[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53348-53351]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21851]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0908; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-251-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Model
BAe 146 Airplanes and Model Avro 146-RJ Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:
* * * * *
    * * * BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has amended the AMM
[aircraft maintenance manual] to remove the life limits on shock
absorber assemblies, but not the individual shock absorber
components, and amend the life limits on the different standards of
Main Landing Gear (MLG) Up-Locks and MLG Door Up-Locks in sub-
chapter 05-10-15. In addition BAE Systems has amended Chapter 05-10-
15 of the AMM to introduce and amend life limits on MLG components.
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of certain structural elements
which

could adversely affect the structural integrity of these airplanes. The
proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 11,
2011.

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 service information identified in this proposed AD, contact BAE
SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED, Customer Information Department,
Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United
Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292 675704; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. 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: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1175; 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-2011-0908;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-251-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

    On May 3, 2010, we issued AD 2010-10-22, Amendment 39-16301 (75 FR
28463, May 21, 2010). That AD required actions intended to address an
unsafe condition on the products listed above.
    Since we issued AD 2010-10-22, we have determined that new life
limits on certain main landing gear components are necessary. The
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2010-0166, dated August 6, 2010 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    The BAe 146/AVRO 146-RJ Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM)
includes chapters 05-10 ``Time Limits'', 05-15 ``Critical Design
Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL)--Fuel System Description
and Operation'' and 05-20 ``Scheduled Maintenance Checks'', some
sub-chapters of which have been identified as requirements for
continued airworthiness and [EASA] AD 2009-0215 [which corresponds
to FAA AD 2010-10-22] was issued to require operators to comply with
those instructions.
    Since the issuance of that AD [2009-0215] BAE Systems
(Operations) Limited has amended the AMM to remove the life limits
on shock absorber assemblies, but not the individual shock absorber
components, and amend the life limits on the different standards of
Main Landing Gear (MLG) Up-Locks and MLG Door Up-Locks in sub-
chapter 05-10-15. In addition BAE Systems has amended Chapter 05-10-
15 of the AMM to introduce and amend life limits on MLG components.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD amends the
requirements of AD 2009-0215, which is superseded, and requires the
implementation of the instructions, limitations, inspections and
corrective measures as specified in the defined parts of Chapter 05
of the AMM at Revision 100.

The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of certain structural elements
which could adversely affect the structural integrity of these
airplanes. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in
the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited has issued Subject 05-10-15,
``Aircraft Equipment Airworthiness Limitations,'' of Chapter 05, ``Time
Limits/Maintenance Checks,'' of BAe 146 Series/AVRO 146-RJ Series
Aircraft Maintenance Manual, Revision 104, dated April 15, 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.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 2 products of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2010-10-22 and retained in this
proposed AD take about 2 work-hours per product, at an average labor
rate of $85 per work hour. Required parts cost

about $0 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
currently required actions is $170 per product.
    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the new 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 $170, or $85 per
product.

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 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

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-16301 (75 FR
28463, May 21, 2010) and adding the following new AD:

BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED: Docket No. FAA-2011-0908;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-251-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by October 11, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2010-10-22, Amendment 39-16301.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED
Model BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes; and Model Avro 146-
RJ70A, 146-RJ85A, and 146-RJ100A airplanes; certificated in any
category.

    Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections)
and/or Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs).
Compliance with these actions and/or CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR
91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified,
altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by this AD, the operator
may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the
revisions. In this situation to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the
operator must request approval of an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) according to paragraph (l) of this AD. The request
should include a description of changes to the required actions that
will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
* * * * *
    * * * BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has amended the AMM
[aircraft maintenance manual] to remove the life limits on shock
absorber assemblies, but not the individual shock absorber
components, and amend the life limits on the different standards of
Main Landing Gear (MLG) Up-Locks and MLG Door Up-Locks in sub-
chapter 05-10-15. In addition BAE Systems has amended Chapter 05-10-
15 of the AMM to introduce and amend life limits on MLG components.
* * * * *

Compliance

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

Restatement of Certain Requirements of AD 2010-10-22

New Airworthiness Limitations Revisions

    (g) Within 90 days after June 25, 2010 (the effective date of AD
2010-10-22), revise the maintenance program, by incorporating
Chapter 5 of the BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited BAe146 Series/
Avro146-RJ Series AMM to incorporate new and more restrictive life
limits for certain items and new and more restrictive inspections to
detect fatigue cracking in certain structures, and to add fuel
system critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs) to
prevent ignition sources in the fuel tanks, in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent).

    Note 2: Guidance on revising Chapter 5 of the BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited BAe146 Series/Avro146-RJ Series AMM, Revision
97, dated July 15, 2009, can be found in the applicable sub-chapters
listed in Table 1 of this AD.

                                      Table 1--Applicable AMM Sub-Chapters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    AMM Sub-chapter                                              Subject
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
05-10-01...............................................  Airframe Airworthiness Limitations before Life
                                                          Extension Programme.
05-10-05 \1\...........................................  Airframe Airworthiness Limitations, Life Extension
                                                          Programme Landings Life Extended.
05-10-10 \2\...........................................  Airframe Airworthiness Limitations, Life Extension
                                                          Programme Calendar Life Extended.
05-10-15...............................................  Aircraft Equipment--Airworthiness Limitations.
05-10-17...............................................  Power Plant Airworthiness Limitations.
05-15-00...............................................  Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations
                                                          (CDCCL)--Fuel System Description and Operation.
05-20-00 \3\...........................................  Scheduled Maintenance.

05-20-01...............................................  Airframe Scheduled Maintenance--Before Life Extension
                                                          Programme.
05-20-05 \1\...........................................  Airframe Scheduled Maintenance--Life Extension
                                                          Programme Landings Life Extended.
05-20-10 \2\...........................................  Airframe Scheduled Maintenance--Life Extension
                                                          Programme Calendar Life Extended.
05-20-15...............................................  Aircraft Equipment Scheduled Maintenance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Applicable only to airplanes post-modification HCM20011A or HCM20012A or HCM20013A.
\2\ Applicable only to airplanes post-modification HCM20010A.
\3\ Paragraphs 5 and 6 only, on the Corrosion Prevention and Control Program (CPCP) and the Supplemental
  Structural Inspection Document (SSID).

    Note 3: Sub-chapter 05-15-00 of the BAE SYSTEMS (Operations)
Limited BAe146 Series/Avro146-RJ Series AMM, is the CDCCL.

    Note 4: Within Sub-chapter 05-20-00 of the BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited BAe146 Series/Avro 146-RJ Series AMM, the
relevant issues of the support documents are as follows: BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited BAe 146 Series/Avro 146-RJ Corrosion Prevention
and Control Program Document CPCP-146-01, Revision 3, dated July 15,
2008, including BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Temporary Revision
(TR) 2.1, dated December 2008; and BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited
BAe146 Series Supplemental Structural Inspection Document SSID-146-
01, Revision 1, dated June 15, 2009.

    Note 5: Within Sub-chapter 05-20-01 of the BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited BAe146 Series/Avro146-RJ Series AMM, the
relevant issue of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited BAe 146/Avro 146-
RJ Maintenance Review Board Report Document MRB 146-01, Issue 2, is
Revision 15, dated March 2009 (mis-identified in EASA AD 2009-0215,
dated October 7, 2009, as being dated May 2009).

    Note 6: Notwithstanding any other maintenance or operational
requirements, components that have been identified as airworthy or
installed on the affected airplanes before revision of Chapter 5 of
the AMM, as required by paragraph (g) of this AD; do not need to be
reworked in accordance with the CDCCLs. However, once the ALS or AMM
has been revised, future maintenance actions on these components
must be done in accordance with the CDCCLs.

    (h) Except as specified in paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD:
After the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD have been
accomplished, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals may
be approved for the structural elements specified in the documents
listed in paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (i) Modifying the main fittings of the main landing gear in
accordance with Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 146-32-171, dated
August 11, 2009, extends the safe limit of the main landing gear
main fitting from 32,000 landings to 50,000 landings on the main
fitting.

New Requirements of This AD

New Airworthiness Limitations Revisions

    (j) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the maintenance program, by incorporating Sub-chapter 05-10-15,
``Aircraft Equipment Airworthiness Limitations'' of Chapter 05,
``Time Limits/Maintenance Checks,'' of the BAE SYSTEMS (Operations)
Limited BAe 146 Series/Avro 146-RJ Series AMM, Revision 104, dated
April 15, 2011, to remove life limits on shock absorber assemblies,
but not the individual shock absorber components, amend life limits
on MLG up-locks and door up-locks, and to introduce and amend life
limits on MLG components. Incorporating the new life limits and
inspections into the maintenance program terminates the requirements
of paragraph (g) of this AD for Sub-chapter 05-10-15, ``Aircraft
Equipment Airworthiness Limitations'' of Chapter 05, ``Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks,'' of the BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited BAe
146 Series/Avro 146-RJ Series AMM, Revision 104, dated April 15,
2011, and after incorporation has been done, the limitations
required by paragraph (g) of this AD for Sub-chapter 05-10-15,
``Aircraft Equipment Airworthiness Limitations'' of Chapter 05,
``Time Limits/Maintenance Checks,'' of the BAE SYSTEMS (Operations)
Limited BAe 146 Series/Avro 146-RJ Series AMM, Revision 104, dated
April 15, 2011, may be removed from the maintenance program.

No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or Critical Design Configuration
Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

    (k) After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (j)
of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections), intervals,
and/or CDCCLs may be used, unless the actions, intervals, and/or
CDCCLs are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this
AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 7: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: Although EASA Airworthiness Directive 2010-0166, dated
August 6, 2010, specifies both revising the maintenance program to
include limitations, and doing certain repetitive actions (e.g.,
inspections) and/or maintaining CDCCLs, this AD only requires the
revision. Requiring a revision of the maintenance program, rather
than requiring individual repetitive actions and/or maintaining
CDCCLs, requires operators to record AD compliance only at the time
the revision is made. Repetitive actions and/or maintaining CDCCLs
specified in the airworthiness limitations must be complied within
accordance with 14 CFR 91.403(c).

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (l) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, 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: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 227-1175; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be e-mailed 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.

Related Information

    (m) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2010-0166, dated
August 6, 2010; and Sub-chapter 05-10-15, ``Aircraft Equipment
Airworthiness Limitations,'' of Chapter 05, ``Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks,'' of the BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited BAe
146 Series/Avro 146-RJ Series AMM, Revision 104, dated April 15,
2011; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 19, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-21851 Filed 8-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 36083-36084]
[DOCID:fr02jy07-102]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55959; File No. SR-ISE-2007-50]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Fee Changes

June 26, 2007.
    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 June 19, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') 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 ISE. The ISE has designated this proposal as one
establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to
a member under 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

    The ISE is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to establish
fees for transactions in options on four Premium Products.\5\ The text
of the proposed rule change is available at the ISE, at the
Commission's Public Reference Room, and on the ISE's Web site (http://www.iseoptions.com/legal/proposed_rule_changes.asp
).

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

    \5\ ``Premium Products'' is defined in the Schedule of Fees as
the products enumerated therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 ISE included stat ements
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 ISE 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 is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to
establish fees for transactions in options on the following four
Premium Products: First Trust ISE--Revere Natural Gas Index Fund
(``FCG''), First Trust ISE Water Index Fund (``FIW''), the SPDR S&P
Metals & Mining ETF (``XME''),\6\ and the KBW Mortgage Finance Index
(``MFX''). The Exchange represents that FCG, FIW, and XME are eligible
for options trading because they constitute ``Fund Shares,'' as defined
by ISE Rule 502(h). The Exchange further represents that MFX meets the
standards of ISE Rule 2002(b), which allows the ISE to begin trading
this product by filing Form 19b-4(e) at least five business days after
commencement of trading this new product pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e)
under the Act.\7\ The ISE represents that it submitted Form 19b-4(e) to
the Commission on June 19, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``Standard & Poor's[supreg],'' ``S&P[supreg],'' ``S&P
500[supreg],'' ``Standard & Poor's 500[supreg],'' ``Standard &
Poor's Depositary Receipts[supreg],'' ``SPDR[supreg],'' and ``the
S&P[supreg] Metals & Mining Select Industry Index,'' are trademarks
of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (``McGraw-Hill''), and have been
licensed for use by State Street Bank and Trust in connection with
the listing and trading of XME. XME is not sponsored, sold or
endorsed by Standard & Poor's, (``S&P''), a division of McGraw-Hill,
and S&P makes no representation regarding the advisability of
investing in XME. McGraw-Hill and S&P have not licensed or
authorized ISE to: (i) engage in the creation, listing, provision of
a market for trading, marketing, and promotion of options on XME; or
(ii) use and refer to any of their trademarks or service marks in
connection with the listing, provision of a market for trading,
marketing, and promotion of options on XME or with making
disclosures concerning options on XME under any applicable federal
or state laws, rules or regulations. McGraw-Hill and S&P do not
sponsor, endorse, or promote such activity by ISE and are not
affiliated in any manner with ISE.
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All of the applicable fees covered by this filing are identical to
fees charged by the Exchange for all other Premium Products.
Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to adopt an execution fee and a
comparison fee for all transactions in options on FCG, FIW, XME and
MFX.\8\ The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee for products
covered by this filing shall be $0.15 and $0.03 per contract,
respectively, for all Public Customer Orders \9\ and Firm Proprietary
orders. The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee for all ISE
Market Maker transactions shall be equal to the execution fee and
comparison fee currently charged by the Exchange for ISE Market Maker
transactions in equity options.\10\ Finally, the amount of the
execution fee and comparison fee for all non-ISE Market Maker
transactions shall be $0.37 and $0.03 per contract, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ These fees will be charged only to Exchange members. Under a
pilot program that is set to expire on July 31, 2007, these fees
will also be charged to Principal Orders and Principal Acting as
Agent Orders. See ISE Rule 1900(10). See also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 54204 (July 25, 2006), 71 FR 43548 (August 1, 2006)
(SR-ISE-2006-38) (``Linkage Orders Pilot''). Telephone conversation
between Samir Patel, Assistant General Counsel, ISE, and Sara
Gillis, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on June
26, 2007.
    \9\ ``Public Customer Order'' is defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(39)
as an order for the account of a Public Customer. ``Public
Customer'' is defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(38) as a person that is not
a broker or dealer in securities.
    \10\ The execution fee is currently between $0.21 and $0.12 per
contract side, depending on the Exchange Average Daily Volume, and
the comparison fee is currently $0.03 per contract side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange has entered into a license agreement
with Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc. in connection with the listing and
trading of options on MFX. As with certain other licensed options, to
defray the licensing costs, the Exchange is adopting a surcharge fee of
$0.10 per contract for trading in options on MFX. The Exchange believes
charging the participants that trade this instrument is the most
equitable means of recovering the costs of the license. However,
because of competitive pressures in the industry, the Exchange proposes
to exclude Public Customer Orders from this surcharge fee. Accordingly,
this surcharge fee will only be charged to Exchange members with
respect to non-Public Customer Orders (e.g., ISE Market Maker, non-ISE
Market Maker & Firm Proprietary orders) and shall apply

to Principal Orders and Principal Acting as Agent Orders.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See ISE Rule 1900(10). See also Linkage Orders Pilot, supra
note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, since options on XME and MFX are multiply-listed, the
Payment for Order Flow fee shall apply to these two products. The
Exchange believes the proposed rule change will further the Exchange's
goal of introducing new products to the marketplace that are
competitively priced.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\12\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\13\ in particular, in that
it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change establishes or changes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange, it has become effective
pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
\15\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 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 No. SR-ISE-2007-50 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-50. 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, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. 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-ISE-2007-50 and should be
submitted on or before July 23, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-12741 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 72 (Friday, April 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 20187]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07768]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3556-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Louisiana; Emergency and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of an
emergency for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-3556-EM), dated February 18,
2021, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued February 18, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated February 18, 2021, the President issued an emergency declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the Stafford Act), as
follows:

    I have determined that the emergency conditions in the State of
Louisiana resulting from a severe winter storm beginning on February
11, 2021, and continuing, are of sufficient severity and magnitude
to warrant an emergency declaration under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.
(``the Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such an emergency
exists in the State of Louisiana.
    You are authorized to provide appropriate assistance for
required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the
Stafford Act, to save lives and to protect property and public
health and safety, and to lessen or avert the threat of a
catastrophe in the designated areas. Specifically, you are
authorized to provide assistance for emergency protective measures
(Category B) for mass care and sheltering and direct Federal
assistance under the Public Assistance program.
    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. In order to provide Federal assistance, you are
hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these
purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal emergency
assistance and administrative expenses.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department
of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, John E.
Long, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this declared emergency.
    The following areas of the State of Louisiana have been designated
as adversely affected by this declared emergency:

    Emergency protective measures (Category B) for mass care and
sheltering and direct federal assistance under the Public Assistance
program for all 64 parishes in the State of Louisiana.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-07768 Filed 4-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14584-14587]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5969]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2006-0952; FRL-9246-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Montana; Attainment Plan for Libby, MT PM2.5 Nonattainment Area and
PM10 State Implementation Plan Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Montana on March 26, 2008. Montana submitted
this SIP revision to meet Clean Air Act requirements for attaining the
1997 annual fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS) for the Libby nonattainment area. The plan
revision, herein called an ``attainment plan,'' includes an attainment
demonstration, an analysis of Reasonably Available Control Technology
and Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACT/RACM), base-year and
projection year emission inventories, and contingency measures. The
requirement for a Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) plan is satisfied
because Montana projected that attainment with the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS will occur in the Libby nonattainment area by
April 2010. In addition, EPA is also approving revisions to the Lincoln
County Air Pollution Control Program submitted by Montana on June 26,
2006, for inclusion into Libby's attainment plan for purposes of the
1987 PM10 NAAQS.

This submittal contains provisions, including contingency measures, for
controlling both PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from
woodstoves, road dust, and outdoor burning. Finally, EPA is finding on-
road directly emitted PM2.5 and oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) in the Libby, Montana nonattainment area insignificant
for regional transportation conformity purposes. As a result of this
finding the Libby, Montana nonattainment area will not have to perform
a regional emissions analysis for either direct PM2.5 or
NOX as part of future conformity determinations for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

DATES: Effective date: This final rule is effective April 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R08-OAR-2006-0952. All documents in the docket are listed in
the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will
be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop St., Denver, Colorado
80202-1129. EPA requests that, if at all possible, you contact the
individual listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to view the hard
copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday
through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Freeman, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Definitions

    For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
    (i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
    (ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
    (iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
    (iv) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers.
    (v) The initials PM10 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometers.
    (vi) The word State or Montana refers to the State of Montana
unless the context indicates otherwise.
    (vii) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air
Quality Standards.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Public Comment
III. EPA Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA established the first
PM2.5 NAAQS, including annual standards of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations, and 24-hour (or daily) standards of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ based
on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
EPA designated the Libby area ``nonattainment'' for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS under section 107(d)(1) of the CAA on April 5,
2005 (70 FR 944, 986; see also 74 FR 58688, 58744-45). The specific
geographic boundaries of this nonattainment area appear in 40 CFR
81.327.
    On April 25, 2007, EPA issued the Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (72 FR 20586).
The implementation rule describes the CAA framework and requirements
for developing PM2.5 attainment plans. Among other things,
an attainment plan must include a demonstration that a nonattainment
area will meet the applicable NAAQS within the timeframe provided in
the statute. It must also include supporting technical analyses and
descriptions of all relevant adopted federal, state, and local
regulations and control measures that have been implemented by the
proposed attainment date. For the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, an
attainment plan must show that a nonattainment area will attain the
standard as expeditiously as practicable but within five years of
designation (April 2010), or within up to ten years of designation
(April 2015) if the EPA Administrator extends an area's attainment date
by 1-5 years based upon the severity of the nonattainment problem or
the feasibility of implementing control measures.
    For each nonattainment area, the state must demonstrate that it has
adopted all Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and
Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) needed to show that the
area will attain the PM2.5 standards as expeditiously as
practicable. Any measures that are necessary to meet these requirements
which are not already either federally promulgated or part of the
state's SIP must be submitted in enforceable form as part of a state's
attainment plan. The implementation rule provides recommendations
(including specific measures for certain source categories) that states
should consider in developing RACT/RACM. The implementation rule also
addresses other required elements of a state's attainment plan,
including emission inventories, the PM2.5 precursors that
must be addressed in the plan, contingency measures, and motor vehicle
emissions budgets used for transportation conformity purposes.
    On March 25, 2008, the Montana Board of Environmental Review (MBER)
submitted revisions to meet the new attainment plan requirements for
the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. On March 23, 2006, the
MBER had previously submitted revisions to the existing PM10
SIP plan for Lincoln County (the county containing Libby). EPA elected
to act on both of these revisions simultaneously. On September 14, 2010
we proposed approval of both the PM2.5 attainment plan and
the PM10 SIP revisions (75 FR 55713).
    The Libby attainment plan provided a demonstration that the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS would be met by April 2010 through the
implementation of the revisions to the Lincoln County Air Pollution
Control Program (Program) summarized below. Among other things, the
Libby attainment plan includes an emissions inventory (EI), a woodstove
air pollution control calculation, and a technical analysis showing
that the emissions of PM2.5 will be reduced sufficiently to
meet the NAAQS.
    The 2006 revisions to the PM10 SIP are also relevant to
PM2.5 for the Libby nonattainment area. Several provisions
are included to regulate solid fuel burning devices (such as
woodstoves) and to require owners and operators of these devices to
obtain operating permits. Additionally, the revisions allow for air
pollution alerts if either PM10 or PM2.5
concentrations averaged over a 4-hour period exceed a level 20 percent
below any federal or state particulate matter standard. Provisions are
also included for penalties for non-compliance and for contingency
measures that are triggered by an exceedance of the PM2.5
NAAQS. Additionally, revisions were made for open and outdoor burning,
including more stringent limits on the time periods for open burning
activities.

    The bases for EPA's approval of both the attainment plan for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the Libby area and for the
revisions to the existing PM10 SIP plan for Lincoln County,
including EPA's analysis and findings, are explained in much more
detail in the proposed rulemaking (75 FR 55713). Additional technical
support documents are available at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-
R08-OAR-2006-0952.

II. Public Comment

    We received no public comments on the proposed approvals.

III. EPA Final Action

    EPA is approving two separate Montana SIP submittals. First, EPA is
approving the attainment plan for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for
the Libby area submitted by Montana on March 26, 2008. Second, EPA is
approving the PM10 SIP revisions to the Lincoln County Air
Pollution Control Program for Lincoln County submitted by Montana on
June 26, 2006. EPA has determined that the PM2.5 attainment
plan and PM10 SIP revisions meet applicable requirements of
the Clean Air Act, including (for the PM2.5 attainment plan)
the Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule issued by EPA on April
25, 2007 (72 FR 20586) and (for the PM10 SIP revisions)
other statutory requirements including section 110(l). In particular,
EPA has determined that Montana's PM2.5 attainment plan for
the Libby area includes the following acceptable elements: An
attainment demonstration, an analysis of RACT/RACM and adoption of
selected control measures, base-year and projection-year emission
inventories, and contingency measures. Finally, EPA is finding on-road
directly emitted PM2.5 and NOX in the Libby,
Montana nonattainment area insignificant for regional transportation
conformity purposes.
    In accordance with section 172(c) of the CAA and the implementation
rule, the attainment plan submitted by Montana for the Libby area
included: (1) Emission inventories for the plan's base year (in this
case, 2005) and projection year (2010); and (2) an attainment
demonstration consisting of: (a) Technical analyses that locate,
identify, and quantify sources of emissions contributing to violations
of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (b) a determination of which
PM2.5 precursors should be controlled in this area for
purposes of expeditious attainment; (c) analyses of future-year
emission reductions and air quality improvements expected to result
from national and local programs, and from new measures to meet
requirements for RACT/RACM; (d) adopted emission reduction measures;
and (e) contingency measures.
    With respect to the pollutants to control in the plan, the State
evaluated, based on its emission inventories and by source category,
sources of direct PM2.5, SO2 and NOX
for RACT/RACM control measures. The State's evaluation of sources of
SO2 and NOX resulted in their conclusion that no
additional controls for those precursors are necessary to attain the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS expeditiously based on the absence of
stationary sources or area sources that can be cost effectively or
reasonably controlled for these precursors in this area. The
overwhelmingly predominant contributor to the PM2.5
nonattainment problem in the Libby area was area sources of direct
PM2.5, and in particular emissions from wood burning devices
and open burning. The State therefore adopted control measures it
determined to be RACM for direct PM2.5 from these area
source categories. EPA has reviewed Montana's RACT/RACM analysis and
has determined that the state reasonably identified potential control
measures and reasonably selected and adopted appropriate measures for
RACT/RACM for the Libby area. In addition, the state used a
proportional model to demonstrate attainment in 2010 resulting from
these measures, and adopted contingency measures triggered by any
future exceedance of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Finally, transportation conformity is required under CAA section
176(c) to ensure that transportation plans, transportation improvement
programs (TIPs) and federally supported highway and transit projects
are consistent with (``conform to'') the state air quality
implementation plan. Transportation conformity applies to areas that
are designated nonattainment, and to those areas redesignated to
attainment after 1990 with a CAA section 175A maintenance plan
(``maintenance areas'') for transportation-related criteria pollutants:
Carbon monoxide (CO), NOX and particulate matter
(PM2.5 and PM10).
    EPA's transportation conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93)
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether
transportation activities conform to the SIP. One requirement of the
rule is that transportation plans, TIPs, and projects must satisfy a
regional emissions analysis for the relevant pollutants and precursors
(40 CFR 93.118, 119). However, section 93.109(m) states that an area is
not required to satisfy a regional emissions analysis for a pollutant
or precursor if EPA finds that the SIP demonstrates that motor vehicle
emissions of that pollutant or precursor are an insignificant
contributor to the area's air quality problem.
    In this action, EPA finds that regional emissions from motor
vehicles of PM2.5 and NOX in the Libby
PM2.5 nonattainment area are an insignificant contributor to
the Libby area's PM2.5 air quality problem. In making this
insignificance finding, EPA evaluated the provisions of 40 CFR
93.109(m) against the relevant information contained in the SIP
attainment plan, the SIP revision's associated technical support
document (TSD), and additional information as developed by EPA. We
evaluated the following factors in determining whether on-road direct
PM2.5 and NOX emissions are insignificant
contributors to the area's PM2.5 air quality problem; (1)
the percentage of motor vehicle emissions in the context of the total
SIP inventory; (2) the current state of air quality as determined by
monitoring data for that NAAQS; (3) the absence of SIP motor vehicle
control measures; and (4) historical trends and future projections of
the growth of motor vehicle emissions. Detailed information regarding
our evaluations of these factors and our conclusions are provided in
our September 14, 2010 proposed rulemaking and will not be repeated
here. EPA did not receive any public comments on the proposed
insignificance finding. Please refer to our September 14, 2010 proposed
rulemaking (75 FR 55713) and additional technical support documents
which are available at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2006-0952.
    Based on our evaluations and conclusions, as presented in our
proposed rulemaking action (see 75 FR 55713, September 14, 2010), EPA
is finding that regional motor vehicle emissions of PM2.5
and NOX are insignificant contributors to Libby's
PM2.5 nonattainment problem. With our finding,
PM2.5 and NOX motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEB) are not required to be established and a regional emissions
analysis is not required for either PM2.5 or NOX
in any future conformity determination in Libby. Please note, however,
that PM2.5 hot-spot analyses will be required for individual
projects, if such an analysis is required in the future for
transportation conformity purposes.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and

therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    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 May 16, 2011. 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

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: December 20, 2010.
James B. Martin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart BB--Montana

0
2. Section 52.1370 is amended by adding and reserving paragraphs
(c)(69) and (c)(70), and by adding paragraph (c)(71) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.1370  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (71) The Governor of Montana submitted revisions, reordering and
renumbering to the Libby County Air Pollution Control Program in a
letter dated June 26, 2006. The revised Lincoln County regulations
focus on woodstove emissions, road dust, and outdoor burning emissions.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Before the Board of Environmental Review of the State of
Montana order issued on March 23, 2006, by the Montana Board of
Environmental Review approving amendments to the Libby Air Pollution
Control Program.
    (B) Libby City Council Resolution No. 1660 signed February 27, 2006
and Lincoln County Board of Commissioners Resolution No. 725 signed
February 27, 2006, adopting revisions, reordering and renumbering to
the Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program, Health and
Environment Regulations, Chapter 1--Control on Air Pollution,
Subchapter 1--General Provisions; Subchapter 2--Solid Fuel Burning
Device Regulations; Subchapter 3--Dust Control Regulations; Subchapter
4--Outdoor Burning Regulations; as revised on February 27, 2006.
    (ii) Additional Material.
    (A) Stipulation signed October 7, 1991, between the Montana
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences (MDHES), the County of
Lincoln and the City of Libby, which delineates responsibilities and
authorities between the MDHES, Lincoln County and Libby.

[FR Doc. 2011-5969 Filed 3-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P