[Federal Register: December 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 239)]
[Notices]
[Page 74059-74061]
[DOCID:fr14de05-104]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52886; File No. S7-24-89]

Joint Industry Plan; Solicitation of Comments and Order Granting
Summary Effectiveness To Request To Extend the Operation of the
Reporting Plan for Nasdaq-Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an
Unlisted Trading Privilege Basis, Submitted by The Pacific Exchange,
Inc., The National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., The
American Stock Exchange LLC, The Boston Stock Exchange, Inc., The
Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., The National Stock Exchange, Inc., and
The Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. and To Extend Certain Exemptive
Relief

December 5, 2005.

I. Introduction and Description

    On December 2, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (``PCX'') on behalf
of itself and the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD''), the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex''), the Boston
Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE''), the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``CHX''), the National Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX''), and the
Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'') (hereinafter referred to
collectively as ``Participants''),\1\ as members of the operating
committee (``Operating Committee'' or ``Committee'') of the Plan
submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
request to extend the operation of the Plan and also to extend certain
exemptive relief as described below.\2\ The Nasdaq UTP Plan governs the
collection, processing, and dissemination on a consolidated basis of
quotation and last sale information for each of its Participants. This
consolidated information informs investors of the current quotation and
recent trade prices of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (``Nasdaq'')
securities. It enables investors to ascertain from one data source the
current prices in all the markets trading Nasdaq securities. The Plan
serves as the required transaction reporting plan for its Participants,
which is a prerequisite for their trading

Nasdaq securities. Currently, the Plan is scheduled to expire on
December 21, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ PCX is the chair of the operating committee (``Operating
Committee'' or ``Committee'') for the Joint Self-Regulatory
Organization Plan Governing the Collection, Consolidation and
Dissemination of Quotation and Transaction Information for Nasdaq-
Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading
Privilege Basis (``Nasdaq UTP Plan'' or ``Plan'') by the
Participants.
    \2\ See letter from Bridget M. Farrell, Chairman, OTC/UTP
Operating Committee, to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission,
dated December 2, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This order grants summary effectiveness, pursuant to Rule 608(b)(4)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\3\ to the request
to extend operation of the Plan, as modified by all changes previously
approved, and to the request to extend certain exemptive relief (``Date
Extension''). Pursuant to Rule 608(b)(4) under the Act,\4\ the Date
Extension will be effective upon publication in the Federal Register on
temporary basis not to exceed 120 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(4).
    \4\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Exemptive Relief

    While both Nasdaq and the NASD operate under the umbrella of a
single Plan Participant, the submission of two distinct best bids and
offers (``BBOs'') could be deemed inconsistent with Section VI.C.1 of
the Plan.\5\ Pursuant to the 13th Amendment of the Plan and Rule
608(a)(3),\6\ Nasdaq cannot be granted Plan Participant status until it
is registered as a national securities exchange. While Nasdaq submits a
distinct BBO from the NASD and until Nasdaq is registered as a national
securities exchange, the NASD will submit quotes to the Plan's
Securities Information Processor (``SIP'') in a manner different than
specified in Section VI.C.1. of the Plan and, thus, in conflict with
Commission Rule 608(c).\7\ As discussed at length in the notice of the
13th Amendment,\8\ the Commission had determined to relieve the
potential conflict among the SuperMontage approval order,\9\ Rule
608,\10\ and the Plan, by granting the NASD an exemption under Rule
608(e) \11\ from compliance with Section VI.C.1. of the Plan as
required by Rule 608(c) \12\ until such time as Nasdaq is registered as
a national securities exchange.\13\ The Plan Participants have
requested an extension of the exemptive relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Section VI.C.1. of the Plan, as approved by the Operating
Committee in the 13th Amendment, states that ``[t]he Processor shall
disseminate on the UTP Quote Data Feed the best bid and offer
information supplied by each Participant, including the NASD....''
    \6\ 17 CFR 242.608(a)(3).
    \7\ 17 CFR 242.608(c). Commission Rule 608(c) requires a self-
regulatory organization participant of national market system plan
to comply with the terms of that plan.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46139 (June 28,
2001), 67 FR 44888 (July 5, 2002) (``13th Amendment Notice'').
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43863 (January 19,
2001), 66 FR 8020 (January 26, 2001).
    \10\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \11\ 17 CFR 242.608(e).
    \12\ 17 CFR 242.608(c).
    \13\ On March 15, 2001, the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc.
(``Nasdaq'') submitted to the Commission a Form 1 application
pursuant to Section 6 of the Act, seeking registration as a national
securities exchange. The most recent Form 1 and accompanying
amendments were published for comment. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 52559 (October 4, 2005), 70 FR 59097 (October 11, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    The Commission finds that extending the operation of the Plan is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder, and, in particular, Section 12(f) \14\ and
Section 11A(a)(1) \15\ of the Act and Rules 601 and 608 thereunder.\16\
Section 11A of the Act directs the Commission to facilitate the
development of a national market system for securities, ``having due
regard for the public interest, the protection of investors, and the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets,'' and cites as an objective of
that system the ``fair competition * * * between exchange markets and
markets other than exchange markets.'' \17\ When the Commission first
approved the Plan on a pilot basis, it found that the Plan ``should
enhance market efficiency and fair competition, avoid investor
confusion, and facilitate surveillance of concurrent exchange and OTC
trading.'' \18\ The Plan has been in existence since 1990 and
Participants have been trading Nasdaq securities under the Plan since
1993. The Commission finds that extending the operation of the Plan
through summary effectiveness furthers the goals described above by
preventing the lapse of the sole effective transaction reporting plan
for Nasdaq securities traded by exchanges pursuant to unlisted trading
privileges. The Commission believes that the Plan is currently a
critical component of the national market system and that the Plan's
expiration would have a serious, detrimental impact on the further
development of the national market system. The Commission also finds
that it is appropriate to grant summary effectiveness to the request to
extend the exemption under Rule 608(e) \19\ from compliance with
Section VI.C.1. of the Plan as required by Rule 608(c).\20\ The
Commission believes that the Plan is a critical component of the
national market system and that the requested exemptive relief is
necessary to assure the effective operation of the Plan. The Commission
believes that the requested exemptive relief extension is consistent
with the Act, the Rules thereunder, and, specifically, with the
objectives set forth in Sections 12(f) and 11A of the Act \21\ and
Rules 601 and 608 thereunder.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(f). The Commission finds that extending the
Plan is consistent with fair and orderly markets, the protection of
investors and the public interest, and otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. The Commission has taken into account the
public trading activity in securities traded pursuant to the Plan,
the character of the trading, the impact of the trading of such
securities on existing markets, and the desirability of removing
impediments to, and the progress that has been made toward the
development of a national market system.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
    \16\ 17 CFR 242.601 and 17 CFR 242.608.
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a).
    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28146 (June 26,
1990), 55 FR 27917 (July 6, 1990).
    \19\ 17 CFR 242.608(e).
    \20\ 17 CFR 242.608(c).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 781(f) and 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \22\ 17 CFR 242.601 and 17 CFR 242.608.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    The Commission seeks general comments on the extension of the
operation of the Plan and the extension of exemptive relief. Interested
persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments
concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposal is consistent
with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following
methods:

Electronic Comments

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

File Number S7-24-89 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number S7-24-89. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference

Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and
copying at the Office of the Secretary of the Committee, currently
located at the Pacific Exchange, Inc. and Archipelago Exchange L.L.C.,
100 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2000, Chicago, IL 60606. 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 S7-24-89 and should be
submitted on or before January 4, 2006.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Sections 12(f) and 11A of the
Act \23\ and paragraph (b)(4) of Rule 608 thereunder,\24\ that the
operation of the Plan, as modified by all changes previously approved,
be, and hereby is, extended, and that certain exemptive relief also be
extended, both for a period not to exceed 120 days from the date of
publication of this Date Extension in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f) and 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \24\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(4).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-7329 Filed 12-13-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 138 (Thursday, July 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 42998]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17201]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2013-0067]

Hazardous Materials: Improving the Safety of Railroad
Transportation of Hazardous Materials

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials, Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Announcement of public meeting and establishment of public
docket.

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

SUMMARY: FRA and PHMSA invite interested persons to participate in a
public meeting addressing the transportation of hazardous materials by
rail. FRA and PHMSA are undertaking a comprehensive review of
operational factors that affect the safety of the transportation of
hazardous materials by rail and are seeking input from stakeholders and
interested parties.

DATES: The public meeting is scheduled for August 27-28, 2013, from
8:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in the Oklahoma Room in the
DOT Conference Center, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590.
    In order to ensure that all interested parties are provided ample
opportunity to speak at the meeting, any person wishing to present an
oral statement should notify Mr. Kurt Eichenlaub, Railroad Safety
Specialist, Hazardous Materials Division, Office of Safety Assurance
and Compliance, FRA, at least 4 business days prior to the date of the
public meeting. Mr. Eichenlaub can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request special assistance or services for
persons with disabilities, please contact Mr. Eichenlaub as soon as
possible.
    FRA will make a teleconference line available for any interested
party who wishes to attend the meeting by phone. Anyone interested in
attending by phone should contact Mr. Eichenlaub prior to the meeting
to obtain a conference call telephone number.
    Interested parties are also invited to participate in these
proceedings by submitting written views, data, or comments. All
communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kurt Eichenlaub, Railroad Safety
Specialist, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mailstop 25, Washington,
DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Mr. Karl Alexy,
Staff Director, Hazardous Materials Division, FRA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Mailstop 25, Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Secretary of Transportation (Secretary)
has authority over all areas of railroad safety (49 U.S.C. 20101 et
seq.) and has delegated this authority to FRA. 49 CFR 1.89(a) through
(q). The Federal hazardous materials transportation laws, 49 U.S.C.
5101 et seq., and the Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations.
    (HMR; Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 171-180)
govern the safe, efficient, and secure transportation of hazardous
materials in commerce. PHMSA administers the HMR, and FRA consults
directly with PHMSA on regulatory matters that affect the
transportation of hazardous materials by rail. FRA is delegated
responsibility to carry out the functions vested in the Secretary of
Transportation with regard to the transportation or shipment of
hazardous materials by railroad. 49 CFR 1.89(j).
    In an effort to continually improve the agencies' hazardous
materials safety program, FRA and PHMSA are currently conducting a
comprehensive review of operational factors that affect the safety of
the transportation of hazardous materials by rail. The agencies invite
all stakeholders and interested parties to participate in this
comprehensive review. We will consider all relevant comments, data, and
other input presented at this public meeting. As noted above, FRA has
established a public docket (Docket No. FRA-2013-0067) to provide
interested parties with a central location to both send and review
relevant information concerning the transportation of hazardous
materials by rail. An agenda outlining the scope of the meeting will be
posted in the public docket at least 30 days prior to the meeting. FRA
and PHMSA encourage meeting participants to focus their discussion at
the meeting on the topics identified in the agenda.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
See http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy notice
of regulations.gov or interested parties may review DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477).

Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013-17201 Filed 7-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: September 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 179)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 52828-52833]
[DOCID:fr17se07-15]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0782; FRL-8469-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Missouri;
Clean Air Interstate Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Missouri State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on May 18, 2007. This revision
addresses the requirements of EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR),
promulgated on May 12, 2005, and subsequently revised on April 28,
2006, and December 13, 2006. EPA is proposing to determine that the SIP
revision fully meets the CAIR requirements for Missouri. If EPA
approves the revisions, we will also withdraw the CAIR Federal
Implementation Plans (CAIR FIPs) concerning SO2, NOX
annual, NOX ozone season emissions for Missouri. The CAIR
FIPs for all States in the CAIR region were promulgated on April 28,
2006, and subsequently revised on December 13, 2006.
    CAIR requires States to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide
(SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) that
significantly contribute to, and interfere with maintenance of, the
national ambient air quality standards for fine particulates and/or
ozone in any downwind state. CAIR establishes State budgets for
SO2 and NOX and requires States to submit SIP
revisions that implement these budgets in States that EPA concluded did
contribute to nonattainment in downwind states. States have the
flexibility to choose which control measures to adopt to achieve the
budgets, including participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs. In the SIP revision that EPA is proposing to approve,
Missouri would meet CAIR requirements by participating in the EPA-
administered cap-and-trade programs addressing SO2, NOX
annual, and NOX ozone season emissions.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 17, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-

OAR-2007-0782, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Michael Jay, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning
and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Michael Jay, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street,
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2007-0782. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI

or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an

``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters and any form of encryption and should be
free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection

Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street,
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The interested persons wanting to
examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at
least 24 hours in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning this
proposal, please contact Michael Jay at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing to Take?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?
V. Analysis of Missouri's CAIR SIP Submittal
    A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations
    B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
    C. Applicability Provisions for Non-EGU NOX SIP Call
Sources
    D. NOX Allowance Allocations
    E. Allocation of NOX Allowances From Compliance
Supplement Pool
    F. Individual Opt-In Units
VI. Proposed Actions
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing to Take?

    EPA is proposing to approve a revision to Missouri's SIP submitted
on May 18, 2007. In its SIP revision, Missouri would meet CAIR
requirements by requiring certain electric generating units (EGUs) to
participate in the EPA-administered State CAIR cap-and-trade programs
addressing SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions. EPA is proposing to determine that the SIP as
revised will meet the applicable requirements of CAIR. Any final action
approving the SIP will be taken by the Regional Administrator for
Region 7. If the EPA approves this revision, the Administrator of EPA
will also issue a final rule to withdraw the FIPs concerning
SO2, NOX annual, NOX ozone season
emissions for Missouri. This action would delete and reserve 40 CFR
52.1341 and 40 CFR 52.1342, relating to the FIP obligations for
Missouri. The withdrawal of the CAIR FIPs for Missouri is a conforming
amendment that must be made once the SIP is approved because EPA's
authority to issue the FIPs was premised on a deficiency in the SIP for
Missouri. Once the SIP is fully approved, EPA no longer has authority
for the FIPs. Thus, EPA will not have the option of maintaining the
FIPs following the full SIP approval. Accordingly, EPA does not intend
to offer an opportunity for a public hearing or an additional
opportunity for written public comment on the withdrawal of the FIPs.

II. What Is the Regulatory History of the CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) was published by EPA on May
12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA determined that 28 States and
the District of Columbia contribute significantly to nonattainment and
interfere with maintenance of the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for fine particles (PM2.5) and/or 8-hour
ozone in downwind States in the eastern part of the country. As a
result, EPA required those upwind States to revise their SIPs to
include control measures that reduce emissions of SO2, which
is a precursor to PM2.5 formation, and/or NOX,
which is a precursor to both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For
jurisdictions that contribute significantly to downwind PM2.5
nonattainment, CAIR sets annual State-wide emission reduction
requirements (i.e., budgets) for SO2 and annual State-wide
emission reduction requirements for NOX. Similarly, for
jurisdictions that contribute significantly to 8-hour ozone
nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide emission reduction requirements for
NOX for the ozone season (May 1 to September 30). Under
CAIR, States may implement these reduction requirements by
participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs or by
adopting any other control measures.
    CAIR explains to subject States what must be included in SIPs to
address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA) with regard to interstate transport with respect to the 8-
hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made national findings,
effective on May 25, 2005, that the States had failed to submit SIPs
meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). The SIPs were due
in July 2000, 3 years after the promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS. These findings started a 2-year clock for EPA
to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). Under CAA section

110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP anytime after such findings are made and
must do so within two years unless a SIP revision correcting the
deficiency is approved by EPA before the FIP is promulgated.
    Missouri submitted its SIP in response to EPA's section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) finding, which EPA approved in a rule published May 8,
2007 (72 FR 25975). In that rule, EPA stated that Missouri had met its
obligation with regard to interstate transport by adoption of the CAIR
model rule. EPA also stated that it would review and act on Missouri's
CAIR rule in a separate rulemaking. This document proposes action on
Missouri's CAIR rule as explained below.
    On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated FIPs for all States covered by
CAIR in order to ensure the emissions reductions required by CAIR are
achieved on schedule. Each CAIR State is subject to the FIPs until the
State fully adopts, and EPA approves, a SIP revision meeting the
requirements of CAIR. The CAIR FIPs require EGUs to participate in the
EPA-administered CAIR SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season trading programs, as appropriate. The CAIR
FIP SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season trading programs impose essentially the same requirements as,
and are integrated with, the respective CAIR SIP trading programs. The
integration of the FIP and SIP trading programs means that these
trading programs will work together to create effectively a single
trading program for each regulated pollutant (SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season) in all States
covered by the CAIR FIP or SIP trading program for that pollutant. The
CAIR FIPs also allow States to submit abbreviated SIP revisions that,
if approved by EPA, will automatically replace or supplement certain
CAIR FIP provisions (e.g., the methodology for allocating
NOX allowances to sources in the State), while the CAIR FIP
remains in place for all other provisions.
    On April 28, 2006, EPA published two additional CAIR-related final
rules that added the States of Delaware and New Jersey to the list of
States subject to CAIR for PM2.5 and announced EPA's final
decisions on reconsideration of five issues, without making any
substantive changes to the CAIR requirements.

III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    CAIR establishes State-wide emission budgets for SO2 and
NOX and is to be implemented in two phases. The first phase
of NOX reductions starts in 2009 and continues through 2014,
while the first phase of SO2 reductions starts in 2010 and
continues through 2014. The second phase of reductions for both
NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and continues
thereafter. CAIR requires States to implement the budgets by either:
(1) Requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs; or (2) adopting other control measures of the State's
choosing and demonstrating that such control measures will result in
compliance with the applicable State SO2 and NOX
budgets.
    The May 12, 2005, and April 28, 2006, CAIR rules provide model
rules that States must adopt (with certain limited changes, if desired)
if they want to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs.
    With two exceptions, only States that choose to meet the
requirements of CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are
allowed to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. One
exception is for States that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model
rules to allow non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered
trading programs. The other exception is for States that include all
non-EGUs from their NOX SIP Call trading programs in their
CAIR NOX ozone season trading programs.

IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?

    States have the flexibility to choose the type of control measures
they will use to meet the requirements of CAIR. EPA anticipates that
most States will choose to meet the CAIR requirements by selecting an
option that requires EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR
cap-and-trade programs. For such States, EPA has provided two
approaches for submitting and obtaining approval for CAIR SIP
revisions. States may submit full SIP revisions that adopt the model
CAIR cap-and-trade rules. If approved, these SIP revisions will fully
replace the CAIR FIPs. Alternatively, States may submit abbreviated SIP
revisions. These SIP revisions will not replace the CAIR FIPs; however,
the CAIR FIPs provide that, when approved, the provisions in these
abbreviated SIP revisions will be used instead of or in conjunction
with, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions of the CAIR FIPs
(e.g., the NOX allowance allocation methodology).
    A State submitting a full SIP revision may either adopt regulations
that are substantively identical to the model rules or incorporate by
reference the model rules. CAIR provides that States may only make
limited changes to the model rules if the States want to participate in
the EPA-administered trading programs. A full SIP revision may change
the model rules only by altering their applicability and allowance
allocation provisions to: (1) Include NOX SIP Call trading
sources that are not EGUs under CAIR in the CAIR NOX ozone
season trading program; (2) provide for State allocation of
NOX annual or ozone season allowances using a methodology
chosen by the State; (3) provide for State allocation of NOX
annual allowances from the compliance supplement pool (CSP) using the
State's choice of allowed, alternative methodologies; or (4) allow
units that are not otherwise CAIR units to opt individually into the
CAIR SO2, NOX annual, or NOX ozone
season trading programs under the opt-in provisions in the model rules.
    An approved CAIR full SIP revision addressing EGUs' SO2,
NOX annual, or NOX ozone season emissions will
replace the CAIR FIP for that State for the respective EGU emissions.

V. Analysis of Missouri's CAIR SIP Submittal

A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations

    The CAIR NOX annual and ozone season budgets were
developed from historical heat input data for EGUs. Using these data,
EPA calculated annual and ozone season regional heat input values,
which were multiplied by 0.15 lb/mmBtu, for Phase I, and 0.125 lb/
mmBtu, for Phase II, to obtain regional NOX budgets for
2009-2014 and for 2015 and thereafter, respectively. EPA derived the
State NOX annual and ozone season budgets from the regional
budgets using State heat input data adjusted by fuel factors.
    The CAIR State SO2 budgets were derived by discounting
the tonnage of emissions authorized by annual allowance allocations
under the Acid Rain Program under title IV of the CAA. Under CAIR, each
allowance allocated in the Acid Rain Program for the years in Phase I
of CAIR (2010 through 2014) authorizes 0.5 ton of SO2
emissions in the CAIR trading program, and each Acid Rain Program
allowance allocated for the years in Phase II of CAIR (2015 and
thereafter) authorizes 0.35 ton of SO2 emissions in the CAIR
trading program.
    In this action, EPA is proposing approval of Missouri's SIP
revision that adopts the budgets established for the State in CAIR,
i.e., 59,871 (2009-2014) and 49,892 (2015-thereafter) tons for
NOX annual emissions, 26,678 (2009-2014) and 22,231 (2015-
thereafter) tons

for NOX ozone season emissions, and 137,214 (2010-2014) and
96,050 (2015-thereafter) annual tons for SO2 emissions.
Missouri's SIP revision sets these budgets as the total amounts of
allowances available for allocation for each year under the EPA-
administered cap-and-trade programs.

B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs

    The CAIR NOX annual and ozone-season model trading rules
both largely mirror the structure of the NOX SIP Call model
trading rule in 40 CFR part 96, subparts A through I. While the
provisions of the NOX annual and ozone-season model rules
are similar, there are some differences. For example, the
NOX annual model rule (but not the NOX ozone
season model rule) provides for a CSP, which is discussed below and
under which allowances may be awarded for early reductions of
NOX annual emissions. As a further example, the
NOX ozone season model rule reflects the fact that the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program replaces the NOX
SIP Call trading program after the 2008 ozone season and is coordinated
with the NOX SIP Call program. The NOX ozone
season model rule provides incentives for early emissions reductions by
allowing banked, pre-2009 NOX SIP Call allowances to be used
for compliance in the CAIR NOX ozone-season trading program.
In addition, States have the option of continuing to meet their
NOX SIP Call requirement by participating in the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program and including all their
NOX SIP Call trading sources in that program.
    The provisions of the CAIR SO2 model rule are also
similar to the provisions of the NOX annual and ozone season
model rules. However, the SO2 model rule is coordinated with
the ongoing Acid Rain SO2 cap-and-trade program under CAA
title IV. The SO2 model rule uses the title IV allowances
for compliance, with each allowance allocated for 2010-2014 authorizing
only 0.50 ton of emissions and each allowance allocated for 2015 and
thereafter authorizing only 0.35 ton of emissions. Banked title IV
allowances allocated for years before 2010 can be used at any time in
the CAIR SO2 cap-and-trade program, with each such allowance
authorizing 1 ton of emissions. Title IV allowances are to be freely
transferable among sources covered by the Acid Rain Program and sources
covered by the CAIR SO2 cap-and-trade program.
    EPA also used the CAIR model trading rules as the basis for the
trading programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR FIP trading rules are
virtually identical to the CAIR model trading rules, with changes made
to account for Federal rather than State implementation. The CAIR model
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
trading rules and the respective CAIR FIP trading rules are designed to
work together as integrated SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season trading programs.
    In the SIP revision, Missouri chooses to implement its CAIR budgets
by requiring EGUs to participate in EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions. Missouri has adopted a full SIP revision that
adopts with certain allowed changes discussed below, the CAIR model
cap-and-trade rules for SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season emissions.

C. Applicability Provisions for non-EGU NOX SIP Call Sources

    In general, the CAIR model trading rules apply to any stationary,
fossil fuel-fired boiler or stationary, fossil fuel-fired combustion
turbine serving at any time, since the later of November 15, 1990, or
the start-up of the unit's combustion chamber, a generator with
nameplate capacity of more than 25 megawatts electric (MWe) producing
electricity for sale.
    States have the option of bringing in, for the CAIR NOX
ozone season program only, those units in the State's NOX
SIP Call trading program that are not EGUs as defined under CAIR. EPA
advises States exercising this option to add the applicability
provisions in the State's NOX SIP Call trading rule for non-
EGUs to the applicability provisions in the State's CAIR NOX
ozone season trading rule, in order to include in the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program all units required to be in
the State's NOX SIP Call trading program that are not
already included in accordance with 40 CFR 96.304. Under this option,
the CAIR NOX ozone season program must cover all large
industrial boilers and combustion turbines, as well as any small EGUs
(i.e., units serving a generator with a nameplate capacity of 25 MWe or
less) that the State currently requires to be in the NOX SIP
Call trading program.
    Missouri has chosen to expand the applicability provisions of the
CAIR NOX ozone season trading program to include all current
and future non-EGUs in the State's NOX SIP Call trading
program. The NOX SIP Call region of the State includes the
eastern one-third of the State of Missouri (70 FR 46860).

D. NOX Allowance Allocations

    Under the NOX allowance allocation methodology in the
CAIR model trading rules and in the CAIR FIP, NOX annual and
ozone season allowances are allocated to units that have operated for
five years, based on heat input data from a three-year period that are
adjusted for fuel type by using fuel factors of 1.0 for coal, 0.6 for
oil, and 0.4 for other fuels. The CAIR model trading rules and the CAIR
FIP also provide a new unit set-aside from which units without five
years of operation are allocated allowances based on the units' prior
year emissions.
    States may establish in their SIP submissions a different
NOX allowance allocation methodology that will be used to
allocate allowances to sources in the States if certain requirements
are met concerning the timing of submission of units' allocations to
the Administrator for recordation and the total amount of allowances
allocated for each control period. In adopting alternative
NOX allowance allocation methodologies, States have
flexibility with regard to: (1) The cost to recipients of the
allowances, which may be distributed for free or auctioned; (2) the
frequency of allocations; (3) the basis for allocating allowances,
which may be distributed, for example, based on historical heat input
or electric and thermal output; and (4) the use of allowance set-asides
and, if used, their size.
    Missouri has chosen to replace the provisions of the CAIR
NOX annual model trading rule concerning the allocation of
NOX annual allowances with its own methodology. Missouri has
chosen to distribute NOX annual allowances to individual
facilities based upon the total of their individual unit's pro-rata
share of State's total heat input for all affected units in the State.
The State has provided a table in rule 10 CSR 10-6.362 that provides
for permanent allocations to units in Phases I and II. Additionally,
the State's rule creates an energy efficiency renewable resource set-
aside of 300 allowances for each year of the program. The purpose for
establishing this set-aside is to serve as an incentive for saving or
generating electricity through the implementation of energy efficiency
and renewable generation projects. If the number of allowances awarded
each year are fewer than allowances allocated to the set-aside, the
State will transfer surplus allowances to the accounts of the electric
utilities on a pro-rata basis in the same proportion as allocations to
the units listed in the rule. Missouri's rule provides that, by May 31
of the year for which allowances are requested from the set-aside, the
State will complete the process of determining what projects are
eligible and how many allowances

should be provided, and of awarding the allowances to the projects. EPA
interprets the rule to provide that, by the May 31 deadline, the State
will transfer to the appropriate allowance tracking system accounts the
allocations awarded to the eligible projects, as well as the surplus
allowances provided to electric utilities.
    As with the annual program described above, Missouri has chosen to
replace the provisions of the CAIR NOX ozone season model
trading rule concerning allowance allocations with its own methodology.
Missouri has chosen to distribute NOX annual allowances to
individual facilities based upon the total of their individual unit's
pro-rata share of the State's total heat input for all affected units
in the State. The State has provided a table in rule 10 CSR 10-6.364
that provides for permanent allocations to NOX ozone season
units in Phases I and II. As mentioned above, Missouri has chosen to
expand the applicability provisions of the CAIR NOX ozone
season trading program to include all current and future non-EGUs in
the State's NOX SIP Call trading program. By doing so, the
three non-EGUs listed in Table II of Missouri's NOX SIP Call
rule, 10 CSR 10-6.360, are provided CAIR NOX ozone season
allowances totaling 59 allowances in Table II of 10 CSR 10-6.364 that
are in addition to the State's initial allocation for both Phase I and
Phase II of the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program. The
number of allowances provided to the non-EGUs in the CAIR
NOX ozone trading program are equivalent to the amount they
received under Missouri's NOX SIP Call rule.

E. Allocation of NOX Allowances From Compliance Supplement Pool

    The CAIR establishes a compliance supplement pool (CSP) to provide
an incentive for early reductions in NOX annual emissions.
The CSP consists of 200,000 CAIR NOX annual allowances of
vintage 2009 for the entire CAIR region, and a State's share of the CSP
is based upon the projected magnitude of the emission reductions
required by CAIR in that State. States may distribute CSP allowances,
one allowance for each ton of early reduction, to sources that make
NOX reductions during 2007 or 2008 beyond what is required
by any applicable State or Federal emission limitation. States also may
distribute CSP allowances based upon a demonstration of need for an
extension of the 2009 deadline for implementing emission controls.
    The CAIR annual NOX model trading rule establishes
specific methodologies for allocations of CSP allowances. States may
choose an allowed, alternative CSP allocation methodology to be used to
allocate CSP allowances to sources in the States.
    Missouri has chosen to distribute CSP allowances using an
allocation methodology that retains much of the CSP model rule language
of 40 CFR 96.143. The State's methodology differs in two main ways.
First, the State has added additional criteria for units subject to the
Acid Rain Program that do not have an applicable NOX
emission limit to be able to apply for allocations from the CSP by
limiting their emissions below what limit would have applied had the
unit been limited by Acid Rain Program or State NOX emission
rate limits. Secondly, the State has chosen to modify the distribution
methodology in the event the CSP is over-prescribed. If more requests
for allocations have been made than CSP allowances exist, the State
will divide the CSP into two pools. The smaller of the two pools is for
units that combust tires, and the larger pool is for the remaining
units.

F. Individual Opt-in Units

    The opt-in provisions of the CAIR SIP model trading rules allow
certain non-EGUs (i.e., boilers, combustion turbines, and other
stationary fossil-fuel-fired devices) that do not meet the
applicability criteria for a CAIR trading program to participate
voluntarily in (i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading program. A non-EGU may
opt into one or more of the CAIR trading programs. In order to qualify
to opt into a CAIR trading program, a unit must vent all emissions
through a stack and be able to meet monitoring, recordkeeping, and
recording requirements of 40 CFR part 75. The owners and operators
seeking to opt a unit into a CAIR trading program must apply for a CAIR
opt-in permit. If the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in permit, the unit
becomes a CAIR unit, is allocated allowances, and must meet the same
allowance-holding and emissions monitoring and reporting requirements
as other units subject to the CAIR trading program. The opt-in
provisions provide for two methodologies for allocating allowances for
opt-in units, one methodology that applies to opt-in units in general
and a second methodology that allocates allowances only to opt-in units
that the owners and operators intend to repower before January 1, 2015.
    States have several options concerning the opt-in provisions.
States may adopt the CAIR opt-in provisions entirely or may adopt them
but exclude one of the methodologies for allocating allowances. States
may also decline to adopt the opt-in provisions at all. Missouri has
chosen to allow non-EGUs meeting certain requirements to opt into the
CAIR trading programs by adopting by reference the entirety of EPA's
model rule provisions for opt-in units in the CAIR NOX
annual, CAIR NOX ozone season, and CAIR SO2
trading programs.

VI. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to approve Missouri's full CAIR SIP revision
submitted on May 18, 2007. Under this SIP revision, Missouri is
choosing to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs
for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season emissions. EPA believes that the SIP revision meets the
applicable requirements in 40 CFR 51.123(o) and (aa), with regard to
NOX annual and NOX ozone season emissions, and 40
CFR 51.124(o), with regard to SO2 emissions. EPA is
proposing to determine that the SIP as revised will meet the
requirements of CAIR. If EPA approves this SIP revision, the
Administrator of EPA will also issue, without providing an opportunity
for a public hearing or an additional opportunity for written public
comment, a final rule to withdraw the CAIR FIPs concerning
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions for Missouri. This action would delete and reserve 40 CFR
52.1341 and 40 CFR 52.1342.

VII. 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 proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal requirements
and would impose no additional requirements beyond those imposed by
State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed
rule would 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 action proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under State law and would 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 proposal also does not have tribal implications because it
would 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 proposed action also
does not have Federalism implications because it would 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 proposes to approve a State rule implementing a Federal
standard and will result, as a consequence of that approval, in the
Administrator's withdrawal of the CAIR FIP. It does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the CAA. This proposed 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 would approve 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 CAA. 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 CAA. 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 proposed rule would not impose
an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Electric
utilities, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: September 10, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. E7-18263 Filed 9-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 26, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59062-59065]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23013]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0881; Project Identifier AD-2020-01062-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2020-12-06, which applies to all Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation
(Gulfstream) Model G-IV airplanes. AD 2020-12-06 requires replacing the
nose wheel steering servo valve manifold, incorporating revised
operating procedures into the airplane flight manual (AFM), doing a
records inspection for any incidents of un-commanded nose wheel
steering turns, and reporting the results to the FAA. Since the FAA
issued AD 2020-12-06, the FAA determined that a typographical error was
made in a citing one of the AFM documents. This proposed AD would
retain the actions of AD 2020-12-06 and would correct the citation to
the AFM. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by December
10, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Gulfstream
Aerospace Corporation, P.O. Box 2206, Savannah, GA 31402; phone: (800)
810-4853; email: [email protected]; website: https://www.gulfstream.com/en/customer-support/. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,

Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816)
329-4148.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0881; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel Belete, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Atlanta ACO Branch, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
(404) 474-5606; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0881; Project Identifier
AD-2020-01062-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Samuel Belete, Aviation Safety Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section,
FAA, Atlanta ACO Branch, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.
Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2020-12-06, Amendment 39-21141 (85 FR 36143, June
15, 2020) (AD 2020-12-06), for all Gulfstream Model G-IV airplanes. AD
2020-12-06 was prompted by reports of un-commanded nose wheel steering
turns. AD 2020-12-06 requires replacing the nose wheel steering servo
valve manifold, incorporating revised operating procedures into the
AFM, doing a records inspection for any incidents of un-commanded nose
wheel steering turns, and reporting the results to the FAA. The agency
issued AD 2020-12-06 to prevent moisture from entering the nose
steering wheel servo valve, which could freeze and cause an un-
commanded nose wheel steering position during touchdown.

Actions Since AD 2020-12-06 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-12-06, a typographical error was found
in the title of the AFM required by paragraph (g)(3) of AD 2020-12-06.
The paragraph incorrectly references the document number as ``FAC-AC-
G400-OPS-0001'' instead of ``GAC-AC-G400-OPS-0001.''

FAA's Determination

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    This proposed AD would require Gulfstream IV Customer Bulletin
Number 244, dated March 12, 2018; Gulfstream G300 Customer Bulletin
244, dated March 12, 2018; Gulfstream G400 Customer Bulletin 244, dated
March 12, 2018; Gulfstream IV Airplane Flight Manual, Gulfstream
Aerospace Document Number GAC-AC-GIV-OPS-0001, Revision 52, dated
October 30, 2017; Gulfstream G300 Airplane Flight Manual, Gulfstream
Aerospace Document Number GAC-AC-G300-OPS-0001, Revision 20, dated
October 30, 2017; and Gulfstream G400 Airplane Flight Manual,
Gulfstream Aerospace Document Number GAC-AC-G400-OPS-0001, Revision 20,
dated October 30, 2017; which the Director of the Federal Register
approved for incorporation by reference as of July 20, 2020 (85 FR
36143, June 15, 2020).
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would retain most of the requirements of AD 2020-
12-06. This proposed AD would require revising the AFM (with the
correct title of the AFM document for G400 airplanes) and replacing the
nose wheel steering servo valve manifold. This proposed AD would also
require doing a records inspection for any incidents of un-commanded
nose wheel steering turns and reporting all recorded occurrences of un-
commanded nose wheel steering turns to the FAA.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    The Gulfstream customer bulletins require reporting compliance with
the bulletins to Gulfstream. This proposed AD does not contain that
requirement; however, this proposed AD would require reporting any
known occurrences of un-commanded nose wheel steering turns to the FAA.
    The Gulfstream customer bulletins include a compliance time of 48
months beginning on March 12, 2018. The compliance time for this
proposed AD is 36 months after July 20, 2020 (the effective date of AD
2020-12-06).

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 425 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorporate AFM revision..............  1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0             $85         $36,125
                                         hour = $85.
Replace nose wheel steering servo       7 work-hours x $85 per            63,624          64,219      27,293,075
 valve.                                  hour = $595.
Review records........................  1 work-hour x $85 per                  0              85          36,125
                                         hour = $85.
Report results........................  1 work hour x $85 per                  0              85          36,125
                                         hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost
impact on affected operators.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    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 currently 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 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate
or any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 2020-12-06, Amendment 39-21141 (85
FR 36143, June 15, 2020); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2021-0881; Project
Identifier AD-2020-01062-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by December 10, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2020-12-06, Amendment 39-21141 (85 FR 36143,
June 15, 2020) (AD 2020-12-06).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation Model G-
IV airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 3200, Landing Gear
System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of un-commanded nose wheel
steering turns. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent moisture from
entering the nose steering wheel servo valve, which could freeze and
cause an un-commanded nose wheel steering position during touchdown.
The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in a lateral
runway departure.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Airplane Flight Manual Revisions for Certain Airplanes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) and
(2) of AD 2020-12-06. Within 30 days after July 20, 2020 (the
effective date of AD2020-12-06), revise your airplane flight manual
(AFM) by incorporating the revision applicable to your airplane
configuration as listed in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this AD:
    (1) Gulfstream IV Airplane Flight Manual, Gulfstream Aerospace
Document Number GAC-AC-GIV-OPS-0001, Revision 52, dated October 30,
2017; or
    (2) Gulfstream G300 Airplane Flight Manual, Gulfstream Aerospace
Document Number GAC-AC-G300-OPS-0001, Revision 20, dated October 30,
2017.

(h) Correction to AFM Revision for Certain Airplanes

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise your
AFM by incorporating Gulfstream G400 Airplane Flight Manual,
Gulfstream Aerospace Document Number GAC-AC-G400-OPS-0001, Revision
20, dated October 30, 2017, if applicable to your airplane
configuration.

(i) Retained Replacement of Nose Wheel Steering Servo Valve Manifold
With No Changes

    The paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2020-12-06 with no changes. Within 36 months after July 20, 2020
(the effective date of AD2020-12-06), replace the nose wheel
steering servo valve manifold with nose wheel steering servo valve
manifold part number 5100-11 or 5105-5 in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the customer bulletin that applies to
your airplane configuration as listed in paragraphs (i)(1) through
(3) of this AD, except you are not required to comply with step H:
    (1) Gulfstream IV Customer Bulletin Number 244, dated March 12,
2018;
    (2) Gulfstream G300 Customer Bulletin 244, dated March 12, 2018;
or
    (3) Gulfstream G400 Customer Bulletin 244, dated March 12, 2018.

(j) Retained Records Inspection and Report of Results with No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2020-12-06 with no changes.
    (1) Between 12 months and 24 months after the replacement of the
nose wheel steering valve manifold assembly required in paragraph
(i) of this AD, inspect all aircraft records for entries of an un-
commanded nose wheel steering turn.
    (2) Within 10 days after the records inspection required in
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, report the results of the inspection,
regardless of whether the inspection found any entries, to the FAA
by either email: [email protected]; or by mail: Attn:
Continued Operational Safety, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701 Columbia
Avenue, College Park, GA 30337. The report must include as much of
the information listed in paragraphs (j)(2)(i) through (vii) of this
AD as is known about the event:
    (i) Date of records inspection;
    (ii) Date and time of all un-commanded occurrences (if any);
    (iii) Airplane serial number;
    (iv) Weather and runway conditions at the time of each
occurrence;
    (v) Copy of the pilot's report of the occurrence (if available);
    (vi) Maintenance entry of the root cause of the un-commanded
deflection (if available); and
    (vii) Any other information pertinent to the occurrence.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Samuel Belete,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA,
Atlanta ACO Branch, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, Gulfstream
Aerospace Corporation, P.O. Box 2206, Savannah, GA 31402; phone:
(800) 810-4853; email: [email protected]; website: https://www.gulfstream.com/en/customer-support/. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on October 13, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-23013 Filed 10-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 135)]
[Notices]
[Page 40413-40415]
[DOCID:fr14jy08-136]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58108; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-64]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to Section 31
Accumulated Funds

July 7, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 12, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
the Exchange. On June 26, 2008, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice and
order to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons and to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to adopt Supplementary Material .30 to NYSE
Rule 440H (``Activity Assessment Fee'') to allow member firms to
voluntarily submit, during a six-month period after the effective date
of this rule proposal, funds previously accumulated by member firms to
satisfy their, and subsequently NYSE's, obligation to remit SEC Section
31-related fees, to the Exchange. In addition, a member or member
organization may designate all or part of any accumulated excess held
by the Exchange and allocated to such member or member organization to
be used by the Exchange in accordance with the terms of proposed
Supplementary Material .30. Finally, to the extent the payment of these
historically accumulated funds or Exchange-accumulated excess is in
excess of the fees due the Commission from NYSE under Section 31 of the
Act,\3\ such surplus shall be used by the Exchange to offset Exchange
regulatory costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78ee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule changes is available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.nyse.com), at the Exchange's principal
office, 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. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III 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
    Pursuant to Section 31 of the Act and Rule 31 thereunder,\4\
national securities exchanges and associations (collectively, ``self-
regulatory organizations'' or ``SROs'') are required to pay a
transaction fee to the SEC that is designed to recover the costs
related to the government's supervision and regulation of the
securities markets and securities professionals. To offset this
obligation, the Exchange assesses its members and member organizations
an Activity Assessment Fee in accordance with NYSE Rule 440H. NYSE Rule
440H requires members and member organizations effecting ``covered
sales'' (as defined in Section 31 of the Act) of securities on the
Exchange to pay Activity Assessment Fees based upon their covered
sales. The Exchange calculates such fees by multiplying the aggregate
dollar amount of covered sales effected on the Exchange during the
appropriate period by the Section 31(b) fee rate in effect during that
period. Clearing members may in turn seek to charge a fee to their
customers or correspondent firms. Any allocation of the fee between the
clearing member and its correspondent firm or customer is the
responsibility of the clearing member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 240.31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reconciling the amounts billed by the Exchange and the amounts
collected from the customers historically had been difficult for member
firms, causing surpluses to accumulate at some broker-dealer firms
(referred to herein as ``accumulated funds''). These accumulated funds
were not remitted to NYSE by certain firms, despite the fact that these
charges may have been previously identified as ``Section 31 Fees'' or
``SEC Fees'' by the firms.\5\ In addition, prior to direct billing of
members and member organizations of Activity Assessment Fees as of June
1, 2005, the Exchange utilized ``self-reporting'' on Form 120-A of
amounts payable under Rule 440H, and the Exchange has accumulated
amounts so paid in excess of amounts paid by the Exchange to the SEC
pursuant to Section 31 of the Act (``Exchange accumulated excess'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The SEC stated in its release adopting new Rule 31 and Rule
31T that ``it is misleading to suggest that a customer or [SRO]
member incurs an obligation to the Commission under Section 31.''
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49928 (June 28, 2004), 69 FR
41060, 41072 (July 7, 2004). In response to this statement, the
Exchange amended Rule 440H to refer to this fee as an ``Activity
Assessment Fee.'' See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52018
(July 12, 2005), 70 FR 41467 (July 19, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2005-39). The
Exchange issued Information Memos regarding the Exchange's
``Activity Assessment Fee'' and the SEC's ``Section 31 Fee'', and
provided guidance for members and member organizations that choose
to charge their customers fees. See Information Memo 05-48 (July 19,
2005) and Information Memo 05-36 (May 13, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In November 2004, the Exchange and other SROs received a letter
from the SEC's Division of Market Regulation \6\ requesting, among
other things, that the Exchange conduct an analysis to ascertain the
amount of accumulated funds and present a plan for broker-dealers to
dispose of or otherwise resolve title to such accumulated funds.
Following discussion among the SROs and staff of the Division of Market
Regulation, in an effort to ascertain the amount of accumulated funds,
NASD surveyed 240 member clearing and self-clearing firms to review
their practices regarding the collection of such fees from customers.
After compiling and analyzing the data provided by member firms, NASD
staff found that over half of the firms surveyed did not have an
accumulated funds balance. NASD worked with the other SROs to recommend
a potential solution to allow NASD and other SRO member firms to
resolve title to the accumulated funds. It was determined, based upon
information provided in connection with NASD's survey, that it would be
virtually impossible to return customer-related accumulated funds to
the

customers that had paid these funds to the firms.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As of November 2007, the Division of Market Regulation was
renamed the Division of Trading and Markets.
    \7\ NASD had asked all surveyed firms whether they could
``identify and relate the funds to specific customers on a
transaction by transaction basis.'' The surveyed firms universally
stated that tracking fractions of a penny to individual customers
would be impossible and any over-collections could not be passed
back at the customer level. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
55886 (June 8, 2007), 72 FR 32935 (June 14, 2007) (Order approving
SR-NASD-2007-027).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is aimed at enabling those fees that may
have been collected for purposes of paying an ``SEC Fee'' or ``Section
31 Fee'' to be used to pay such fees. The Exchange is proposing new
Supplementary Material .30 to NYSE Rule 440H that will allow firms, on
a one-time-only basis, voluntarily to remit historically accumulated
funds to the Exchange. These funds then would be used to pay the
Exchange's current Section 31 fees in conformity with prior
representations made by member firms. In addition, a member or member
organization could designate all or part of the Exchange accumulated
excess held by the Exchange and allocated to such member or member
organization to be used by the Exchange in accordance with the terms of
Supplementary Material .30.
    Finally, to the extent the payment of these historically
accumulated funds or Exchange accumulated excess is in excess of the
fees due the SEC from NYSE under Section 31, such surplus shall be used
by the Exchange to offset Exchange regulatory costs. Specifically, the
Exchange will subject such surplus to the same treatment utilized with
respect to unused fine income that has accumulated beyond a level
reasonably necessary for future contingencies. That is, the board of
directors of NYSE Regulation would utilize any such surplus to fund one
or more special projects of NYSE Regulation, to reduce fees charged by
NYSE Regulation to its member organizations or the markets that it
serves, or for a charitable purpose.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55003 (December 22,
2006), 71 FR 78497 (December 29, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2006-109) (approved
in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55216 (January 31, 2007), 72
FR 5779 (February 7, 2007) (relating to NYSE Regulation policies
regarding exercise of power to fine NYSE member organizations and
use of money collected as fines).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes that the effective date of the proposed rule
change be the date on which any Commission order approving the proposed
rule change is published in the Federal Register. In addition,
Supplementary Material .30 to Rule 440H would automatically sunset six
months after the effective date.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The proposed effective date and sunset date of the proposed
rule change are comparable to those approved by the Commission for a
similar proposed rule change by the American Stock Exchange LLC
(``Amex''). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57829 (May 16,
2008), 73 FR 30173 (May 23, 2008) (SR-Amex-2007-107).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6 of the Act,\10\ in general, and further the objectives
of Section 6(b)(5),\11\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change will provide a transparent way of addressing
the issue of accumulated funds held at the member firm level as well as
the Exchange accumulated excess. As this proposed rule change would
automatically sunset, it will be of limited duration. Moreover, based
on the reminder set for this in the proposed Supplementary Material .30
to NYSE Rule 440H and the issuance of prior Information Memos on this
matter, the accumulation of funds that are collected and disclosed as
``Section 31 Fees'' or ``SEC Fees'' should not reoccur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2007-64 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-64. 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 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 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-
NYSE-2007-64 and should be submitted on or before August 4, 2008.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
the Proposed Rule Changes

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\12\ In addition, the Commission finds good cause to approve
the proposed rule change prior to the thirtieth day after the date of
publication of the notice of filing. The Commission previously found
similar proposals from other SROs to be

consistent with the Act.\13\ The Commission is not aware of any issue
that should cause it to revisit those findings or preclude the
Commission from approving the NYSE proposal on the same basis. The
Commission notes that, because the program is voluntary, it imposes no
obligation on any NYSE member that believes that accumulated funds
should be retained or disposed of in another manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In approving this rule change, the Commission notes that it
has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57829 (May 16,
2008), 73 FR 30173 (May 23, 2008) (SR-Amex-2007-107); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 55886 (June 8, 2007), 72 FR 32935 (June 14,
2007) (SR-NASD-2007-027).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2007-64), as modified
by Amendment No. 1, be and hereby is approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-15816 Filed 7-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P