[Federal Register: August 16, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 157)]
[Notices]
[Page 49917-49918]
[DOCID:fr16au10-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR10-29-001]

Enbridge Pipelines (North Texas) L.P.; Notice of Baseline Filing

August 6, 2010.
    Take notice that on July 29, 2010, Enbridge Pipelines (North Texas)
L.P. submitted a revised baseline filing of its Statement of Operating
Conditions for services provided under section 311 of the Natural Gas
Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA).
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must
file a motion to intervene or to protest this filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and

interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, August 16, 2010.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-20131 Filed 8-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67693-67695]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27491]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68149; File No. SR-BOX-2012-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Fee Schedule for Trading on BOX

November 5, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on October 31, 2012, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) 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)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    BOX Options Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') proposes to amend its
Fee Schedule for trading on its options facility, BOX Market LLC
(``BOX''). While changes to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal
will be effective upon filing, the changes will become operative on
November 1, 2012. The text of the proposed rule change is available
from the principal office of the Exchange, on the Exchange's Internet
Web site at http://boxexchange.com, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange 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 implement a change to the BOX routing fees
in Section III of the fee schedule. BOX believes the proposed structure
will continue to provide an incentive to BOX Options Participants
(``Participants'') to submit their customer orders for execution on
BOX.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Note that BOX does not route broker-dealer proprietary
orders and thus does not assess them any routing fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Each U.S. options exchange is obligated to ensure that any order
executed on its market is at a price at least equal to the best price
available at the other options exchanges (``the NBBO''). To enable
this, the Intermarket Linkage Plan (``IML'') \6\ was implemented
several years ago giving each exchange access to the markets on the
other exchanges. During IML, individual customer orders were not
actually routed to an away exchange for execution; rather, a designated
market maker or specialist at each exchange would itself trade on the
away market for the required price and quantity. Subsequently, an equal
and offsetting order would be executed between the market maker/
specialist and the customer on the originating exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an
Intermarket Options Linkage. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023 (August 4, 2000) (order approving
the IML Plan submitted by the Amex, CBOE, and ISE).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This execution structure meant that the customer order execution
was billed at the prevailing transaction fee applicable to customer
orders on the originating exchange. The fees associated with the trade
on the away exchange were either absorbed by the market maker/
specialist as part of his obligations to the exchange or were absorbed
by the originating exchange.
    IML was subsequently replaced by the Options Order Protection and
Locked/Crossed Market national market system plan.\7\ As a result, each
exchange routes orders to an away exchange via a contractual agreement
with an order routing broker (``third party router'' or TPR). The
transaction fees on the away exchange are billed to the originating
exchange by the TPR, together with any handling fees the TPR may
charge. At present, many options exchanges other than BOX pass this
away execution fee,

together with a service/handling charge, to the broker acting as agent
for the order which was executed on the away exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60405 (July 30,
2009), 74 FR 39362 (August 6, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BOX, however, charges a flat fifty cents per contract for these
away executions and provides for an exemption from this fee for its
Participants provided that the monthly total of such away transactions
represents less than 45% of the Participant's total BOX non-
Professional, Public Customer \8\ account trading activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For the purposes of the discussion in this proposed rule
change, these non-Professional, Public Customer orders will be
referred to as Public Customer orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to adjust the
conditions of this routing fee exemption. BOX proposes to:
 Continue to charge all Professional customer accounts fifty
cents per contract executed on away exchanges by BOX on their behalf;
 Charge all Public Customer accounts fifty cents per contract
for orders executed on away exchanges by BOX on behalf of Public
Customer accounts where such orders were non-Directed Orders; and
 Continue to exempt Public Customer accounts from the routing
fee for orders received by BOX via Directed Order provided that:
    [cir] 33% or more of a Participant's Public Customer Directed
Orders received during the month are executed through the BOX Price
Improvement Period (``the PIP''), AND
    [cir] Less than 45% of a Participant's Directed Orders received are
routed to and executed on an away exchange during the month.
The reason BOX proposes to reduce the scope of the away trade fee
exemption is that is [sic] has proven too costly for BOX. However, BOX
wishes to continue to provide incentives to Participants to seek price
improvement for their Public Customer orders by entering them into the
PIP. A majority of BOX Participants submitting orders to the PIP are
sent to BOX via Directed Order, and therefore, BOX proposes to maintain
the away fee exemption for Directed Orders sent to BOX for price
improvement provided that at least 33% of the contracts submitted via
Directed Order are executed through the PIP.

    Instructing BOX to route orders away if they are not able to be
executed on BOX is voluntary for BOX Participants. Participants may
choose not to route their Public Customer orders to another exchange.
Participants may also avoid paying the proposed routing fee by choosing
to designate their orders as Fill and Kill (``FAK''). FAK orders are
not eligible for routing to away exchanges. FAK orders are executed on
BOX, if possible, and then cancelled.
    Additionally, BOX believes the 45% threshold is appropriate as BOX
has reviewed its routing costs over time and believes this is a
reasonable percentage of Public Customer Directed Orders that BOX may
route at no charge to the Participant, provided 33% of the
Participant's Public Customer Directed Orders are submitted to the PIP
during the month. Similarly, BOX's cost-benefit analysis led BOX to
conclude that 33% of Public Customer Directed Orders submitted to the
PIP was a reasonable level for liquidity providers accepting such
orders on BOX. BOX believes that imposing a routing fee structure that
provides a benefit to Participants for trading on BOX will allow BOX to
recoup a portion of the costs incurred for providing routing services,
while also providing an incentive to Participants to trade on BOX.
    While changes to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal will be
effective upon filing, the changes will become operative on November 1,
2012.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange
believes the changes proposed are an equitable allocation of reasonable
fees and charges among BOX Options Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed BOX routing fee structure is a
reasonable attempt for BOX to recoup the costs incurred in providing
routing services for customer orders. BOX incurs costs, including
transaction fees at away exchanges, every time it routes a customer
order to an away exchange for execution. The away execution fees vary,
but may cost up to $0.45 per contract.\11\ As stated, BOX incurs this
cost in addition to handling fees assessed by its TPR. As such, BOX
aims to recover its costs by assessing Participants fees for routing
Public Customer orders to away exchanges if they choose not to seek
liquidity on BOX by sending non-Directed Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See e.g., Take Fee of NYSE Arca Options, Options Pricing on
BATS BZX Exchange Fee Schedule, C2 Options Exchange Fee Schedule,
and NASDAQ Options Pricing as of October 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For some period of time, BOX has provided optional routing services
for certain Public Customer orders at no charge, and the Exchange
believes it is also reasonable to continue to provide an economic
incentive to BOX Participants to seek price improvement for their
Public Customer orders by sending them to BOX to access the PIP. The
Exchange believes that providing these Participants with a limited
exemption from routing fees for continuing to send their Public
Customer orders to BOX via Directed Orders to access the PIP, is a
fair, reasonable and equitable incentive program for these
Participants.
    Additionally, BOX believes the 45% threshold is appropriate as BOX
has reviewed its routing costs over time and believes this is a
reasonable percentage of Public Customer Directed Orders that BOX may
route at no charge to the Participant, provided 33% of the
Participant's Public Customer Directed Orders are submitted to the PIP
during the month. Similarly, BOX's cost-benefit analysis led BOX to
conclude that 33% of Public Customer Directed Orders submitted to the
PIP was a reasonable level for liquidity providers accepting such
orders on BOX. BOX believes that imposing a routing fee structure that
provides a benefit to Participants for trading on BOX will allow BOX to
recoup a portion of the costs incurred for providing routing services,
while also providing an incentive to Participants to trade on BOX.
    BOX believes the proposed change is not unfairly discriminatory for
the following reasons: First, any BOX Participant is welcome to enter
an agreement with any other BOX Participant providing liquidity in
order to send Directed Orders to seek price improvement for his
customers. However, certain order flow providers (``OFPs) acting as
agent for Public Customers lack the technological sophistication to
ensure an order is not routed away by BOX; BOX fears, as a consequence,
these firms will simply avoid sending their customer orders to BOX via
Directed Order to seek price improvement if the OFPs' risk of higher
trading fees due to away executions cannot be managed. As such, BOX
believes it is appropriate and not unfairly discriminatory to provide
an exemption from routing fees of the limited scope provided for these
Participants.
    Secondly, BOX Participants choosing to offer price improvement to
customers directly via internalization through the PIP (i.e., without
using Directed Orders)

can avoid any potential BOX away execution fee by simply not sending
any orders to BOX where BOX is not on the NBBO for the options series
in question. BOX believes that any firm with the technical
sophistication to interact with its own customer order flow via the PIP
will encounter no difficulties in avoiding sending an order to BOX
which risks being routed away by BOX.
    Furthermore, such Participants can ensure that this never happens
by choosing to instruct BOX not to route their customer orders. This
will ensure that where BOX cannot execute any portion of an order at a
price equal to NBBO, the BOX trading system will return the order to
the submitting Participant after the BOX quantity at NBBO has executed
with the order.
    BOX notes that the away fee exemption will be equally available to
order consolidator firms that are the most significant users of
Directed Orders, using them to route orders for price improvement to
their affiliated market maker.
    For all the reasons stated above, BOX believes that all firms
wishing to offer price improvement to their customers will be on equal
footing under the BOX proposal. Each is free to choose the mechanism he
finds suits his business model best and BOX believes no firm will
encounter unreasonable levels of away execution transaction fees.
    The Exchange believes the proposed routing fee structure is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the incentive to send
Public Customer orders to BOX via Directed Order is available to all
Participants on an equal basis. The Exchange believes it is reasonable
and equitable to provide Participants (A) an incentive to trade on BOX,
and (B) the ability to route a limited amount of customer orders at no
cost, because transactions executed on BOX increase BOX market activity
and market quality. Greater liquidity and additional volume executed on
BOX aids the price and volume discovery process. Participant trading on
BOX also results in revenue that BOX is able to use to provide routing
services for a limited amount of customer orders at no cost to
Participants. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
not unfairly discriminatory because it promotes enhancing BOX market
quality. As discussed above, BOX Participants can manage their own
routing to different options exchanges or can utilize a myriad of other
routing solutions that are available to market participants.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition 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 Exchange Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\13\ because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other
charge applicable only to a member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend 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 Exchange Act.

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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-BOX-2012-017 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2012-017. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email 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 Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-BOX-2012-017 and should be
submitted on or before December 4, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-27491 Filed 11-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 119 (Thursday, June 20, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28885-28886]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12934]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0057]

Federal Advisory Committee National Emergency Medical Services
Advisory Council (NEMSAC); Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice--National Emergency Medical Services Advisory
Council

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA announces a meeting of NEMSAC to be held at DOT
Headquarters in Washington, DC. This notice announces the date, time,
and location of the meeting, which will be open to the public, as well
as provide opportunities for public input to the NEMSAC. The purpose of
NEMSAC, a nationally recognized council of emergency medical services
representatives and consumers, is to advise and consult with DOT and
the Federal Interagency Committee on Emergency Medical Services
(FICEMS) on matters relating to emergency medical services (EMS).

DATES: The NEMSAC meeting will be held on July 9, 2019, from 9 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. EDT, on July 10, 2019, from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. EDT and on
July 11, 2019 form 9 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EDT. A public comment period
will take place on July 9, 2019, between 11 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. EDT and
July 10, 2019, between 10:45 a.m. and 11:15 a.m. EDT. Written comments
for the NEMSAC from the

public must be received no later than July 1, 2019.

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at the DOT Headquarters, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Attendees should plan to arrive
10-15 minutes early.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Chaney, DOT, Office of Emergency
Medical Services, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, NPD-400, Washington, DC
20590<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of the NEMSAC meeting is given under
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended (5
U.S.C. App. 2). The NEMSAC is authorized under Section 31108 of the
Moving Ahead with Progress in the 21st Century Act of 2012.

Tentative Agenda of the National EMS Advisory Council Meeting

    The tentative NEMSAC agenda includes the following:

Tuesday, July 9, 2019 (9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. EDT)

(1) Call to Order, Introductions, and Opening Remarks (9 a.m. to 9:30
a.m. EDT)
(2) Approval of October 2018 NEMSAC Meeting Minutes (9:30 a.m. to 9:45
a.m. EDT)
(3) Federal Liaison Update
(4) Prehospital Pediatric Emergency Care Coordinator Project (10 a.m.
to 10:30 a.m. EDT)
(5) Critical Crossroads Project (10:30 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. EDT)
(6) Break (10:45 a.m. to 11 a.m. EDT)
(7) Public Comment (11 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. EDT)
(8) FICEMS Strategic Plan Update/Revision (11:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
EDT)
(9) Lunch (12 p.m. to 1 p.m. EDT)
(10) CMS Emergency Triage, Treat and Transport (ET3) Model (1 p.m. to
1:30 p.m. EDT)
(11) Review and Discussion of Previously Approved NEMSAC
Recommendations (1:30 p.m. to 2 p.m. EDT)
(12) Review of Ongoing NHTSA Projects (2 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. EDT)
(13) Break (2:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. EDT)
(14) Ad Hoc Committee Reports (3 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. EDT)
(15) NEMSIS Update (3:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. EDT)
(16) Review of Action Items (4:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. EDT)

Wednesday, July 10, 2019 (9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. EDT)

(1) Reconvene and Introductions (9 a.m. to 9:15 a.m. EDT)
(2) Committee Reports (9:15 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. EDT)
(3) Public Comment (10:45 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. EDT)
(4) Continue Discussion of NEMSAC Focus Areas for 2019--2020 (11:15
a.m. to 11:30 a.m. EDT)
(5) Committee Break Out Sessions (12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. EDT)

Thursday, July 11, 2019 (9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EDT)

(1) Reconvene and Introductions (9 a.m. to 9:15 p.m. EDT)
(2) Committee Break Out Sessions (9:15 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. EDT)
(3) Lunch (12:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. EDT)
(4) Committee Reports (1:15 a.m. to 4 p.m.)

    Registration Information: This meeting will be open to the public;
however, pre-registration is requested no later than June 28, 2019. For
assistance with NEMSAC registration, please contact Eric Chaney at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>. There will not be a teleconference
option for this meeting.
    Public Comment: Members of the public are encouraged to comment
directly to the NEMSAC during designated public comment periods. In
order to allow as many people as possible to speak, speakers are
requested to limit their remarks to 5 minutes. Written comments from
members of the public will be distributed to NEMSAC at the meeting and
should reach the NHTSA Office of EMS no later than July 1, 2019.
Written comments may be submitted by either one of the following
methods: (1) You may submit comments by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or (2)
you may submit comments by fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    NHTSA is committed to providing equal access to this meeting for
all participants. If you need alternative formats or services because
of a disability, please contact the Eric Chaney at the email or phone
number listed in the ``Registration Information'' section with your
request by close of business on July 1, 2019.
    A final agenda as well as meeting materials will be available to
the public online through www.EMS.gov on or before July 1, 2019.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A)

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Jon Krohmer,
Acting Associate Administrator, Office of Research and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. 2019-12934 Filed 6-19-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 26, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12988-12991]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04339]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0094; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-160-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. This proposed
AD was prompted by reports that certain trimmable horizontal stabilizer
actuators (THSA) were found with corrosion that affected the ballscrew
lower splines between the tie-bar and screw-jack. This proposed AD
would require repetitive inspections of the THSA; ballscrew integrity
tests, if necessary; and replacement of affected THSAs. We are
proposing this AD to detect and correct corrosion in the ballscrew
lower splines, which, if the ballscrew ruptured, could lead to
transmission of THSA torque loads from the ballscrew to the tie-bar,
prompting THSA blowback, and possible loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 12, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For Airbus service information identified in this proposed AD,
contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax
+33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.airbus.com. For Goodrich service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Goodrich Corporation, Actuation Systems,
Stafford Road, Fordhouses, Wolverhampton WV10 7EH, England; telephone
+44 (0) 1902 624938; fax +44 (0) 1902 788100; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.goodrich.com/TechPubs.You may review copies of the referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2013-0094;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-160-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2012-0175, dated September 7, 2012 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    Some Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer Actuators (THSA), Part Number
(P/N) 47147-500 fitted on A330/A340 aeroplanes have been found with
corrosion, affecting the ballscrew lower splines between the tie bar
and the screw-jack. The affected ballscrew is made of steel and anti-
corrosion protection is ensured, except on both extremities (upper and
lower splines) where Molykote is applied.
    The results of the technical investigations have identified that
the corrosion was caused by a combination of:

--contact/friction between the tie bar and the inner surface of the
ballscrew, leading to the removal of Molykote (corrosion protection) at
the level of the tie bar splines,
--humidity ingress initiating surface oxidation starting from areas
where Molykote is removed, and
--water retention in THSA lower part leading to corrosion spread out
and to the creation of a brown deposit (iron oxide).

    The results of the technical investigations have also concluded
that A320 family THSA P/N 47145-XXX (where XXX stands for any numerical

value) ballscrews might be affected by this corrosion issue.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, may lead, in case of
ballscrew rupture, to loss of transmission of THSA torque loads from
the ballscrew to the tie-bar, prompting THSA blowback, possibly
resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires repetitive
detailed inspections of the ballscrew lower splines of THSAs having P/N
47145-XXX to detect corrosion and, depending on findings, the
accomplishment of applicable corrective actions.

The required action is repetitive detailed inspections of the gaps
between the ballscrew shaft and tie-rod splines of the affected THSAs
to determine the corrosion category. Depending on the corrosion
category, additional actions include a ballscrew shaft integrity test
and replacing the THSA with a new THSA if necessary. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-27-1214, including Appendix
01, dated February 23, 2012; and Goodrich has issued Service Bulletin
47145-27-16, dated November 7, 2011. The actions described in this
service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition
identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 755 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 4 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $256,700, or $340 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 15 work-hours and require parts costing $2,203, for a cost
of $3,478 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
products that may need these actions.

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.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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 AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2013-0094; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-
160-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 12, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -
122 airplanes; Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131,
-132, and -133 airplanes; Airbus Model A320-111, -211, -212, -214, -
231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Airbus Model A321-111, -112, -
131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes; certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that certain trimmable
horizontal stabilizer actuators (THSA) were found with corrosion
that affected the ballscrew lower splines between the tie-bar and
screw-jack. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct corrosion
in the ballscrew lower splines, which, if the ballscrew ruptured,
could lead to transmission of THSA torque loads from the ballscrew
to the tie-bar, prompting THSA blowback, and possible loss of
control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions
have already been done.

(g) Explanation of THSA First Flight

    For the purposes of this AD, the definition of THSA first flight
is the THSA ``entry into service date,'' as identified in Goodrich
Service Bulletin 47145-27-16, dated November 7, 2011. If the THSA
part number (P/N) is not identified in Goodrich Service Bulletin
47145-27-16, dated November 7, 2011, the THSA first flight is the
manufacturing date engraved on the THSA identification plate.

(h) Repetitive Inspections

    At the later of the times in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of
this AD: Do a detailed inspection of the gaps between the ballscrew
shaft and tie-rod splines on any THSA having P/N 47145-XXX (where
XXX stands for any numerical value) to determine if the corrosion
category is Type I, Type II, or Type III, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1214,
including Appendix 01, dated February 23, 2012; and the
Accomplishment Instructions and the flowchart following the
Accomplishment Instructions of Goodrich Service Bulletin 47145-27-
16, dated November 7, 2011. Repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 24 months.
    (1) Within 22 years accumulated by the THSA since the THSA's
first flight, but no earlier than 20 years accumulated by the THSA
since its first flight.
    (2) Within three months after the effective date of this AD.

(i) Ballscrew Integrity Test and Corrective Actions

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
it is determined that a THSA has Type II or Type III corrosion:
Before further flight, do a ballscrew integrity test, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin
A320-27-1214, including Appendix 01, dated February 23, 2012; and
the Accomplishment Instructions and the flowchart following the
Accomplishment Instructions of Goodrich Service Bulletin 47145-27-
16, dated November 7, 2011. If Type I corrosion is found, no action
is required by this paragraph.
    (1) For THSAs having Type II or Type III corrosion and for which
the results of the ballscrew integrity test are not correct, as
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1214, including
Appendix 01, dated February 23, 2012: Before further flight, replace
the affected THSA with a new THSA, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1214,
including Appendix 01, dated February 23, 2012.
    (2) For THSAs having Type III corrosion and on which the results
of the ballscrew integrity test are correct, as specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320 27-1214, including Appendix 01, dated February
23, 2012: Within 10 days after the most recent inspection, replace
the THSA with a new THSA, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1214, including
Appendix 01, dated February 23, 2012.
    (3) For THSAs having Type II corrosion and on which the results
of the ballscrew integrity test are correct, as specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320 27-1214, including Appendix 01, dated February
23, 2012: Within 24 months or 5,000 flight cycles after the most
recent inspection, whichever occurs first, replace the THSA with a
new THSA, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1214, including Appendix 01, dated
February 23, 2012.

(j) Replacement of a THSA Is Not Terminating Action

    Replacement of a THSA, as required by paragraph (i) of this AD,
does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(k) Reporting Requirement

    If any corrosion type is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, at the applicable time in paragraph (k)(1)
or (k)(2) of this AD, report the findings to Airbus, Customer
Services Engineering--SEEL5, Flight Control Systems A320 Family, 1
Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; fax +33 5
61 93 44 25. The report must include the information specified in
Appendix 01 of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1214, dated February
23, 2012.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Within 90 days after that inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.

(l) Parts Installation Limitations

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
THSA having P/N 47145-XXX (where XXX stands for any numerical
value), on any airplane, unless that THSA meets the criteria
specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) of this AD.
    (1) The THSA has not accumulated 20 years since the THSA's first
flight, or the THSA has been inspected as required by paragraph (h)
of this AD and it has been determined that the THSA had Type I
corrosion (no corrosion) at the time of installation; and
    (2) The THSA is thereafter inspected as required by paragraph
(h) of this AD, and any applicable actions specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD are accomplished.

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay
Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may
be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing, and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

(n) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with sections
21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197
and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the airplane
can be modified (if the operator elects to do so), provided that, if
any THSA corrosion is found during any action required by paragraph
(h) of this AD, that corrosion is classified as Type I or Type II,
as defined in Goodrich Service Bulletin 47145-27-16, dated November
7, 2011.

(o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2012-0175,
dated September 7, 2012, and the service information specified in
paragraphs (o)(1)(i) and (o)(1)(ii) of this AD, for related
information.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-27-1214, including Appendix 01,
dated February 23, 2012.
    (ii) Goodrich Service Bulletin 47145-27-16, dated November 7,
2011.
    (2) For Airbus service information identified in this AD,
contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com. For Goodrich service information
identified in this AD, contact Goodrich Corporation, Actuation
Systems, Stafford Road, Fordhouses, Wolverhampton WV10 7EH, England;
telephone +44 (0) 1902 624938; fax +44 (0) 1902 788100; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.goodrich.com/TechPubs. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW.,

Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 11, 2013.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-04339 Filed 2-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22088-22089]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07717]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2023-0002-N-7]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its
implementing regulations, this notice announces that FRA is forwarding
the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the information collection and its expected burden. On
January 20, 2023, FRA published a notice providing a 60-day period for
public comment on the ICR.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before
May 12, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed ICR
should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find the particular ICR by selecting
``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using
the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Arlette Mussington, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, at email: [email protected] or
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or Ms. Joanne Swafford, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, at email: [email protected] or
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to
issue two notices seeking public comment on information collection
activities before OMB may approve paperwork packages. See 44 U.S.C.
3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.8 through 1320.12. On January 20, 2023, FRA
published a 60-day notice in the Federal Register soliciting public
comment on the ICR for which it is now seeking OMB approval. See 88 FR
3772. FRA has received one comment from the public that was outside the
scope of this notice.
    Before OMB decides whether to approve this proposed collection of
information, it must provide 30-days' notice for public comment.
Federal law requires OMB to approve or disapprove paperwork packages
between 30 and 60 days after the 30-day notice is published. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also 60 FR 44978, 44983, Aug. 29,
1995. OMB believes the 30-day notice informs the regulated community to
file relevant comments and affords the agency adequate time to digest
public comments before it renders a decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug. 29,
1995. Therefore, respondents should submit their respective comments to
OMB within 30 days of publication to best ensure having their full
effect.
    Comments are invited on the following ICR regarding: (1) Whether
the information collection activities are necessary for FRA to properly
execute its functions, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FRA's estimates of the burden of
the information collection activities, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used to determine the estimates; (3) ways
for FRA to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
being collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of information
collection activities on the public, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
    The summary below describes the ICR that FRA will submit for OMB
clearance as the PRA requires:
    Title: Grade Crossing Signal System Safety Regulations.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0534.
    Abstract: FRA believes that highway-rail grade crossing (grade
crossing) accidents resulting from warning system failures can be
reduced when railroads take certain actions, as required by FRA's
regulations, in the event of an activation failure.\1\ These required
actions are set forth in 49 CFR part 234. An activation failure is
defined as when a grade crossing warning system fails to indicate the
approach of a train at least 20 seconds prior to the train's arrival at
the crossing or to indicate the presence of a train occupying the
crossing. Specifically, railroads must report to FRA every impact
between on-track railroad equipment and an automobile, bus, truck,
motorcycle, bicycle, farm vehicle, or pedestrian at a highway-rail
grade crossing involving a crossing warning system activation failure.
Notification must be provided to the National Response Center within 24
hours of occurrence at the stipulated toll-free telephone number.
Additionally, railroads must report to FRA within 15 days each
activation failure of a highway-rail grade warning system. Form FRA F
6180.83, ``Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Warning System Activation
Failure Report,'' must be used for this purpose and completed using the
instructions printed on the form. With this information, FRA can
identify the causes of activation failures and investigate them to
determine whether periodic maintenance, inspection, and testing
standards are effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 59 FR 50086.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Request: Extension without change (revised estimates) of a
currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses (railroads).
    Form(s): FRA F 6180.83.
    Respondent Universe: 784 railroads.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion/monthly.
    Total Estimated Annual Responses: 60,252 responses.

    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 5,042 hours.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent:
$363,737.
    FRA informs all interested parties that it may not conduct or
sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection
of information that does not display a currently valid OMB control
number.
    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

Brett A. Jortland,
Deputy Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2023-07717 Filed 4-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


From:  Randy Wiler<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 4:52 PM To:  Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: Mike Durkin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Paul Saffrin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:  Coke-Enclosure-1-Questionnaire Answer File_ALL-Part_04 01 16.xlsx

Dr. Donna Lee Jones,

Please find attached the Enclosure 1  -  Questionnaire Answer File as required.

Sincerely Erie Coke Corporation

R.G. Wiler Environmental Engineer

<< Coke-Enclosure-1-Questionnaire Answer File_ALL-Part_04 01 16.xlsx >>