of 2 years, as long as the v-band coupling
continues to pass all of the inspections.
    Replacing a spot-welded, multi-segment exhaust tailpipe v-band
coupling with a v-band of a different part number or type (riveted or
single piece) would not be permitted, unless previously FAA-approved as
part of the aircraft or engine type certificate, an STC, or an AMOC.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, could
affect up to 41,058 airplanes, helicopters, and engines (products of
U.S. registry). The FAA has no way of determining the number of these
products that could have an affected spot-welded, multi-segment v-band
coupling installed. The FAA's estimated cost on U.S. operators reflects
the maximum possible cost based on the 41,058 products of U.S.
registry. Based on this, the FAA estimates the following costs to
comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Cost per     Number of U.S.    Cost on U.S.
            Action                Labor cost      Parts cost        product         products        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft records review......  0.5 work hour x             N/A  $42.50.........          41,058  $1,744,965.
                                $85 = $42.50.
Removal of the coupling from   2 work-hours x             $400  $570...........          31,248  $17,811,360.
 service and replacement        $85 per hour =
 (single-engine aircraft).      $170.
Removal of the couplings from  4 work-hours x              800  $1,140.........           9,810  $11,183,400.
 service and replacement        $85 per hour =
 (twin-engine aircraft).        $340.
Inspection of the coupling     0.5 work-hour x             N/A  $42.50 per               31,248  $1,328,040 per
 without removal (single-       $85 per hour =                   inspection                       inspection
 engine aircraft).              $42.50.                          cycle.                           cycle.
Inspection of the couplings    1 work-hour x               N/A  $85 per                   9,810  $833,850 per
 without removal (twin-engine   $85 per hour =                   inspection                       inspection
 aircraft).                     $85.                             cycle.                           cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                               On Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                Action                          Labor cost                   Parts cost               product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection of the coupling, including   1.5 work-hours x $85 per   N/A..........................         $127.50
 removal and reinstallation (single-     hour = $127.50.
 engine aircraft).
Inspection of the couplings, including  3 work-hours x $85 per     N/A..........................             255
 removal and reinstallation (twin-       hour = $255.
 engine aircraft).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed AD would provide operators the option of performing
an inspection with the coupling removed from the aircraft instead of an
inspection of the coupling without removing it from the aircraft. In
some cases, an inspection with the coupling removed may be required.
    A coupling may need to be removed from service before it reaches
its 500-hour TIS life limit if it does not meet all of the inspection
criteria at each inspection. The FAA has no way of determining the
number of products that may need to remove the coupling from service
before reaching its 500-hour TIS life limit.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:

Various Airplanes, Helicopters, and Engines: Docket No. FAA-2022-
0891; Project Identifier AD-2022-00585-A,E,R.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by November 4, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Definitions

    (1) For purposes of this AD, a ``v-band coupling'' means a spot-
welded, multi-segment v-band coupling installed at the tailpipe to
turbocharger exhaust housing flange.
    (2) For purposes of this AD, ``new'' means zero hours time-in-
service (TIS).

(d) Applicability

    This AD applies to all turbocharged, reciprocating engine-
powered airplanes and helicopters and turbocharged, reciprocating
engines, certificated in any category, with a spot-welded, multi-
segment v-band coupling installed at the tailpipe to turbocharger
exhaust housing flange, except for airplanes that are in compliance
with an AD listed in paragraphs (d)(1) through (10) of this AD.
These v-band couplings are installed on, but not limited to, the
products listed in Table 1 to paragraph (d) of this AD.
    (1) AD 2018-06-11, Amendment 39-19231 (83 FR 13383, March 29,
2018).
    (2) AD 2014-23-03, Amendment 39-18019 (79 FR 67340, November 13,
2014).
    (3) AD 2013-10-04, Amendment 39-17457 (78 FR 35110, June 12,
2013; corrected September 5, 2013, 78 FR 54561).
    (4) AD 2010-13-07, Amendment 39-16338 (75 FR 35619, June 23,
2010; corrected July 26, 2010, 75 FR 43397).
    (5) AD 2004-23-17, Amendment 39-13872 (69 FR 67809, November 22,
2004).
    (6) AD 2001-08-08, Amendment 39-12185 (66 FR 20192, April 20,
2001).
    (7) AD 2000-11-04, Amendment 39-11752 (65 FR 34941, June 1,
2000).
    (8) AD 2000-01-16, Amendment 39-11514 (65 FR 2844, January 19,
2000).
    (9) AD 91-21-01 R1, Amendment 39-9470 (61 FR 29003, June 7,
1996; corrected September 6, 1996, 61 FR 47051).
    (10) AD 81-23-03 R2, Amendment 39-4491 (47 FR 51101, November
12, 1982).
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY22.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY22.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY22.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY22.005

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

(e) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 8100, Exhaust
Turbine System (Recip).

(f) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by multiple failures of spot-welded, multi-
segment v-band couplings installed at the tailpipe to turbocharger
exhaust housing flange. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent
failure of the spot-welded, multi-segment exhaust tailpipe v-band
coupling. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could lead to
detachment of the exhaust tailpipe from the turbocharger and allow
high-temperature exhaust gases to enter the engine compartment. This
could result in smoke in the cockpit, in-flight fire, and loss of
control of the aircraft.

(g) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(h) Review of the Maintenance Records

    Within 50 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, review
the aircraft maintenance records to determine the number of hours
TIS accumulated on each v-band coupling.

(i) V-Band Coupling Life Limit

    (1) Within the compliance times specified in paragraph (i)(1)(i)
or (ii) or (i)(2) of this AD, remove the v-band coupling from
service and install a new v-band coupling. Apply correct torque as
necessary to the v-band coupling nut.
    (i) If the v-band coupling has accumulated less than 500 hours
TIS: Initially remove the v-band coupling from service before it
accumulates 500 hours TIS or within 50 hours TIS after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs later. Thereafter, remove the v-
band coupling from service before it accumulates 500 hours TIS.
    (ii) If the v-band coupling has accumulated 500 or more hours
TIS or if the hours TIS of the v-band coupling cannot be determined:
Initially remove the v-band coupling from service within 50 hours
TIS after the effective date of this AD. Thereafter, remove the v-
band coupling from service before it accumulates 500 hours TIS.
    (2) As an alternative to initially removing the v-band coupling
from service as required by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, you may
perform the inspections required by paragraphs (j)(1) through (7) or
(k) of this AD. Do the initial inspections at the time the v-band
coupling would have been removed from service and thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 6 months or 100 hours TIS, whichever occurs
first, for a period not to exceed 2 years after the effective date
of this AD. If the v-band coupling fails to meet any inspection
criteria in paragraphs (j)(1) through (7) or (k) of this AD, it must
be removed from service before further flight.
    Note 1 to paragraph (i): Instructions for installing a v-band
coupling can be found in Appendix B: Best Practices Guide, paragraph
3.1, of the ``Exhaust System Turbocharger to Tailpipe V-band
Coupling/Clamp Working Group Final Report,'' dated January 2018.

(j) Inspections Without Removal of the V-Band Coupling

    At the next annual inspection after the effective date of this
AD or within the next 12 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, and repetitively thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 12 months, visually inspect the v-band coupling as
required by paragraphs (j)(1) through (7) of this AD. Removing the
v-band coupling from service and installing a new v-band coupling
does not terminate the requirement to do these repetitive
inspections.
    (1) Inspect the v-band coupling and area around the v-band
coupling for exhaust stains, sooting, and discoloration. If any of
those conditions are found, remove the coupling and, instead of the
inspections in paragraphs (j)(2) through (7) of this AD, do the
inspections in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (2) Inspect the v-band coupling outer band for cracks, paying
particular attention to the spot weld areas. If there is a crack,
before further flight, remove the v-band coupling from service and
install a new v-band coupling.
    (3) Inspect the v-band coupling for looseness and for separation
of the outer band from the v-retainer segments at all spot welds. If
there is any looseness or separation of the outer band from any
retainer segment, before further flight, remove the v-band coupling
from service and install a new v-band coupling.
    (4) Inspect the v-band coupling outer band for cupping, bowing,
and crowning as depicted in figure 1 to paragraph (k)(1)(iii) of
this AD. If there is any cupping, bowing, or crowning, before
further flight, remove the coupling and, instead of the inspections
in paragraphs (j)(5) through (7) of this AD, do the inspections in
paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (5) Inspect the area of the v-band coupling, including the outer
band, opposite the t-bolt for damage and distortion. If there is any
damage or distortion, before further flight, remove the v-band
coupling from service and install a new v-band coupling.
    (6) Using a mirror, inspect the v-band coupling to determine
whether there is a space between the two v-retainer coupling
segments next to the t-bolt. If there is no space between the two v-
retainer coupling segments next to the t-bolt, before further

flight, remove the v-band coupling from service and install a new v-
band coupling.
    (7) Determine whether the v-band coupling nut is properly
torqued and apply correct torque as necessary.

(k) Inspections With the Spot-Welded, Multi-Segment Exhaust Tailpipe V-
Band Coupling Removed

    (1) Remove the v-band coupling and do the inspections in
paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this AD if required by paragraph (j)(1)
or (4) of this AD or as an alternative to the inspections required
by paragraph (j) of this AD. Removing the v-band coupling from
service and installing a new v-band coupling does not terminate the
requirement to repeat the inspections in paragraph (j) or (k) of
this AD.
    (i) Using crocus cloth and mineral spirits or Stoddard solvent,
clean the outer band of the v-band coupling. Pay particular
attention to the spot weld areas on the v-band coupling. If there is
corrosion that cannot be removed by cleaning or if there is pitting,
before further flight, remove the v-band coupling from service and
install a new v-band coupling.
    (ii) Using a 10X magnifying glass, visually inspect the outer
band for cracks, paying particular attention to the spot weld areas.
If there is a crack, before further flight, remove the v-band
coupling from service and install a new v-band coupling.
    (iii) Visually inspect the flatness of the outer band using a
straight edge. Lay the straight edge across the width of the outer
band as depicted in figure 1 to paragraph (k)(1)(iii) of this AD. If
the gap between the outer band and the straight edge exceeds 0.062
inch, before further flight, remove the v-band coupling from service
and install a new v-band coupling.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY22.006

    (iv) With the t-bolt in the 12 o'clock position, visually
inspect the attachment of the outer band to the v-retainer coupling
segments for gaps between the outer band and the v-retainer coupling
segments from the 1 o'clock through 11 o'clock positions. If there
are any gaps between the outer band and the v-retainer coupling
segments, before further flight, remove the v-band coupling from
service and install a new v-band coupling.
    Note 2 to paragraph (k)(1)(iv): You may use backlighting to see
gaps.
    (v) Visually inspect the bend radii of the v-retainer coupling
segments, throughout the length of the segment, as depicted in
figure 1 to paragraph (k)(1)(iii) of this AD, for cracks. If there
are any cracks, before further flight, remove the v-band coupling
from service and install a new v-band coupling.
    (vi) Visually inspect the outer band opposite the t-bolt for
damage (distortion, creases, bulging, or cracks) caused by excessive
spreading of the coupling during installation or removal. If there
is any damage, before further flight, remove the v-band coupling
from service and install a new v-band coupling.
    (2) If the v-band coupling passes all of the inspections in
paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (vi) of this AD, it may be re-
installed.
    (i) Apply correct torque as necessary to the v-band coupling
nut.
    (ii) Inspect the v-band coupling to determine whether there is
space between the two v-retainer coupling segments next to the t-
bolt. If there is no space between the two v-retainer coupling
segments next to the t-bolt, before further flight, remove the v-
band coupling from service and install a new v-band coupling.

(l) Installation Prohibitions

    (1) From the effective date of this AD until two years after the
effective date of this AD, do not install a v-band coupling that has
accumulated more than zero hours TIS on any turbocharged airplane,
helicopter, or engine, unless it has passed all inspections required
by paragraph (j) or (k) of this AD.
    (2) As of two years after the effective date of this AD, do not
install a v-band coupling that has accumulated more than zero and
less than 500 hours TIS on any turbocharged airplane, helicopter, or
engine, unless it has passed all inspections required by paragraph
(j) or (k) of this AD.
    (3) As of two years after the effective date of this AD, do not
install a v-band coupling that has accumulated 500 or more hours TIS
on any turbocharged airplane, helicopter, or engine.

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Operational Safety Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the Operational Safety Office, send it to
the attention of the person identified in paragraph (n)(1) of this
AD and email to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(n) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Thomas Teplik,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 S Airport
Road, Wichita, KS 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected] or [email protected].
    (2) The ``Exhaust System Turbocharger to Tailpipe V-band
Coupling/Clamp Working Group Final Report,'' dated January 2018, may
be found in the AD docket at www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0891.

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on July 20, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-16139 Filed 7-25-22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 37281-37285]
[DOCID:fr28jy09-88]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60356; File No. SR-NYSE-2009-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Rescinding NYSE Rule 110 Which
Establishes the Role of Competitive Traders and Exchange Rule 107A
Which Establishes the Role of the Registered Competitive Market Makers

July 21, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On April 6, 2009, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to rescind NYSE Rule 110, which establishes the
role of Competitive Traders (``CTs''), and Exchange Rule

107A, which establishes the role of the Registered Competitive Market
Makers (``RCMMs'').\3\ The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on April 16, 2009.\4\ The Commission
received two comment letters on the proposal.\5\ On July 10, 2009 the
Exchange filed a comment response letter.\6\ This order approves the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ The Exchange also proposes to make conforming amendments to
NYSE Rules 36, 98, 123, 111, 476A, 800, 900 and 1600 to eliminate
references to RCMMs and CTs.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59746 (April 10,
2009), 74 FR 17702 (the ``Notice'').
    \5\ See letter from Robert Baxter and Charles Bocklet, Partners,
Green Mountain Trading LLC (``GMT'') to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission (``Elizabeth Murphy'') (``GMT Comment
Letter''). See also e-mail from Chris Forbes to Elizabeth Murphy,
dated July 9, 2009 (``Forbes E-mail'').
    \6\ See letter from Pia K. Thompson, Assistant Secretary, New
York Stock Exchange LLC to Elizabeth Murphy, dated July 10, 2009
(``NYSE Response Letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Currently, NYSE Rule 107A governs the registration and obligations
of RCMMs. Similarly, NYSE Rule 110 governs the registration and
obligations of CTs. CTs and RCMMs were first established by the
Exchange in 1964 and 1978, respectively, as classes of floor traders
that could commit capital to trade in a manner that provides additional
liquidity, contribute to mitigating price fluctuations, and enhance
competition.\7\ In 1981, the Commission adopted Rule 11a1-5, which
provides that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For a detailed discussion on the background and functions of
RCMMs and CTs, see Notice, supra note 4.

    Any transaction by a New York Stock Exchange registered
competitive market maker * * * effected in compliance with [NYSE's]
governing rules shall be deemed to be of a kind which is consistent
with the purposes of section 11(a)(1) of the Act, the protection of
investors, and the maintenance of fair and orderly markets.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.11a1-5. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
17569 (February 24, 1981), 46 FR 14888 (March 3, 1981). Section
11(a)(1) of the Act prohibits a member of a national securities
exchange from effecting transactions on that exchange for its own
account, the account of an associated person, or an account over
which it or its associated person exercises discretion unless an
exception applies. 15 U.S.C. 78k(a).

    Included among RCMM's affirmative obligations under Section B of
Rule 107A are requirements for a RCMM to: (i) Make a bid or offer in a
stock that contributes to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market
in such stock whenever called upon by certain parties, and (ii) effect
all purchases and sales for the RCMM's proprietary account in a manner
that contributes to the maintenance of price continuity with reasonable
depth and minimizes the effects of a temporary disparity between supply
and demand. In addition, NYSE Rule 107A requires a RCMM to avoid
participation as a dealer during the opening of the stock in a manner
that would disrupt the public balance of supply and demand, subject to
certain exceptions. Further, a RCMM may not effect transactions for its
own account or the account of its member organization that are not a
part of a course of dealings reasonably calculated to contribute to the
maintenance of price continuity with reasonable depth and to the
minimizing of the effects of any temporary disparity between supply and
demand. NYSE Rule 107A.10 describes the conditions under which a RCMM
must be ready to enter the market if called upon by a Floor Official or
Floor broker to narrow the quotation spread or add liquidity to the
market.
    NYSE Rule 110 describes the obligations applicable to CTs. For
example, members acting as CTs that desire to purchase or sell stock
for accounts in which they have an interest are prohibited from
congregating in a particular stock, and individually or as a group,
intentionally or unintentionally, dominating the market in that stock.
CTs are also subject to meeting certain stabilization tests which are
computed on a monthly basis.
    The Exchange proposes to rescind NYSE Rule 110 and NYSE Rule 107A,
eliminating CTs and RCMMs as recognized classes of floor traders on the
Exchange.\9\ The Exchange notes that the volume and speed of the
securities markets has increased dramatically since the inception of
the CTs and RCMMs and that the majority of trades on the Exchange are
now executed electronically. When the Exchange introduced its Hybrid
Market,\10\ the Exchange determined that a review of the viability of
RCMMs and CTs to trade in the more electronic trading environment was
warranted and undertook to assess the contributions of RCMMs and CTs to
the liquidity available to the NYSE. Thus, in October 2005, the
Exchange implemented a moratorium on the qualification and registration
of new CTs and RCMMs while the Exchange conducted a study on the future
viability of CTs and RCMMs (``Moratorium'').\11\ The Moratorium was
extended six times \12\ while the Exchange continued its evaluation of
CT and RCMM trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange also proposes to make conforming amendments to
NYSE Rules 36, 98, 476A, 111, 800, 900 and 1600 to eliminate
references to RCMMs and CTs.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53539 (March 22,
2006), 71 FR 16353 (March 31, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2004-05) (establishing
the Hybrid Market).
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52648 (October 21,
2005), 70 FR 62155 (October 28, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2005-63).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54140 (July 13,
2006), 71 FR 41491 (July 21, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-48); 54985
(December 21, 2006), 72 FR 171 (January 3, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2006-113);
55992 (June 29, 2007), 72 FR 37289 (July 9, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-57);
56556 (September 27, 2007), 72 FR 56421 (October 3, 2007) (SR-NYSE-
2007-86); 57072 (December 31, 2007), 73 FR 1252 (January 7, 2008)
(SR-NYSE-2007-125); and 57601 (April 2, 2008), 73 FR 19123 (April 8,
2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-22). The Moratorium was also amended to grant
RCMM firms the ability to replace a RCMM who relinquishes his or her
registration and ceases to conduct business as a RCMM during the
Moratorium with a newly qualified and registered RCMM. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53549 (March 24, 2006), 71 FR
16388 (March 31, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In October 2008, the Commission approved the Exchange's new market
model filing (``Next Generation NYSE'').\13\ In light of the
implementation of the NYSE's new market model, the Exchange again
extended the Moratorium several times to evaluate the viability of the
RCMMs and CTs under its revised structure.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58845 (October 24,
2008), 73 FR 64379 (October 29, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-46).
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58033 (June 26,
2008), 73 FR 38265 (July 3, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-49); 58713 (October
2, 2008), 73 FR 59024 (October 8, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-96); and 59069
(December 8, 2008), 73 FR 76081 (December 15, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-
124). The Exchange extended the Moratorium three additional times
due to the filing of this current proposed rule change in order to
maintain the Moratorium until the completion of the Rule 19b-4 rule
filing process for this proposed rule change. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 59551 (March 10, 2009), 74 FR 11624 (March
18, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-24); 60062 (June 8, 2009), 74 FR 28297 (June
15, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-53); and 60197 (June 30, 2009), 74 FR 32663
(July 8, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-62).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that, at the time the Moratorium was first
imposed, there were 11 registered RCMMs and one registered, but
inactive, CT. In December 2006, the largest RCMM firm ceased its RCMM
business and left the floor, eliminating 6 RCMMs from the floor. This
reduced the number of RCMMs operating on the Exchange to five.\15\
These remaining five RCMMs are associated with two member
organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Registration as an RCMM is applicable only to individual
members, not member organizations. See NYSE Rule 107A(1).
Accordingly, RCMM trading licenses are issued to individual members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its study of the CT and RCMM trading in the more electronic
environment, the Exchange reviewed the trading data associated with the
CT and RCMM order execution. The Exchange's review found that the CT
class of floor trader had not executed

any transactions on the floor as a result of the non-usage of the CT
license and therefore provided no contribution to the quality of the
NYSE Market.
    The Exchange also states that, from May 2004 to December 2004, RCMM
trading volume comprised only .018% of the total NYSE trading volume
for that time period. In 2005, the year that the Moratorium was
implemented, RCMM trading volume comprised only .017% of the total NYSE
trading volume for the year. In 2006, the RCMM trading volume comprised
.008% of the total NYSE trading volume for the year. After the largest
RCMM firm ceased its business in December 2006, RCMM trading volume in
2007 and 2008 comprised only .001% of the NYSE total trading volume for
each of those years.
    The Exchange also represents that, from August 2005 through
February 2008, RCMM monthly average trading volume for that time period
never exceeded .021% of the Exchange's total trading volume for that
time period. On average during this time period, RCMMs comprised only
.006% of the NYSE's trading volume. The Exchange asserts that review of
the trading volume prior to and during the Moratorium indicates that
RCMM/CT trading volume was minimally affected by the Moratorium.
    The Exchange further states that, for the time period from July
2008 to December 2008, RCMM and CT average trading volume did not
exceed .0011% of the Exchange's total trading volume per month for that
time period. On average over these six months, RCMMs comprised only
.001% of the NYSE's trading volume. The Exchange's review also found
that the CT class of floor trader still had not executed any
transactions on the floor as a result of the non-usage of the CT
license and therefore provided no contribution to the market quality on
the NYSE. The Exchange reports that RCMM trading in 2009 (as of the
date the Exchange filed this proposed rule change) comprised
approximately .001% of the total NYSE trading volume.
    In light of these statistics, the Exchange concluded that the level
of participation of the RCMMs and CTs no longer serve as viable
supplemental market makers because they no longer contribute
significantly to the overall liquidity available on the NYSE.
    In addition to reviewing the trading statistics of the RCMMs and
the sole, inactive CT, NYSE Market and NYSE Regulation reviewed the
technology, operational and regulatory costs required to adequately
support and surveil RCMM and CT trading activity in a predominantly
electronic trading environment. Following such review, the Exchange
concluded that the development of technology specifically designed to
comport with the RCMM and CT trading rules in the context of Next
Generation NYSE would not be cost effective in view of the minimal
current trading volume of the five RCMMs and the nonexistent trading
volume of the one registered CT.
    Moreover, NYSE notes that it has developed a new class of
electronic liquidity providers, Supplemental Liquidity Providers
(``SLPs'') \16\ that, the Exchange contends, has largely supplanted the
role once filled by RCMMs and CTs. SLPs are off-floor entities that
quote and trade on the NYSE electronically. The operation of SLPs is
intended to provide incentives for quoting and to add competition to
the existing group of floor-based liquidity providers, the designated
market makers (``DMMs'').\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58877 (October 29,
2008), 73 FR 65904 (November 5, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-108). See also
NYSE Rule 107B.
    \17\ A SLP is required to quote at the National Best Bid
(``NBB'') or the National Best Offer (``NBO'') at least 5% of the
trading day for each assigned security in round lots to maintain its
status as an SLP. If a SLP posts liquidity in its assigned
securities that results in an execution, the Exchange will pay the
SLP a financial rebate per share for such executions provided that
the SLP meets its monthly quoting requirement for rebates averaging
3% at the NBB or NBO in its assigned securities in round lots.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Comments \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ In addition to the GMT Comment Letter, the Commission also
received the Forbes E-mail from Chris Forbes, who identified himself
as a RCMM on the floor of the NYSE. See supra note 5. Mr. Forbes
expressed his belief that RCMMs can provide a vital service on the
NYSE. Mr. Forbes did not provide any further substantive arguments
against the NYSE's proposal to eliminate CTs and RCMMs as classes of
floor traders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its comment letter, GMT objects to the Exchange's elimination of
CTs and RCMMs as classes of floor traders on the NYSE for several
reasons. First, GMT argues that the Exchange's assertion that CTs and
RCMMs provide only limited liquidity to the Exchange as compared to the
overall trading volume on the NYSE is invalid because the Exchange
itself imposed a limitation on the growth of the RCMM community by
placing the Moratorium on the registration of new RCMMs.\19\ As such,
the GMT Comment Letter speculates that, had the Exchange permitted the
registration of additional RCMMs, the group's trading volume would have
been much greater, and contended that over 100 NYSE members desired to
become RCMMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See GMT Comment Letter, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, GMT questions the reliability of the Exchange's data
on RCMM trading because it ``only accounts for trading done through
hand-held systems or `paper' trading on the floor.'' \20\ GMT asserts
that, had the Exchange included volume traded away from the floor via
the DOT system in its review, the trading data would have been
``dramatically larger,'' particularly if NYSE had not placed the
Moratorium on RCMMs and if the number of RCMMs had numbered ``500 or
1000.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, GMT argues that RCMMs should be maintained as an
additional source of liquidity on the floor, in addition to the
liquidity supplied from DMMs and from off the floor by SLPs, and
advocates for a trial period during which RCMMs could receive rebate
incentives and upgraded handheld technology, among other things, to
determine whether RCMMs could benefit the Exchange's market.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NYSE Response Letter, the Exchange notes that the RCMM
community has never been large.\22\ Specifically, the Exchange states
that there were only eleven registered RCMMs at the time the Moratorium
was imposed and, since the year 2000, the number of registered RCMMs
has never exceeded thirteen.\23\ Further, the Exchange notes that, in
the filing, it had included volume data for a period preceding the
imposition of the Moratorium and, as indicated, that volume was small
in comparison to overall trading volume on the Exchange. In addition,
the Exchange responded that the elimination of the RCMM and CT
categories would not revoke the Exchange memberships of these
individuals.\24\ If they retain their memberships, the Exchange notes
that they would be able to trade from off the floor through the
Exchange's electronic systems, without the obligations currently
applicable to RCMMs trading on the Exchange. Moreover, the Exchange
states that the current RCMMs would be able to seek to become Floor
brokers or DMMs if they wish to continue to trade on the floor of the
Exchange.\25\ Thus, the Exchange contends that the elimination of RCMMs
and CTs would not prevent these individuals from trading and adding
liquidity to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See NYSE Response Letter, supra note 6.
    \23\ Id.
    \24\ Id.
    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange states that it has consulted with the RCMM
community over a period of years to determine whether to continue the
RCMM trading category.\26\ However, the Exchange has

concluded that it is not cost effective to devote resources to the
facilitation and regulation of RCMM or CT trading in view of the
limited liquidity provided by these floor traders.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\28\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\29\ which requires that an
exchange have rules designed to promote just and equitable principles
of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that it is reasonable and consistent with
the Act for the Exchange to eliminate RCMMs and CTs as classes of floor
traders on the Exchange. The Commission notes that the Exchange
analyzed this issue over a three-year period to review the
contributions of RCMMs and CTs to the liquidity of the Exchange in
light of its more electronic trading environment. As detailed above,
the Exchange's data demonstrated that the trading of RCMMs and CTs on
the Exchange amounted to a negligible portion of the overall trading
volume of the Exchange. For example, according to NYSE, from August
2005 through February 2008, RCMM monthly average trading volume for
that time period never exceeded .021% of the Exchange's total trading
volume and, on average, RCMMs comprised only .006% of the NYSE's
trading volume. In addition, NYSE represents that, during the time
period reviewed, there was no trading on the Exchange by CTs.
    The GMT Comment Letter takes issue with the Exchange's RCMM trading
data, stating that the low RCMM trading volume figures were the result
of the Exchange imposing the Moratorium and thereby restricting the
size of the RCMM community. However, as the NYSE Response Letter notes,
the GMT Comment Letter fails to address the fact that NYSE did review
and provide data for a period of time prior to the Moratorium.
Specifically, the Notice stated that from May 2004 to December 2004,
before the Moratorium was imposed, RCMM trading volume comprised only
.018% of the total trading volume on the Exchange and that in 2005, the
year that the Moratorium was implemented (in October 2005), RCMM
trading volume comprised only .017% of the total NYSE trading volume
for the year. Thus, it appears that RCMM trading volume was quite
limited in comparison to the overall trading volume of the Exchange,
even before the Exchange imposed the Moratorium. In addition, the NYSE
Response Letter represents that, even before the implementation of the
Moratorium, the RCMM community has always been relatively small, with a
maximum of only 13 individuals registered as RCMMs since the year 2000.
    The GMT Comment Letter also criticizes the RCMM trading data
because it fails to take into account trading done on the DOT System.
However, the Commission notes that GMT itself concedes that adding the
DOT trading data for the five active RCMMs would not have made a
significant difference in the figures.
    In light of the above, the Commission believes that the Exchange's
conclusion that RCMMs and CTs no longer serve as viable supplemental
market makers and no longer contribute significantly to the overall
liquidity available on the NYSE is reasonable.
    Further, the Commission notes that the Exchange also considered the
technological, operational and regulatory costs required to adequately
support and surveil RCMM and CT trading activity. According to the
Exchange, the rules and functions of RCMMs and CTs were developed when
NYSE was a manual trading center and are not well-suited for the
electronic, high speed trading environment found on the Exchange
today.\30\ The Commission notes that the Exchange concluded that it
would not be cost effective to develop technology specifically designed
to comport with the RCMM and CT trading rules in the context of Next
Generation NYSE in view of the minimal current trading volume of the
five RCMMs and the nonexistent trading volume of the one registered CT.
Instead, the Exchange argues that SLPs ``largely supplanted'' the role
that the RCMMs and CTs once filled on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Notice, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Though the GMT Comment Letter argues that more floor traders mean
more liquidity and efficient price discovery and thus the Exchange
should retain RCMMs and CTs as classes of floor traders,\31\ the
Commission agrees with NYSE that there are a number of other types of
market participants to provide liquidity, competition, and price
discovery, even after the elimination of the CTs and RCMMs. Along with
SLPs who quote and trade electronically from off the floor, DMMs and
Floor brokers will still provide liquidity and competition on the floor
of the Exchange. Importantly, as NYSE noted in its Response Letter, the
Exchange is not rescinding RCMM and CT traders' membership to the
Exchange.\32\ Members currently operating as RCMMs and CTs may choose
to continue to trade and provide liquidity to the Exchange either by
trading from off of the floor through the Exchange's electronic systems
or by trading as a different class of trader, such as Floor brokers or
DMMs, assuming they are willing and able to meet the requirements
applicable to such classes of traders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See GMT Comment Letter, supra note 5.
    \32\ See Notice, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The GMT Comment Letter also argues that the rule change should be
delayed to allow for additional input and testing, and to implement a
one-year trial period.\33\ However, according to NYSE, the continuation
of RCMM and CT trading would require trading system enhancements, the
cost of continued development of surveillance technology and
procedures, and staff training and hours spent in these efforts.
Moreover, as noted in the NYSE Response Letter, the Exchange has
consulted with RCMM firms over several years regarding whether this
class of traders should be continued. The Commission also notes that
the Exchange has already extended the Moratorium a number of times over
a period of more than three years. Thus, the Commission finds NYSE's
proposal to be reasonable in balancing the costs of maintaining RCMMs
and CTs as classes of trades on the Exchange against the benefits that
they provide to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission recognizes that the Exchange operates in a
competitive marketplace and believes that the Exchange should have the
ability to structure its rules to accommodate the implementation of its
own business model, provided that such rules comply with the Act and
the rules promulgated thereunder. Given the considerations noted
above--the limited trading volume of RCMMs and CTs, the high costs of
maintaining and surveiling these classes of floor traders, the
existence of other market participants to provide liquidity and
competition, as

well as the fact that those currently trading as RCMMs or CTs may
choose to continue trading in another role as members of the Exchange--
the Commission believes that the Exchange's decision to eliminate RCMMs
and CTs from the Exchange is reasonable and within the business
judgment of the Exchange, and is consistent with the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\34\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2009-08) be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17879 Filed 7-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 76 (Friday, April 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16519-16521]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07839]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0065]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Registration of Food Facilities

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and
to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This
notice solicits comments on the information collection provisions of
the Agency's regulations that require registration for domestic and
foreign facilities that manufacture, process, pack, or hold food for
human or animal consumption in the United States.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by June 18, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before June 18, 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of June 18, 2019. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2013-N-0065 for ``Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Registration of Food Facilities
Under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act of 2002.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely
manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for
those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between
9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The

second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information
redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted
on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets
Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information
to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the
cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify
this information as ``confidential.'' Any information marked as
``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR
10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about
FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September
18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Registration of Food Facilities

OMB Control Number 0910-0502--Extension

    The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act of 2002 (the Bioterrorism Act) amended the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), which, among other things,
requires domestic and foreign facilities that manufacture, process,
pack, or hold food for human or animal consumption in the United States
to register with FDA. Sections 1.230 to 1.235 of our regulations (21
CFR 1.230 to 1.235) set forth the requirements for the registration of
food facilities. Information provided to us under these regulations
helps us to notify quickly the facilities that might be affected by a
deliberate or accidental contamination of the food supply. In addition,
data collected through registration is used to support FDA enforcement
activities and to screen imported food shipments.
    Advance notice of imported food allows FDA, with the support of the
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, to target import inspections
more effectively and help protect the nation's food supply against
terrorist acts and other public health emergencies. If a facility is
not registered or the registration for a facility is not updated when
necessary, we may not be able to contact the facility and may not be
able to target import inspections effectively in case of a known or
potential threat to the food supply or other food-related emergency,
putting consumers at risk of consuming hazardous food products that
could cause serious adverse health consequences or death.
    To assist respondents of the information collection we developed
the following forms. Each facility that manufactures, processes, packs,
or holds food for human or animal consumption in the United States must
register with FDA using Form FDA 3537 entitled ``Food Facility
Registration'' (Sec.  1.231), unless exempt under 21 CFR 1.226 from the
requirement to register. To cancel a registration, respondents must use
Form FDA 3537a entitled ``Cancellation of Food Facility Registration''
(Sec.  1.235). The terms ``Form FDA 3537'' and ``Form FDA 3537a'' refer
to both the paper version of each form and the electronic system known
as the Food Facility Registration Module, which is available at https://www.access.fda.gov. Beginning in January 2020, registrations, updates,
and cancellations will be required to be submitted electronically.
Domestic facilities are required to register whether or not food from
the facility enters interstate commerce. Foreign facilities that
manufacture, process, pack, or hold food also are required to register
unless food from that facility undergoes further processing (including
packaging) by another foreign facility outside the United States.
However, if the further manufacturing/processing conducted by the
subsequent facility consists of adding labeling or any similar activity
of a de minimis nature, the former facility is required to register.
    In addition to the initial registration requirements, a facility is
required to submit timely updates within 60 days of a change to any
required information on its registration form, using Form FDA 3537
(Sec.  1.234), and to cancel its registration when the facility ceases
to operate or is sold to new owners or ceases to manufacture, process,
pack, or hold food for consumption in the United States, using Form FDA
3537a (Sec.  1.235).
    Registration is one of several tools under the Bioterrorism Act
that enables us to act quickly in responding to a threatened or actual
bioterrorist attack on the U.S. food supply or other food-related
emergency. Further, in the event of an outbreak of foodborne illness,
the information provided helps us determine the source and cause of the
event and enables us to quickly notify food facilities that might be
affected by an outbreak, terrorist attack, or other emergency. Finally,
the registration requirements enable us to quickly identify and remove
from commerce an article of food for which there is a reasonable
probability that the use of, or exposure to, such article of food will
cause serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or
animals.
    Description of Respondents: Respondents to this collection of
information are owners, operators, or agents in charge of domestic or
foreign facilities that manufacture, process,

pack, or hold food for human or animal consumption in the United
States.
    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Number of
      Activity; 21 CFR section           FDA Form        Number of     responses per   Total annual       Average burden per response       Total hours
                                          No.\2\        respondents     respondent       responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New domestic facility registration;             3537           9,795               1           9,795  2.7...............................          26,447
 1.230-1.233.
New foreign facility registration;              3537          13,697               1          13,697  8.7...............................         119,164
 1.230-1.233.
Updates; 1.234......................            3537          53,836               1          53,836  1.2...............................          64,603
Cancellations; 1.235................           3537a           6,390               1           6,390  1.................................           6,390
Biennial renewals; 1.235............            3537          97,883               1          97,883  0.38 (23 minutes).................          37,196
3rd party registration verification.            3537          41,256               1          41,256  0.25 (15 minutes).................          10,314
U.S. Agent verification.............            3537          57,070               1          57,070  0.25 (15 minutes).................          14,268
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...........................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..................................         278,382
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
\2\ Forms FDA 3537 and FDA 3537a refer to both the paper version of the form and the electronic system known as the Food Facility Registration Module,
  which is available at https://www.access.fda.gov.

    These burden figures are based on currently available data and
reflect an overall decrease to the information collection by 174,395
and 31,370 hours. The decrease results from the realization of burden
associated with implementing measures on newly established electronic
registration requirements.

    Dated: April 15, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-07839 Filed 4-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: April 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 74)]
[Notices]
[Page 19487-19488]
[DOCID:fr18ap07-43]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

April 11, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC07-75-000.
    Applicants: Walton County Power, L.L.C.; Washington County Power,
LLC; Effingham County Power, LLC; MPC Generating, LLC; Progress Genco
Ventures, LLC; Progress Ventures, Inc.; Mackinaw Power, L.L.C.
    Description: Progress Ventures, Inc. et al. submit an application
for authorization under section 203 of the FPA and request for waivers.
    Filed Date: 04/04/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070409-0198.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 25, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: EC07-76-000.
    Applicants: J-Power USA Investment Co., Ltd.; John Hancock Life
Insurance Company.
    Description: J-Power USA Investment Co., Ltd. and John Hancock Life
Insurance Co. submit a joint application for authorization to transfer
ownership interest in exempt wholesale generators etc.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0074.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 27, 2007.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings.

    Docket Numbers: ER04-1232-007.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits its Substitute
Sixth Revised Sheet 161A to FERC Electric Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume
1.
    Filed Date: 04/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070410-0170.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-880-006; ER07-632-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Neptune Regional Transmission System, LLC and PJM
Transmission Owners Administrative Committee submit revisions to
Schedule 14 to their Open Access Transmission Tariff filed on 3/16/07.
    Filed Date: 04/04/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0143.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 25, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-613-003.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.; New England Power Pool.
    Description: ISO New England, Inc. submits a report on the status
of the implementation of certain reserve market changes that were
included as part of Phase II of the Ancillary Services Market project.
    Filed Date: 04/02/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0142.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 23, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-597-001.
    Applicants: Montana Generation, LLC.
    Description: Montana Generation, LLC submits an amendment to its
tariff, Substitute Sheet 1 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Original
Volume 1 to incorporate the requested changes pursuant to the
Commission's 2/16/06 order.
    Filed Date: 04/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070410-0169.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-710-000.
    Applicants: Peoples Energy Services Corporation.
    Description: Integrys Energy Group Inc. on behalf of Peoples Energy
Services Corp submits a revised market-based rate tariff etc.
    Filed Date: 03/23/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070409-0191.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 13, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-717-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Services, Inc on behalf of the Entergy
Operating Companies submits a notice of adoption of North American
Electric Reliability Council's revised Transmission Loading Relief
Procedures compliance filing.
    Filed Date: 04/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070410-0172.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-718-000.
    Applicants: Pepperell Realty LLC.
    Description: Pepperell Realty LLC submits a notice of cancellation
of FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 04/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070410-0171.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-719-000.
    Applicants: Xcel Energy Operating Companies.
    Description: Xcel Energy Operating Companies submits Third Revised
Sheet 27 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1 to its Joint
Open Access Transmission Tariff, First Revised Volume 1 pur to Part 35
of FERC's Regulations.
    Filed Date: 04/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070410-0173.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-722-000.
    Applicants: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company.
    Description: South Carolina Electric & Gas Co submits Original
Tariff Sheet 374 et al. adopting the North American Electric
Reliability Council Transmission Loading Relief Procedures to comply
with FERC's Order 676.
    Filed Date: 04/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-723-000.
    Applicants: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative submits rate
schedule for providing cost-based Reactive Power and Voltage Control
from Generation Sources Service etc.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0145.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-724-000.
    Applicants: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative submits amended rate
schedule for providing cost-based Reactive Power and Voltage Control
from Generation Sources Service.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-725-000.
    Applicants: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative submits an amended
rate schedule for providing cost-based Reactive Power and Voltage
Control from Generation Sources Service.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0062.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-726-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits
revisions to its Open Access Transmission Tariff to incorporate the
latest approved version re Transmission Loading Relief procedure.
    Filed Date: 04/05/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0144.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 26, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-727-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Operating Companies submits an amendment to
the Entergy System Agreement.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0066.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-729-000.
    Applicants: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative submits a rate
schedule for providing cost-based Reactive Power and Voltage Control
from Generation Sources Service etc.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0064.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-730-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Electric and Gas Company; PSEG Energy
Resources & Trade LLC.
    Description: Public Service Electric & Gas Company et al. submit
request for waivers of affiliate standards and authorizations for sales
etc.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 27, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-731-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Florida Power & Light Co submits a new Rate Schedule
305, Agreement for Generator Balancing Service with DeSoto County
Generating Co, LLC.
    Filed Date: 04/09/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070411-0067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 30, 2007.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified Comment
Date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will e-File a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-7315 Filed 4-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P