[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 161 (Wednesday, August 20, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 49306]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19667]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-530-000]

Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on August 6, 2014, Southern Star Central Gas
Pipeline, Inc. (Southern Star), pursuant to its blanket certificate
authorization granted on September 30, 1982, in Docket No. CP82-479-
000,\1\ filed an application in accordance to sections 157.205,
157.210, 157.211 and 157.216(b) of the Commission's Regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) as amended, requesting authority to replace
approximately 6.01 miles of existing 12-inch XT pipeline by
constructing approximately 6.01 miles of 20-inch XM pipeline in Johnson
County, Missouri. The proposed pipeline is a part of a project that
Southern Star proactively committed in 2008 to a multi-year plan to
replace the approximately 18.93 remaining miles of 1930s-vintage 12-
inch XT pipeline, all as more fully set forth in the application which
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 20 FERC ] 62,592 (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The existing 12-inch XT pipeline was constructed in 1930s for the
purpose of providing natural gas service to market areas between
Ottawa, Kansas and Sedalia, Missouri and to the communities of
Carrollton and Marshall in Missouri. Sections of the pipeline have been
replaced over a period of years for various reasons including when
required by the Department of Transportation (DOT) and as needed to
eliminate obsolete, acetylene-welded pipe. The proposed 6.01 miles of
20-inch XM pipeline is the final component in the multi-year program of
replacing the entire 12-inch XT pipeline. Southern Star plans to
abandon the existing 12-inch XT pipeline in-place. The proposed
pipeline will be constructed approximately 25 feet from and parallel to
the existing pipeline. Southern Star proposes to operate the 20-inch XM
pipeline to a maximum operating pressure (MOP) of 720 psig.\2\ Southern
Start states that the entire 20-inch XM pipeline does not provide any
additional firm capacity upstream due to constrains through the Ottawa
and Peculiar compressor stations. The total estimated cost of the
proposed project is $21,007,847.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The proposed 20-inch XM pipeline will be hydrostatically
tested at a maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of 960 psig.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to
Phyllis K. Medley, Senior Analyst, Regulatory Compliance, Southern Star
Central Gas Pipeline, Inc., 4700 State Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky
42301, by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>.
    This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be
viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number filed to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FERC
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or, for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. Comments, protests and interventions may be
filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
intervenors to file electronically.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    Dated: August 13, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-19667 Filed 8-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 19930-19931]
[DOCID:fr11ap08-132]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Lavacot Locomotive Works, Inc.

Docket Number FRA-2008-0021

    Lavacot Locomotive Works, Inc. (LLW) requests a waiver from the
requirement of 49 CFR Section 224.103(b), Characteristics of
Retroreflective Sheeting; Color. LLW requests that it be permitted to
use the color red instead of yellow to comply with this rule.
    LLW owns two ex-Southern Pacific Railroad (SP) SD-9 type
locomotives, which are occasionally leased and used by the Portland &
Western Railroad in freight service. The Albany & Eastern Railroad and
the Port of Tillamook Bay Railroad also have used them. All three of
these railroads are shortlines located in northwestern Oregon. When the
locomotives were last in SP service, they were numbered SP 4364 and
4433.

When delivered from the builder, they were identified as SP 5399 and
5426, respectively. These locomotives were built in 1955 and rebuilt by
SP in the 1970s.
    Wishing to acknowledge the historic heritage of these locomotives,
LLW has returned the ex-SP 4364 to its, as built, ``Black Widow''
livery and original number of 5399. LLW intends to repaint and renumber
4433 similarly. The Black Widow paint scheme consists of a black car
body with silver ends and a 9-inch red side frame stripe immediately
below the walkway. The front end, in addition to the silver painted
nose, has a horizontal silver side stripe above two orange stripes, all
trailing back toward the cab. The trucks are painted silver.
    Title 49 CFR Part 224, Reflectorization of Rail Freight Rolling
Stock (Final Rule), does not provide a mechanism for facilitating the
application of historically correct paint schemes to antique or
historic rail equipment. LLW states in its request for relief that they
recognize the importance of the visibility issue addressed by the rule
and proposes to substitute reflectorized red material meeting the same
standards, as required by 49 CFR Section 224.103(b). LLW states that
red reflectorized material is widely used for safety in such
applications as striping on grade crossing gate arms. Also, the trucks
of the locomotives are painted silver to enhance visibility.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2008-0021) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 7, 2008.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
 [FR Doc. E8-7682 Filed 4-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 148 (Thursday, August 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46679-46680]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18502]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2013-0057]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), this document provides the public notice that by
documents dated May 28, 2013, and June 12, 2013, Steam Into History
(Steam) has petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a
waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad
safety regulations contained at 49 CFR Part 215-Railroad Freight Car
Safety Standards. FRA assigned the petition Docket Number FRA-2013-
0057.
    Specifically, Steam seeks relief from 49 CFR 215.303-Stenciling of
restricted cars, which requires that restricted railroad freight cars
shall be stenciled or marked in clearly legible letters with the letter
``R'' and a series of designated terms to completely indicate the basis
for the restricted operation of the car.
    The petition concerns three leased and two owned freight cars,
numbered RERX 101, 213, and 702 and NCR 150 and 840, which are railroad
flat cars converted to passenger carriage cars for tourist and
excursion railroad service by the addition of seating, superstructures,
and steps. Each of the Steam freight cars in the present petition is
more than 50 years old, measured from the date of original
construction, and the freight cars are the subject of a parallel
petition for special approval for continued operation under 215.203(c).
Therefore, Steam seeks a waiver of the requirement for stenciling found
in 215.303, as the

railroad states that the stenciling would detract from both the
aesthetic and historical nature of the reproduction vintage rail car
equipment. As Steam's passenger equipment will operate in a limited
area, Steam requests permission to keep documentation related to the
restricted status of the equipment at its business office, similar to
the conditions granted to other tourist and excursion railroads. In
addition, Steam petitions for relief from all requirements of 49 CFR
Part 224--Reflectorization of Rail Freight Rolling Stock, as the
railroad states that reflectorization would detract from both the
aesthetic and historical nature of the reproduction vintage equipment.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the Department of Transportation's
Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations Facility is open from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by September 16, 2013 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
See http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy notice
of regulations.gov or interested parties may review DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477).

Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013-18502 Filed 7-31-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5915-5920]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02145]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0189; FRL-9973-61-OAR]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Arkansas; Regional Haze and Interstate Visibility Transport
Federal Implementation Plan Revisions; Withdrawal of Federal
Implementation Plan for NOX for Electric Generating Units in Arkansas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) that addresses regional haze for the
first planning period for Arkansas that was published in the Federal
Register on September 27, 2016, as it applies to the nitrogen oxide
(NOX) requirements for the Arkansas Electric Cooperative
Corporation (AECC) Bailey Plant Unit 1; AECC McClellan Plant Unit 1;
the American Electric Power/Southwestern Electric Power Company (AEP/
SWEPCO) Flint Creek Plant Boiler No. 1; Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
(Entergy) Lake Catherine Plant Unit 4; Entergy White Bluff Plant Units
1 and 2 and the Auxiliary Boiler; and Entergy Independence Plant Units
1 and 2. We are removing these FIP requirements because in a separate
action being published in this Federal Register, we are taking final
action to approve revisions to the Arkansas State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submitted by the State of Arkansas through the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) on October 31, 2017, that
address NOX requirements for the nine aforementioned units.

DATES: This final rule will be effective March 14, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0189. All documents in the dockets are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dayana Medina,<PHONE_NUMBER>;
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for this action?
II. What final action is EPA taking?
III. Responses to Comments Received
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this action?

    Arkansas submitted a SIP revision on September 9, 2008, to address
the first regional haze implementation period. On August 3, 2010,
Arkansas submitted a SIP revision with non-substantive revisions to the
Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission (APCEC) Regulation
19, Chapter 15; this Chapter identified the BART-eligible and subject-
to-BART sources in Arkansas and established the BART emission limits
for subject-to-BART sources. On September 27, 2011, the State submitted
supplemental information to address the regional haze requirements. We
are hereafter referring to these regional haze submittals collectively
as the ``2008 Arkansas Regional Haze SIP.'' On March 12, 2012, we
partially approved and partially disapproved the 2008 Arkansas Regional
Haze SIP.\1\ On September 27, 2016, we published a FIP (the Arkansas
Regional Haze FIP) addressing the disapproved portions of the 2008
Arkansas Regional Haze SIP.\2\ Among other things, the FIP established
NOX emission limits under the BART requirements for Bailey
Unit 1; McClellan Unit 1; Flint Creek Boiler No. 1; Lake Catherine Unit
4; and White Bluff Units 1 and 2 and the Auxiliary Boiler. The FIP also
established NOX emission limits under the reasonable
progress requirements for Independence Units 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 77 FR 14604.
    \2\ 81 FR 66332; see also 81 FR 68319 (October 4, 2016)
(correction).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to petitions submitted by the State of Arkansas and
industry parties seeking reconsideration and an administrative stay of
the final Arkansas Regional Haze FIP,\3\ in a letter dated April 14,
2017, we announced the convening of a proceeding to reconsider several
elements of the FIP, including the appropriate compliance dates for the
NOX emission limits for Flint Creek Unit 1, White Bluff
Units 1 and 2, and Independence Units 1 and 2.\4\ EPA also published a
document in the Federal Register on April 25, 2017, administratively
staying the effectiveness of the 18-month NOX compliance
dates in the FIP for these units for a period of 90 days.\5\ On July
13, 2017, the EPA published a proposed rule that would extend the FIP's
NOX compliance dates for Flint Creek Unit 1, White Bluff
Units 1 and 2, and Independence Units 1 and 2, by 21 months to January
27, 2020.6 7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See the docket associated with this proposed rulemaking for
a copy of the petitions for reconsideration and administrative stay
submitted by the State of Arkansas; Entergy Arkansas Inc., Entergy
Mississippi Inc., and Entergy Power LLC (collectively ``Entergy'');
AECC; and the Energy and Environmental Alliance of Arkansas (EEAA).
    \4\ Letter from E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator, EPA, to Nicholas
Jacob Bronni & Jamie Leigh Ewing, Arkansas Attorney General's
Office, (April 14, 2017). A copy of this letter is included in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0189-0240.
    \5\ 82 FR 18994.
    \6\ 82 FR 32284.
    \7\ EPA has not finalized the July 13, 2017 proposed rule. The
separate final action approving the Arkansas Regional Haze
NOX SIP revision together with this final action EPA is
taking to withdraw the source-specific NOX emission
limits for the nine EGUs in the Arkansas Regional Haze FIP, make it
unnecessary to finalize our July 13, 2017 proposed rule to revise
the NOX compliance dates in the Arkansas Regional Haze
FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 12, 2017, Arkansas submitted a proposed SIP revision with a
request for parallel processing, addressing the NOX
requirements for Bailey Unit 1, McClellan Unit 1, Flint Creek Boiler
No. 1, Lake Catherine Unit 4, White Bluff Units 1 and 2 and the
Auxiliary Boiler, and Independence Units 1 and 2 (Arkansas Regional
Haze NOX SIP

revision or Arkansas NOX SIP revision). Arkansas' proposed
July 2017 Regional Haze NOX SIP revision addressed the
NOX BART requirements for Arkansas' EGUs by relying on
participation in the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) ozone
season NOX trading program as an alternative to BART. The
July 2017 Regional Haze NOX SIP revision proposal also made
the determination that no additional NOX emission controls
for Arkansas sources, beyond participation in CSAPR's ozone season
NOX trading program, are required for achieving reasonable
progress in Arkansas. The July 2017 Regional Haze SIP revision
addresses NOX requirements for the same EGUs for which we
established source-specific NOX emission limits in the
September 27, 2016 FIP. In a document published in the Federal Register
on September 11, 2017, we proposed to approve the Arkansas Regional
Haze NOX SIP revision and proposed to withdraw corresponding
parts of the FIP.\8\ On October 31, 2017, we received ADEQ's final
NOX SIP revision addressing BART and reasonable progress
requirements for NOX for EGUs in Arkansas for the first
implementation period. In a final action being published separately in
this Federal Register, we are taking final action to approve the
Arkansas Regional Haze NOX SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 82 FR 42627.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The background for this final rule and the separate action also
being published in this Federal Register that approves the Arkansas
Regional Haze NOX SIP revision is also discussed in detail
in our September 11, 2017 proposal.\9\ The comment period was open for
30 days, and we received comments from three commenters in response to
our proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 82 FR 42627.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What final action is EPA taking?

    We are withdrawing those portions of the Arkansas Regional Haze FIP
at 40 CFR 52.173 that impose NOX requirements on Bailey Unit
1; McClellan Unit 1; Flint Creek Boiler No. 1; Lake Catherine Unit 4;
White Bluff Units 1 and 2 and the Auxiliary Boiler; and Independence
Units 1 and 2. Therefore, as of the effective date of this final rule,
the Arkansas Regional Haze FIP NOX requirements will no
longer apply to the nine aforementioned units. All other provisions of
the Arkansas Regional Haze FIP are unaffected by this action and remain
in place.
    As explained in our September 11, 2017 proposal,\10\ this action is
made possible because of our separate action being published in this
Federal Register to approve the Arkansas Regional Haze NOX
SIP revision submitted to us on July 12, 2017, with a request for
parallel processing. On October 31, 2017, we received ADEQ's final SIP
revision addressing NOX BART for EGUs in Arkansas and the
reasonable progress requirements for NOX for the first
implementation period. The final Arkansas Regional Haze NOX
SIP revision we received on October 31, 2017, did not contain
significant changes from the state's proposed SIP revision. Therefore,
it is appropriate for us to take final action, as proposed, on the
final SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 82 FR 42627.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has made the determination that the Arkansas Regional Haze NOx
SIP revision is approvable because the plan's provisions meet all
applicable requirements of the CAA and EPA implementing regulations.
EPA is finalizing this action under section 110 and part C of the Act.

III. Responses to Comments Received

    We received a total of three comment letters concerning our
proposed action. The issues raised in those comment letters are
summarized, along with our response to each, in the separate document
being published in this Federal Register that approves the Arkansas
Regional Haze NOX SIP revision. Copies of the comments are
available in the docket for this rulemaking.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Please see Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0189 in the
regulations.gov website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review. This final rule revises a FIP to withdraw source-specific
NOX emission limits for only six facilities in Arkansas and
is therefore not a rule of general applicability.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This
final rule revises a FIP to withdraw source-specific NOX
emission limits for six facilities in Arkansas.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this final action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
RFA. This final action will not impose any requirements on small
entities. This final action revises a FIP to withdraw source-specific
NOX emission limits that apply to six power plants in
Arkansas.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because this partial FIP withdrawal does not
apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA
or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law. This final action revises a FIP to withdraw source-
specific NOX emission limits that apply to six power plants
in Arkansas. There are no Indian reservation lands in Arkansas. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potentially disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income
or indigenous populations.

L. Determination Under Section 307(d)

    Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(B), this action is subject to the
requirements of CAA section 307(d), as it revises a FIP under CAA
section 110(c).

M. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This rule is exempt from the CRA because it is a rule of particular
applicably. EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding this
action under section 801 because this is a rule of particular
applicability that only affects six facilities in Arkansas.

N. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 13, 2018. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Air pollution control, Best available retrofit technology,
Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Regional haze, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Visibility.

    Dated: January 25, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    Title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart E--Arkansas

0
2. Section 52.173 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (c)(3) through (10) and (12);
0
b. Removing paragraphs (c)(13) and (14);
0
c. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(15) through (29) as paragraphs (c)(13)
through (27); and
0
d. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (c)(14), (15), (17), (18),
and (20) through (24).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  52.173  Visibility protection.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) Emissions limitations for AECC Bailey Unit 1 and AECC McClellan
Unit 1. The individual SO2 and PM emission limits for each
unit are as listed in the table in this paragraph (c)(3).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Unit                              SO2 emission limit               PM emission limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AECC Bailey Unit 1..............................  Use of fuel with a sulfur       Use of fuel with a sulfur
                                                   content limit of 0.5% by        content limit of 0.5% by
                                                   weight.                         weight.
AECC McClellan Unit 1...........................  Use of fuel with a sulfur       Use of fuel with a sulfur
                                                   content limit of 0.5% by        content limit of 0.5% by
                                                   weight.                         weight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) Compliance dates for AECC Bailey Unit 1 and AECC McClellan Unit
1. The owner or operator of each unit must comply with the
SO2 and PM requirements listed in paragraph (c)(3) of this
section by October 27, 2021. As of October 27, 2016, the owner or
operator of each unit shall not purchase fuel for combustion at the
unit that does not meet the sulfur content limit in paragraph (c)(3) of
this section. The owner or operator of each unit must comply with the
requirement in paragraph (c)(3) of this section to burn only fuel with
a sulfur content limit of 0.5% by weight by October 27, 2021.
    (5) Compliance determination and reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for AECC Bailey Unit 1 and AECC McClellan Unit 1 for SO4
and PM. To determine compliance with the SO2 and PM
requirements listed in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the owner or
operator shall sample and analyze each shipment of fuel to determine
the sulfur content by weight, except for natural gas shipments. A
``shipment'' is considered delivery of the entire amount of each order
of fuel purchased. Fuel sampling and analysis may be performed by the
owner or operator of an affected unit, an outside laboratory, or a fuel
supplier. All records pertaining to the sampling of each shipment of
fuel as described in this paragraph (c)(5), including the results of
the sulfur content analysis, must be maintained by the owner or
operator and made available upon request to EPA and ADEQ
representatives.
    (6) Emissions limitations for AEP Flint Creek Unit 1 and Entergy
White Bluff Units 1 and 2. The individual SO2 emission
limits for each unit are as listed in the table in this paragraph
(c)(6), as specified in pounds per million British thermal units (lb/
MMBtu). The SO2 emission limits of 0.06 lb/MMBtu are on a
rolling 30 boiler-operating-day averaging period.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           SO2 emission
                          Unit                              limit (lb/
                                                              MMBtu)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AEP Flint Creek Unit 1..................................            0.06
Entergy White Bluff Unit 1..............................            0.06

Entergy White Bluff Unit 2..............................            0.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (7) Compliance dates for AEP Flint Creek Unit 1 and Entergy White
Bluff Units 1 and 2. The owner or operator of AEP Flint Creek Unit 1
must comply with the SO2 emission limit listed in paragraph
(c)(6) of this section by April 27, 2018. The owner or operator of
White Bluff Units 1 and 2 must comply with the SO2 emission
limit listed in paragraph (c)(6) of this section by October 27, 2021.
    (8) Compliance determination and reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for AEP Flint Creek Unit 1 and Entergy White Bluff Units 1
and 2. (i) For purposes of determining compliance with the
SO2 emission limit listed in paragraph (c)(6) of this
section for AEP Flint Creek Unit 1 and with the SO2 emission
limits listed in paragraph (c)(6) of this section for White Bluff Units
1 and 2, the emissions for each boiler-operating-day for each unit
shall be determined by summing the hourly emissions measured in pounds
of SO2. For each unit, heat input for each boiler-operating-
day shall be determined by adding together all hourly heat inputs, in
millions of BTU. Each boiler-operating-day of the 30-day rolling
average for a unit shall be determined by adding together the pounds of
SO2 from that day and the preceding 29 boiler-operating-days
and dividing the total pounds of SO2 by the sum of the heat
input during the same 30 boiler-operating-day period. The result shall
be the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling average in terms of lb/MMBtu
emissions of SO2. If a valid SO2 pounds per hour
or heat input is not available for any hour for a unit, that heat input
and SO2 pounds per hour shall not be used in the calculation
of the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling average for SO2. For
each day, records of the total SO2 emitted that day by each
emission unit and the sum of the hourly heat inputs for that day must
be maintained by the owner or operator and made available upon request
to EPA and ADEQ representatives. Records of the 30 boiler-operating-day
rolling average for SO2 for each unit as described in this
paragraph (c)(8)(i) must be maintained by the owner or operator for
each boiler-operating-day and made available upon request to EPA and
ADEQ representatives.
    (ii) The owner or operator shall continue to maintain and operate a
CEMS for SO2 on the units listed in paragraph (c)(6) of this
section in accordance with 40 CFR 60.8 and 60.13(e), (f), and (h), and
appendix B of 40 CFR part 60. The owner or operator shall comply with
the quality assurance procedures for CEMS found in 40 CFR part 75.
Compliance with the emission limits for SO2 shall be
determined by using data from a CEMS.
    (iii) Continuous emissions monitoring shall apply during all
periods of operation of the units listed in paragraph (c)(6) of this
section, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction,
except for CEMS breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, and zero and
span adjustments. Continuous monitoring systems for measuring
SO2 and diluent gas shall complete a minimum of one cycle of
operation (sampling, analyzing, and data recording) for each successive
15-minute period. Hourly averages shall be computed using at least one
data point in each fifteen-minute quadrant of an hour. Notwithstanding
this requirement, an hourly average may be computed from at least two
data points separated by a minimum of 15 minutes (where the unit
operates for more than one quadrant in an hour) if data are unavailable
as a result of performance of calibration, quality assurance,
preventive maintenance activities, or backups of data from data
acquisition and handling system, and recertification events. When valid
SO2 pounds per hour emission data are not obtained because
of continuous monitoring system breakdowns, repairs, calibration
checks, or zero and span adjustments, emission data must be obtained by
using other monitoring systems approved by the EPA to provide emission
data for a minimum of 18 hours in each 24-hour period and at least 22
out of 30 successive boiler operating days.
    (9) Emissions limitations for Entergy White Bluff Auxiliary Boiler.
The individual SO2 and PM emission limits for the unit are
as listed in the table in this paragraph (c)(9) in pounds per hour (lb/
hr).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      SO2 emission limit   PM emission limit (lb/
                               Unit                                        (lb/hr)                  hr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entergy White Bluff Auxiliary Boiler..............................                 105.2                    4.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (10) Compliance dates for Entergy White Bluff Auxiliary Boiler. The
owner or operator of the unit must comply with the SO2 and
PM emission limits listed in paragraph (c)(9) of this section by
October 27, 2016.
* * * * *
    (12) Emissions limitations for Entergy Lake Catherine Unit 4. The
unit must not burn fuel oil until BART determinations are promulgated
for the unit for SO2 and PM for the fuel oil firing scenario
through a FIP and/or through EPA action upon and approval of revised
BART determinations submitted by the State as a SIP revision.
* * * * *
    (14) Compliance dates for Domtar Ashdown Mill Power Boiler No. 1.
The owner or operator of the boiler must comply with the SO2
and NOX emission limits listed in paragraph (c)(13) of this
section by November 28, 2016.
    (15) Compliance determination and reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for Domtar Ashdown Paper Mill Power Boiler No. 1. (i)(A)
SO2 emissions resulting from combustion of fuel oil shall be
determined by assuming that the SO2 content of the fuel
delivered to the fuel inlet of the combustion chamber is equal to the
SO2 being emitted at the stack. The owner or operator must
maintain records of the sulfur content by weight of each fuel oil
shipment, where a ``shipment'' is considered delivery of the entire
amount of each order of fuel purchased. Fuel sampling and analysis may
be performed by the owner or operator, an outside laboratory, or a fuel
supplier. All records pertaining to the sampling of each shipment of
fuel oil, including the results of the sulfur content analysis, must be
maintained by the owner or operator and made available upon request to
EPA and ADEQ representatives. SO2 emissions resulting from
combustion of bark shall be determined by using the following site-
specific curve equation, which accounts for the SO2
scrubbing capabilities of bark combustion:

Y= 0.4005 * X - 0.2645

Where:

Y = pounds of sulfur emitted per ton of dry fuel feed to the boiler.
X = pounds of sulfur input per ton of dry bark.

    (B) The owner or operator must confirm the site-specific curve
equation through stack testing. By October 27, 2017, the owner or
operator must

provide a report to EPA showing confirmation of the site-specific curve
equation accuracy. Records of the quantity of fuel input to the boiler
for each fuel type for each day must be compiled no later than 15 days
after the end of the month and must be maintained by the owner or
operator and made available upon request to EPA and ADEQ
representatives. Each boiler-operating-day of the 30-day rolling
average for the boiler must be determined by adding together the pounds
of SO2 from that boiler-operating-day and the preceding 29
boiler-operating-days and dividing the total pounds of SO2
by the sum of the total number of boiler operating days (i.e., 30). The
result shall be the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling average in terms of
lb/day emissions of SO2. Records of the total SO2
emitted for each day must be compiled no later than 15 days after the
end of the month and must be maintained by the owner or operator and
made available upon request to EPA and ADEQ representatives. Records of
the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling averages for SO2 as
described in this paragraph (c)(15)(i) must be maintained by the owner
or operator for each boiler-operating-day and made available upon
request to EPA and ADEQ representatives.
    (ii) If the air permit is revised such that Power Boiler No. 1 is
permitted to burn only pipeline quality natural gas, this is sufficient
to demonstrate that the boiler is complying with the SO2
emission limit under paragraph (c)(13) of this section. The compliance
determination requirements and the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements under paragraph (c)(15)(i) of this section would not apply
and confirmation of the accuracy of the site-specific curve equation
under paragraph (c)(15)(i)(B) of this section through stack testing
would not be required so long as Power Boiler No. 1 is only permitted
to burn pipeline quality natural gas.
    (iii) To demonstrate compliance with the NOX emission
limit under paragraph (c)(13) of this section, the owner or operator
shall conduct stack testing using EPA Reference Method 7E, found at 40
CFR part 60, appendix A, once every 5 years, beginning October 27,
2017. Records and reports pertaining to the stack testing must be
maintained by the owner or operator and made available upon request to
EPA and ADEQ representatives.
    (iv) If the air permit is revised such that Power Boiler No. 1 is
permitted to burn only pipeline quality natural gas, the owner or
operator may demonstrate compliance with the NOX emission
limit under paragraph (c)(13) of this section by calculating
NOX emissions using fuel usage records and the applicable
NOX emission factor under AP-42, Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors, section 1.4, Table 1.4-1. Records of the
quantity of natural gas input to the boiler for each day must be
compiled no later than 15 days after the end of the month and must be
maintained by the owner or operator and made available upon request to
EPA and ADEQ representatives. Records of the calculation of
NOX emissions for each day must be compiled no later than 15
days after the end of the month and must be maintained by the owner or
operator and made available upon request to EPA and ADEQ
representatives. Each boiler-operating-day of the 30-day rolling
average for the boiler must be determined by adding together the pounds
of NOX from that day and the preceding 29 boiler-operating-
days and dividing the total pounds of NOX by the sum of the
total number of hours during the same 30 boiler-operating-day period.
The result shall be the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling average in
terms of lb/hr emissions of NOX. Records of the 30 boiler-
operating-day rolling average for NOX must be maintained by
the owner or operator for each boiler-operating-day and made available
upon request to EPA and ADEQ representatives. Under these
circumstances, the compliance determination requirements and the
reporting and recordkeeping requirements under paragraph (c)(15)(iii)
of this section would not apply.
* * * * *
    (17) SO2 and NOX Compliance dates for Domtar Ashdown Mill Power
Boiler No. 2. The owner or operator of the boiler must comply with the
SO2 and NOX emission limits listed in paragraph
(c)(16) of this section by October 27, 2021.
    (18) SO2 and NOX Compliance determination and reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for Domtar Ashdown Mill Power Boiler No. 2.
(i) NOX and SO2 emissions for each day shall be
determined by summing the hourly emissions measured in pounds of
NOX or pounds of SO2. Each boiler-operating-day
of the 30-day rolling average for the boiler shall be determined by
adding together the pounds of NOX or SO2 from
that day and the preceding 29 boiler-operating-days and dividing the
total pounds of NOX or SO2 by the sum of the
total number of hours during the same 30 boiler-operating-day period.
The result shall be the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling average in
terms of lb/hr emissions of NOX or SO2. If a
valid NOX pounds per hour or SO2 pounds per hour
is not available for any hour for the boiler, that NOX
pounds per hour shall not be used in the calculation of the 30 boiler-
operating-day rolling average for NOX. For each day, records
of the total SO2 and NOX emitted for that day by
the boiler must be maintained by the owner or operator and made
available upon request to EPA and ADEQ representatives. Records of the
30 boiler-operating-day rolling average for SO2 and
NOX for the boiler as described in this paragraph (c)(18)(i)
must be maintained by the owner or operator for each boiler-operating-
day and made available upon request to EPA and ADEQ representatives.
    (ii) The owner or operator shall continue to maintain and operate a
CEMS for SO2 and NOX on the boiler listed in
paragraph (c)(16) of this section in accordance with 40 CFR 60.8 and
60.13(e), (f), and (h), and appendix B of 40 CFR part 60. The owner or
operator shall comply with the quality assurance procedures for CEMS
found in 40 CFR part 60. Compliance with the emission limits for
SO2 and NOX shall be determined by using data
from a CEMS.
    (iii) Continuous emissions monitoring shall apply during all
periods of operation of the boiler listed in paragraph (c)(16) of this
section, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction,
except for CEMS breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, and zero and
span adjustments. Continuous monitoring systems for measuring
SO2 and NOX and diluent gas shall complete a
minimum of one cycle of operation (sampling, analyzing, and data
recording) for each successive 15-minute period. Hourly averages shall
be computed using at least one data point in each fifteen-minute
quadrant of an hour. Notwithstanding this requirement, an hourly
average may be computed from at least two data points separated by a
minimum of 15 minutes (where the unit operates for more than one
quadrant in an hour) if data are unavailable as a result of performance
of calibration, quality assurance, preventive maintenance activities,
or backups of data from data acquisition and handling system, and
recertification events. When valid SO2 or NOX
pounds per hour emission data are not obtained because of continuous
monitoring system breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, or zero and
span adjustments, emission data must be obtained by using other
monitoring systems approved by the EPA to provide emission data for a
minimum of 18 hours in each 24-hour

period and at least 22 out of 30 successive boiler operating days.
    (iv) If the air permit is revised such that Power Boiler No. 2 is
permitted to burn only pipeline quality natural gas, this is sufficient
to demonstrate that the boiler is complying with the SO2
emission limit under paragraph (c)(16) of this section. Under these
circumstances, the compliance determination requirements under
paragraphs (c)(18)(i) through (iii) of this section would not apply to
the SO2 emission limit listed in paragraph (c)(16) of this
section.
    (v) If the air permit is revised such that Power Boiler No. 2 is
permitted to burn only pipeline quality natural gas and the operation
of the CEMS is not required under other applicable requirements, the
owner or operator may demonstrate compliance with the NOX
emission limit under paragraph (c)(16) of this section by calculating
NOX emissions using fuel usage records and the applicable
NOX emission factor under AP-42, Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors, section 1.4, Table 1.4-1. Records of the
quantity of natural gas input to the boiler for each day must be
compiled no later than 15 days after the end of the month and must be
maintained by the owner or operator and made available upon request to
EPA and ADEQ representatives. Records of the calculation of
NOX emissions for each day must be compiled no later than 15
days after the end of the month and must be maintained and made
available upon request to EPA and ADEQ representatives. Each boiler-
operating-day of the 30-day rolling average for the boiler must be
determined by adding together the pounds of NOX from that
day and the preceding 29 boiler-operating-days and dividing the total
pounds of NOX by the sum of the total number of hours during
the same 30 boiler-operating-day period. The result shall be the 30
boiler-operating-day rolling average in terms of lb/hr emissions of
NOX. Records of the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling average
for NOX must be maintained by the owner or operator for each
boiler-operating-day and made available upon request to EPA and ADEQ
representatives. Under these circumstances, the compliance
determination requirements under paragraphs (c)(18)(i) through (iii) of
this section would not apply to the NOX emission limit.
* * * * *
    (20) PM compliance dates for Domtar Ashdown Mill Power Boiler No.
2. The owner or operator of the boiler must comply with the PM BART
requirement listed in paragraph (c)(19) of this section by November 28,
2016.
    (21) Alternative PM Compliance Determination for Domtar Ashdown
Paper Mill Power Boiler No.2. If the air permit is revised such that
Power Boiler No. 2 is permitted to burn only pipeline quality natural
gas, this is sufficient to demonstrate that the boiler is complying
with the PM BART requirement under paragraph (c)(19) of this section.
    (22) Emissions limitations for Entergy Independence Units 1 and 2.
The individual emission limits for each unit are as listed in the table
in this paragraph (c)(22) in pounds per million British thermal units
(lb/MMBtu). The SO2 emission limits listed in the table as
lb/MMBtu are on a rolling 30 boiler-operating-day averaging period.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           SO2 Emission
                          Unit                              limit (lb/
                                                              MMBtu)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entergy Independence Unit 1.............................            0.06
Entergy Independence Unit 2.............................            0.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (23) Compliance dates for Entergy Independence Units 1 and 2. The
owner or operator of each unit must comply with the SO2
emission limits in paragraph (c)(22) of this section by October 27,
2021.
    (24) Compliance determination and reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for Entergy Independence Units 1 and 2. (i) For purposes
of determining compliance with the SO2 emissions limit
listed in paragraph (c)(22) of this section for each unit, the
SO2 emissions for each boiler-operating-day shall be
determined by summing the hourly emissions measured in pounds of
SO2. For each unit, heat input for each boiler-operating-day
shall be determined by adding together all hourly heat inputs, in
millions of BTU. Each boiler-operating-day of the thirty-day rolling
average for a unit shall be determined by adding together the pounds of
SO2 from that day and the preceding 29 boiler-operating-days
and dividing the total pounds of SO2 by the sum of the heat
input during the same 30 boiler-operating-day period. The result shall
be the 30 boiler-operating-day rolling average in terms of lb/MMBtu
emissions of SO2. If a valid SO2 pounds per hour
or heat input is not available for any hour for a unit, that heat input
and SO2 pounds per hour shall not be used in the calculation
of the applicable 30 boiler-operating-days rolling average. For each
day, records of the total SO2 emitted that day by each
emission unit and the sum of the hourly heat inputs for that day must
be maintained by the owner or operator and made available upon request
to EPA and ADEQ representatives. Records of the 30 boiler-operating-day
rolling average for each unit as described in this paragraph (c)(24)(i)
must be maintained by the owner or operator for each boiler-operating-
day and made available upon request to EPA and ADEQ representatives.
    (ii) The owner or operator shall continue to maintain and operate a
CEMS for SO2 on the units listed in paragraph (c)(22) in
accordance with 40 CFR 60.8 and 60.13(e), (f), and (h), and appendix B
of 40 CFR part 60. The owner or operator shall comply with the quality
assurance procedures for CEMS found in 40 CFR part 75. Compliance with
the emission limits for SO2 shall be determined by using
data from a CEMS.
    (iii) Continuous emissions monitoring shall apply during all
periods of operation of the units listed in paragraph (c)(22) of this
section, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction,
except for CEMS breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, and zero and
span adjustments. Continuous monitoring systems for measuring
SO2 and diluent gas shall complete a minimum of one cycle of
operation (sampling, analyzing, and data recording) for each successive
15-minute period. Hourly averages shall be computed using at least one
data point in each fifteen-minute quadrant of an hour. Notwithstanding
this requirement, an hourly average may be computed from at least two
data points separated by a minimum of 15 minutes (where the unit
operates for more than one quadrant in an hour) if data are unavailable
as a result of performance of calibration, quality assurance,
preventive maintenance activities, or backups of data from data
acquisition and handling system, and recertification events. When valid
SO2 pounds per hour emission data are not obtained because
of continuous monitoring system breakdowns, repairs, calibration
checks, or zero and span adjustments, emission data must be obtained by
using other monitoring systems approved by the EPA to provide emission
data for a minimum of 18 hours in each 24-hour period and at least 22
out of 30 successive boiler operating days.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-02145 Filed 2-9-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 26, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48524-48527]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0503; Product Identifier 2018-NM-048-AD; Amendment
39-19413; AD 2018-19-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; 328 Support Services GmbH (Type
Certificate Previously Held by AvCraft Aerospace GmbH; Fairchild
Dornier GmbH; Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all 328
Support Services GmbH Model 328-100 and -300 airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports indicating corrosion on the horizontal stabilizer
bearing supports at the contact surface to the horizontal stabilizer
rear spar. This AD requires inspections for corrosion and any other
damage (i.e., cracking and chafing) of the horizontal stabilizer rear
bearing supports, replacement of the affected horizontal stabilizer
rear bearing supports if necessary, and modification of the horizontal
stabilizer rear spar. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 31, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 31,
2018.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact 328 Support Services GmbH, Global Support Center, P.O. Box
1252, D-82231 Wessling, Federal Republic of Germany; telephone +49 8153
88111 6666; fax +49 8153 88111 6565; email [email protected];
internet http://www.328support.de. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th
St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2018-0503.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0503; 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 final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all 328 Support Services
GmbH Model 328-100 and -300 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on June 7, 2018 (83 FR 26389). The NPRM was prompted
by reports indicating corrosion on the horizontal stabilizer bearing
supports at the contact surface to the horizontal stabilizer rear spar.
The NPRM proposed to require inspections for corrosion and any other
damage (i.e., cracking and chafing) of the horizontal stabilizer rear
bearing supports, replacement of the affected horizontal stabilizer
rear bearing supports if necessary, and modification of the horizontal
stabilizer rear spar.
    We are issuing this AD to address corrosion on the horizontal
stabilizer rear bearing supports and rear spar, which could lead to
failure of the fitting and loss of one load path of the horizontal
stabilizer attachment, and possibly result in reduced controllability
of the airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2017-0239, dated November 30, 2017 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all 328 Support
Services GmbH Model 328-100 and -300 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences were reported on horizontal stabilizer bearing
supports being found corroded at the contact surface to the
horizontal stabilizer rear spar. The corroded area was at the lower
flange position, which is connected to the stabilizer rear spar and
not visible without detachment of the fitting. Investigation
determined that the corrosion is

triggered by galvanic effect, due to a direct contact between the
horizontal stabilizer rear spar, made from CFRP (carbon fibre
reinforced plastic), and the aluminium rear attachment fitting.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
failure of the fitting and loss of one load path of the horizontal
stabilizer attachment, possibly resulting in reduced control of the
aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, 328 Support Services
GmbH (328 SSG) issued Service Bulletin (SB) SB-328-55-557 and SB-
328J-55-324 to provide instructions for inspection of the affected
area, replacement of the parts, and modification to improve
corrosion behaviour by incorporating of glass fibre layer.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time inspection [detailed visual inspection and an eddy current
inspection for chafing and corrosion] of the horizontal stabilizer
rear bearing supports, and, depending on findings, accomplishment of
applicable corrective action(s) [replacement of the affected
horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports]. This [EASA] AD also
requires a modification of the horizontal stabilizer rear spar,
irrespective of findings.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0503.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this final rule. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the
determination of the cost to the public.

New Service Information

    We received 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-
557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018; and 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018. We
referred to 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557,
Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018; and 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018; as
the appropriate sources of service information for the actions
specified in the proposed AD. Revision 2 of the service information
corrects spelling errors and adds alternative parts. No additional work
is needed if the actions specified in the earlier revisions of the
service information have been done.
    We have revised this AD to refer to 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018; and 328
Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 2,
dated May 24, 2018, as the appropriate sources of service information
for accomplishing the required actions. We have also added 328 Support
Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 1, dated
February 1, 2018; and 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-
328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018, to paragraph (j) of
this AD in order to give credit for accomplishing actions specified in
Revision 1 of the service information.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this final rule with the changes
described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined
that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    328 Support Services GmbH has issued Service Bulletin SB-328-55-
557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018; and Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-
324, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018. This service information describes
procedures for a detailed visual inspection and an eddy current
inspection for corrosion and any other damage (i.e., cracking and
chafing) of the horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports,
modification of the horizontal stabilizer rear spar, and replacement of
the affected horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports if necessary.
These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane
models. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 27 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed visual inspection and eddy     4 work-hours x $85 per                $0            $340          $9,180
 current inspection.                     hour = $340.
Modification..........................  16 work-hours x $85 per                0           1,360          36,720
                                         hour = $1,360.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacement
that would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this
replacement:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement..................................  24 work-hours x $85 per hour =                *           $2,040
                                                $2,040.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide parts cost estimates for the on-condition
  action specified in this AD.

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.

    We are 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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will 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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2018-19-13 328 Support Services GmbH (Type Certificate Previously
Held by AvCraft Aerospace GmbH; Fairchild Dornier GmbH; Dornier
Luftfahrt GmbH): Amendment 39-19413; Docket No. FAA-2018-0503;
Product Identifier 2018-NM-048-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 31, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all 328 Support Services GmbH (Type
Certificate previously held by AvCraft Aerospace GmbH; Fairchild
Dornier GmbH; Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH) Model 328-100 and -300
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of corrosion on the horizontal
stabilizer bearing supports at the contact surface to the horizontal
stabilizer rear spar. We are issuing this AD to address corrosion on
the horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports and rear spar, which
could lead to failure of the fitting and loss of one load path of
the horizontal stabilizer attachment, and possibly result in reduced
controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Modification

    (1) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or
(g)(3)(ii) of this AD, do a detailed visual inspection and an eddy
current inspection for corrosion and any other damage (i.e.,
cracking and chafing) of the horizontal stabilizer rear bearing
supports in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 328
Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 2,
dated May 24, 2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support
Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 2, dated May
24, 2018 (for Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable.
    (2) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or
(g)(3)(ii) of this AD, modify the horizontal stabilizer rear spar in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 328 Support
Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 2, dated May
24, 2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for
Model 328-300 airplanes); as applicable.
    (3) Do the actions in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD at
the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or
(g)(3)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For Group 1 airplanes, serial numbers (S/Ns) 1005 through
1031 inclusive, as identified in 328 Support Services GmbH Service
Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model
328-100 airplanes): Within 1,000 flight cycles or 8 months,
whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD.
    (ii) For Group 2 airplanes, S/Ns 1032 through 3224 inclusive, as
identified in 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-
557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes);
or 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324,
Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model 328-300 airplanes); as
applicable: Within 5,000 flight hours or 30 months, whichever occurs
first after the effective date of this AD.

(h) Corrective Action

    If, during the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
corrosion or any other damage (i.e., cracking and chafing) is
detected, before further flight, replace the affected horizontal
stabilizer rear bearing supports in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of 328 Support Services GmbH Service
Bulletin SB-328-55-557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model
328-100 airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin
SB-328J-55-324, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model 328-300
airplanes); as applicable.

(i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or
(i)(2) of this AD, no person may install a horizontal stabilizer
rear bearing support, part number 001B551A1441000, on any airplane.
    (1) For Group 1 airplanes, S/Ns 1005 through 1031 inclusive, as
identified in 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-
557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes):
After replacement of the horizontal stabilizer rear bearing supports
as specified in paragraph (g)(2) or (h) of this AD.
    (2) For Group 2 airplanes, S/Ns 1032 through 3224 inclusive, as
identified in 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-
557, Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model 328-100 airplanes);
or 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324,
Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018 (for Model 328-300 airplanes); as
applicable: As of the effective date of this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557, dated September 1, 2017; or 328
Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-

328-55-557, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018 (for Model 328-100
airplanes); or 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-
55-324, dated September 1, 2017; or 328 Support Services GmbH
Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324, Revision 1, dated February 1, 2018
(for Model 328-300 airplanes).

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected]. 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.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or 328 Support Services GmbH's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2017-0239, dated November 30,
2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0503.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Todd Thompson,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this AD.

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328-55-557,
Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018.
    (ii) 328 Support Services GmbH Service Bulletin SB-328J-55-324,
Revision 2, dated May 24, 2018.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact 328
Support Services GmbH, Global Support Center, P.O. Box 1252, D-82231
Wessling, Federal Republic of Germany; telephone +49 8153 88111
6666; fax +49 8153 88111 6565; email [email protected]; internet
http://www.328support.de.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on September 7, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-20357 Filed 9-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 18716-18718]
[DOCID:fr13ap07-93]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55596; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Fees for
Transactions in Listed and Nasdaq Securities Priced Less Than One
Dollar

April 6, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 22, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange''),
through its wholly owned subsidiary NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (``NYSE
Arca Equities''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Exchange. NYSE Arca has filed the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\

which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the section of its Schedule of Fees
and Charges for Exchange Services (``Fee Schedule'') that applies to
transactions by ETP Holders \5\ to add a pricing structure for listed
and Nasdaq securities priced less than one dollar. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at NYSE Arca, the Commission's Public
Reference Room, and http://www.nysearca.com.

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

    \5\ See NYSE Arca Equities Rule 1.1(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, NYSE Arca included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. NYSE Arca has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the section of its Fee Schedule that
applies to transactions by ETP Holders to add a separate pricing
structure for listed and Nasdaq securities priced less than one dollar
($1.00) consistent with Rule 610(c) of Regulation NMS.\ 6\ The Exchange
intends to implement these changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this
proposal immediately upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 242.610(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Fee Schedule currently provides that ETP Holders are charged
between $0.001 per share and $0.003 per share for round-lot
transactions in NYSE-listed and Nasdaq securities that execute against
orders residing on the NYSE Arca Book. ETP Holders are charged $0.03
per share for listed securities and $0.004 per share for Nasdaq
securities for odd-lot orders that execute against orders residing on
the NYSE Arca Book. Similarly, ETP Holder orders that route to any away
market center or participant and are executed are charged between
$0.001 per share and $0.03 per share, dependent upon the away market
center or participant, the type of security, and whether the
transaction was for a round or odd-lot.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to (i) clarify that
these fees will remain unchanged for listed and Nasdaq securities
priced greater than or equal to $1.00, and (ii) add a separate,
distinct pricing structure for listed and Nasdaq securities priced less
than $1.00, pursuant to Rule 610(c) of Regulation NMS, and consistent
with the recent fee announcement \7\ by The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to implement a fee of 0.1% of the
total dollar value for all round and odd-lot transactions of ETP
Holders that execute against orders residing on the NYSE Arca Book for
listed or Nasdaq securities priced less than $1.00, and shall impose a
fee of 0.3% of the total dollar value for orders of listed and Nasdaq
securities priced less than $1.00 that route and are executed with any
away market center or participant. The Exchange will not provide a
rebate (credit) to ETP Holders for any transactions in securities
priced less than $1.00.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55576 (April 3,
2007) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-026); see also NASDAQ Head Trader Alert
2007-065: NASDAQ Announces Pricing Change for Non-NASDAQ
Listed Executions Under $1 (March 21, 2007) (announcing an execution
fee of 0.1%, or 10 basis points, for non-NASDAQ securities with a
share price below $1.00).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it
is intended to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \10\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder \11\ because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other
charge applicable only to a member imposed by the self-regulatory
organization. Accordingly, the proposal is effective upon Commission
receipt of the filing. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-30 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-30. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the

public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public
Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE Arca. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-30 and should
be submitted on or before May 4, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-6959 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 9714]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3865]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket ID FEMA-2010-0003; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1170]

Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On January 7, 2011, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule that included an erroneous Base Flood Elevation (BFE) for
the Skykomish River in Snohomish County, Washington. The BFE currently
in effect for the location approximately 216 feet downstream of
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway should have been listed as 355
feet, referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988.

DATES: Comments pertaining to the Skykomish River BFE for the location
approximately 216 feet downstream of Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railway are to be submitted on or before May 23, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-
1170, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal
Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER> or (e-
mail) rodriguez1<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER> or (e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) publishes proposed determinations of Base (1% annual-chance)
Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified BFEs for communities participating
in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are minimum requirements.
They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any
existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain
management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter
requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed elevations are
used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and
also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium
rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final,
and for the contents in those buildings.

Correction

    In the proposed rule published at 76 FR 1121, in the January 7,
2011, issue of the Federal Register, FEMA published a table under the
authority of 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled ``Snohomish County,
Washington, and Incorporated Areas'' addressed several flooding
sources, including the Skykomish River. The proposed rule incorrectly
listed the effective BFE for the Skykomish River, for the location
approximately 216 feet downstream of Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railway. The effective BFE for that location was listed as 359 feet,
referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988. The correct
effective BFE is 355 feet, referenced to the North American Vertical
Datum of 1988. The proposed modified BFE was correctly listed as 351
feet, referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988. This
proposed rule correction is reopening the comment period for the
Skykomish River, for the location approximately 216 feet downstream of
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, due to the error in listing the
effective BFE in the previously published proposed rule at 76 FR 1121.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: February 11, 2011.
Sandra K. Knight,
Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, Mitigation,
Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-3865 Filed 2-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P