[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67722-67723]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27527]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68170; File No. 4-655]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Minor Rule Violation Plan

November 6, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(d)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19d-1(c)(2) thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby
given that on October 15, 2012, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the
``Exchange''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') a proposed minor rule violation plan (``MRVP'') with
sanctions not exceeding $2,500 which would not be subject to the
provisions of Rule 19d-1(c)(1) of the Act \3\ requiring that a self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') promptly file notice with the
Commission of any final disciplinary action taken with respect to any
person or organization.\4\ In accordance with Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under
the Act, the Exchange proposed to designate certain specified rule

violations as minor rule violations, and requested that it be relieved
of the prompt reporting requirements regarding such violations,
provided it gives notice of such violations to the Commission on a
quarterly basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(d)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(1).
    \4\ The Commission adopted amendments to paragraph (c) of Rule
19d-1 to allow SROs to submit for Commission approval plans for the
abbreviated reporting of minor disciplinary infractions. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 21013 (June 1, 1984), 49 FR
23828 (June 8, 1984). Any disciplinary action taken by an SRO
against any person for violation of a rule of the SRO which has been
designated as a minor rule violation pursuant to such a plan filed
with and declared effective by the Commission shall not be
considered ``final'' for purposes of Section 19(d)(1) of the Act if
the sanction imposed consists of a fine not exceeding $2,500 and the
sanctioned person has not sought an adjudication, including a
hearing, or otherwise exhausted his administrative remedies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to include in its MRVP the procedures and
violations currently included in Exchange Rule 12140 (``Imposition of
Fines for Minor Rule Violations'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ On April 27, 2012, the Exchange's application for
registration as a national securities exchange, including the rules
governing the Exchange, was approved. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 66871 (April 27, 2012), 77 FR 26323 (May 3, 2012) (File
No. 10-206).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the Exchange's proposed MRVP, under Rule 12140, the
Exchange may impose a fine (not to exceed $2,500) on a member or an
associated person with respect to any rule violation listed in Rule
12140(d). The Exchange shall serve the person against whom a fine is
imposed with a written statement setting forth the rule or rules
violated, the act or omission constituting each such violation, the
fine imposed for each such violation, and the date by which such fine
shall be paid, such determination becomes final or such determination
must be contested. If the person against whom the fine is imposed pays
the fine, such payment shall be deemed to be a waiver of such person's
right to a disciplinary proceeding and any review of the matter under
the Exchange Rules. Any person against whom a fine is imposed may
contest the Exchange's determination by filing with the Exchange a
written answer, at which point the matter shall become a disciplinary
proceeding.
    The Exchange proposes that, as set forth in Exchange Rule 12140(d),
violations of the following rules would be appropriate for disposition
under the MRVP: Rule 3120 (Position Limits); Rule 10030 (Focus
Reports); Rule 10040 (Requests for Trade Data); Rules 7110(a), 7150(d)-
(f), and 8050(a)-(d) (Order Entry); Rule 8040(a)(7) (Quotation
Parameters); Rule 8050(e) (Continuous Quotes); Rule 3180 (Mandatory
Systems Testing); Rules 2020, 2040, and 2050 related to failure to
timely file amendments to Form U4, Form U5, and Form BD; Rule 9000(c)-
(e), (g) and (h) (Contrary Exercise Advice); Rule 15020 (Locked and
Crossed Markets); Rule 8030(e) (Market Maker Assigned Activity); Rule
8050(c)(2)-(4) (Request for Quote); and Rule 15010(a) (Trade-
Through).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Commission notes that the list of violations set forth
in this notice corrects certain rule reference errors that are
presently in Exchange Rule 12140. The Exchange has informed
Commission staff that it will submit a rule filing to correct such
errors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon approval of the plan, the Exchange will provide the Commission
a quarterly report of actions taken on minor rule violations under the
plan. The quarterly report will include, among other things: the
Exchange's internal file number for the case, the name of the
individual and/or organization, the nature of the violation, the
specific rule provision violated, the sanction imposed, the number of
times the rule violation has occurred, and the date of disposition.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange attached a sample form of the quarterly report
with its submission to the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. 4-655 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. 4-655. This file number should
be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please
use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the
Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed MRVP that are filed with the
Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
MRVP between the Commission and any person, other than those that may
be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5
U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the proposed MRVP 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 No. 4-655 and should be submitted on
or before December 4, 2012.

II. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Minor Rule Violation Plan and
Timing for Commission Action

    Pursuant to Section 19(d)(1) of the Act and Rule 19d-1(c)(2)
thereunder,\8\ after December 4, 2012, the Commission may, by order,
declare the Exchange's proposed MRVP effective if the plan is
consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Commission in
its order may restrict the categories of violations to be designated as
minor rule violations and may impose any other terms or conditions to
the proposed MRVP, File No. 4-655, and to the period of its
effectiveness, which the Commission deems necessary or appropriate in
the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(d)(1); 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-27527 Filed 11-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 8, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 131)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 38900-38905]
[DOCID:fr08jy08-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-28255; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-023-AD;
Amendment 39-15589; AD 2008-13-26]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed Model 1329 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Lockheed Model 1329 series airplanes. This AD requires determining the
part number on the steering cylinder assembly for the nose landing gear
(NLG), determining the total flight cycles accumulated on the NLG
steering cylinder assembly, repetitively replacing the assembly,
inspecting for missing tow turning limit markings, and performing
corrective actions if necessary. This AD results from reports of
numerous failures of the NLG steering cylinder. We are issuing this AD
to prevent the loss of hydraulic pressure and steering control.

DATES: This AD is effective August 12, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 12,
2008.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, 86 South Cobb Drive, Marietta,
Georgia 30063.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hector Hernandez, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ACE-119A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft
Certification Office, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite
450, Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (770) 703-
6097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
certain Lockheed Model 1329 series

airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on May 24,
2007 (72 FR 29088). That NPRM proposed to require determining the part
number on the steering cylinder assembly for the nose landing gear
(NLG), determining the total flight cycles accumulated on the NLG
steering cylinder assembly, repetitively replacing the assembly,
inspecting for missing tow turning limit markings, and performing
corrective actions if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Withdraw NPRM: Inadequate To Correct Unsafe Condition

    Faith Landmark Ministries requests that we withdraw the NPRM
because it does not address the real problem with the NLG steering
cylinder: Possible fatigue cracking due to machining errors during
manufacture.
    We disagree. Based on information from Lockheed Martin, due to lack
of access to this area there is no reliable inspection that can be
performed in the thread relief area where the failures are occurring.
The only way to do the inspection is to disassemble the actuator
steering cylinder--which would destroy the cylinder. Originally the NLG
steering cylinder was a life-limited part, but unknown to Lockheed
Martin the life limit was removed from the Lockheed JetStar/Handbook of
Operating and Maintenance Instructions (HOMI). We have determined that
it is necessary to issue the final rule to re-establish a relevant life
limit and to address the identified unsafe condition.

Request To Remove Certain Cylinder Part Numbers as Affected

    Faith Landmark Ministries and Carl A. Smith request that we revise
the NPRM to remove P/N JL1955-7 steering cylinder as an affected part,
because there is no record of a JL1955-7 steering cylinder failure due
to stress corrosion cracking.
    We disagree. We received reports of several more service failures
of P/N JL1955-7 steering cylinders as a result of fatigue cracking in
the thread relief area. Although no signs of corrosion were found in
these particular failures, access to this area is difficult, and a
reliable inspection cannot be performed in the thread relief area where
the failures are occurring. Further, disassembling the actuator
steering cylinder would destroy the cylinder. Crack growth cannot be
shown and inspection intervals cannot be developed because the initial
detectable crack length is longer than the critical crack length. As a
result, we find it necessary to impose a fatigue-based life limit on
the actuator steering cylinder. We have not changed the final rule
regarding this issue.

Suggestion of Possible Batch Problem

    Mr. Smith and Faith Landmark Ministries suggest the possibility of
a batch problem with the P/N JL1955-7 steering cylinder. Faith Landmark
Ministries states that four cylinders failed within two years on
Lockheed Martin airplanes that had very close serial numbers (S/N 5211,
5213, 5215, and 5218) and another cylinder failed on an airplane having
S/N 5210. Mr. Smith also notes that the airplanes on which the parts
experienced fatigue failures are bunched together (S/Ns 5210, 5213,
5215, and 5218).
    The commenters made no specific request. We have reviewed the data
and have found no evidence of any batch problem with the steering
cylinders having P/N JL1955-7. We have not changed the final rule
regarding this issue.

Request To Withdraw NPRM: Documentation Errors

    Faith Landmark Ministries requests that we withdraw the NPRM
because of major errors in the supportive documentation and data
supplied by Lockheed Martin.
    We disagree. The identified unsafe condition is a serious safety
issue that must be corrected. Lockheed Service Bulletins 329-300,
Revision C, and 329II-32-8, Revision B, both dated September 5, 2006,
were cited as the appropriate sources of service information for the
NPRM's proposed requirements. The actions specified in these service
bulletins adequately address the identified unsafe condition; however,
these service bulletins did contain discrepancies, which Lockheed
Martin has corrected in Lockheed Service Bulletin 329-300, Revision D,
and 329II-32-8, Revision C, both dated October 4, 2007. Relevant
changes to the service bulletins are outlined below. We have determined
that it is necessary to issue this final rule in order to address the
identified unsafe condition. We have revised paragraph (f) of this
final rule to require the revised service bulletins, and provided
credit for accomplishment of the earlier revisions.

Requests To Address Service Bulletin Discrepancies

    Faith Landmark Ministries requests correction of certain
discrepancies, as outlined below, in the service information cited in
the NPRM. Lockheed Martin also stated that several operators have
indicated a need for additional instructions on rebuilding the NLG
steering cylinder assembly.
    Since we issued the NPRM, Lockheed issued Lockheed Service Bulletin
329-300, Revision D, and 329II-32-8, Revision C, both dated October 4,
2007. These revisions address many of the problems noted by the
commenters, but do not add work beyond the actions specified in the
previous revision levels. The service bulletins also extend the life
limits for certain NLG steering cylinder assemblies (as set forth in
the Life Limits table below).

       Revised Jetstar NLG Steering Cylinder Assembly Life Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Life limit  (in
           Component                  Part No.          flight cycles)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7049-T73 die forging...........  JL1955-5..........                2,175
7050-T7451 plate...............  JL1955-9..........                1,113
4340 steel bar.................  JL1955-801........                3,211
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have revised paragraph (f) of this AD to require the revised
service bulletins and added new paragraph (j) of this AD to provide
credit for work already done in accordance with the previous revisions.
    Paragraph 2.B.(1) of the service bulletins indicates disassembling,
cleaning, and inspecting the NLG steering actuator assembly per ``HOMI
<IP_ADDRESS>'' (of the Lockheed JetStar/Handbook of Operating and
Maintenance Instructions), but the correct reference is ``HOMI Figure
32-26A.'' Faith Landmark Ministries states that for nose steering
system rigging instructions, paragraph 2.B.(5) of the service bulletins
refers to ``HOMI Figure

32-22,'' but the correct reference is ``HOMI Figure 32-25'' and that
paragraph 2.B.(4) should refer to ``HOMI Figure 32-26A.'' The service
bulletins have been revised to correct these discrepancies. Although
the revised service bulletins do not specify the HOMI, they incorporate
the necessary figure and instructions.
    Paragraph 2.B.(2) of the service bulletins specifies to identify
the replacement NLG steering cylinder assembly with a serial number in
the location and method specified by engineering drawing JL-1955,
Revision AE or later. Faith Landmark Ministries states that one or more
JetStar operators will probably use the same serial number so that,
after repair, overhaul, or replacement, multiple units could have the
same identifier. Further, the commenter states that the NLG steering
cylinders are not serialized, so they cannot be traced. The commenter
notes that many operators, trying to comply with an earlier version of
the service bulletin, installed exchanged overhauled units, which are
not serialized. As a result, the cylinders are mixed within the fleet,
and it is possible that some of the mis-machined cylinders are still in
service.
    We agree that the identification of the NLG steering cylinder
assembly must be clear. The revised service bulletins specify
completing the identification plate to indicate compliance with the
service bulletin, and to indicate new P/N JL1501-7 or JL1501-9 for the
NLG steering actuator assembly. It is our understanding that the
JL1955-13 cylinder assembly (which uses the JL1955-15 cylinder) will
have a serial number consisting of a vendor cage code and sequential
numerical lot number beginning at -001. For example, the serial number
should be 8 characters XXXXX001, where XXXXX is the vendor cage code
unique to the manufacturer (vendor) and -001 identifies the lot number.
The proposed serial number will tie the cylinder assembly to a specific
manufacturer and lot number for traceability. As we discussed
previously, we have revised this final rule to refer to the revised
service bulletins.

Requests for Revised Engineering Drawing

    Mr. Smith and Faith Landmark Ministries refer to two reports by the
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB): (1) The report associated
with the NPRM (regarding a 1998 incident involving a Lockheed Model
1329 airplane on which the nose landing gear wheel locked sideways on
landing and caused the airplane to run off the runway) and (2) NTSB
Materials Laboratory Factual Report 99-107, dated April 13, 1999. The
commenters note that the Lockheed engineering drawing for the cylinder
does not clearly define the machining details of this region of the
cylinder, but shows a large radius without dimensions. The commenters
suggest that this indicates a design problem that needs to be
corrected. The commenters state that the fatigue origins were all
located in a very straight circular path in the tread relief area
around the inner surface of the cylinder.
    We infer that the commenters are requesting that we wait to issue
the final rule until a revised drawing is available. We agree that the
NTSB reports could indicate a design problem. Lockheed Martin examined
engineering drawing JL-1955, Revision AD, dated March 10, 1978, and
determined that view A on sheet 1 did not contain sufficient clarity to
consistently produce the cylinder in a condition that Lockheed Martin
had intended. Lockheed Martin examined the engineering drawing and
found that the radius was defined but needed clarification. Lockheed
Martin has prepared an engineering order against drawing JL-1955 and
determined that sufficient detail now exists to consistently produce
the cylinder with the intended thread relief groove. However, the
revised service bulletins removed any reference to drawing JL-1955,
Revision AD or AE. We have not changed the final rule regarding this
issue.

Request To Clarify Criteria for Maintenance Personnel

    Faith Landmark Ministries asserts that reassembling the NLG
steering cylinder should be done by qualified shop persons or overhaul
specialists at an appropriately rated repair station.
    We infer that the commenter is requesting that we revise the NPRM
to clarify the qualifications of personnel allowed to reassemble the
NLG steering cylinder. As long as the actions are to be accomplished by
persons prescribed in section 43.3 (``Persons authorized to perform
maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations.'') of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.3), the persons authorized
to perform the work required in an AD are not prescribed by the AD. We
have not changed the final rule regarding this issue.

Request To Remove Spares Prohibition

    Faith Landmark Ministries states that Lockheed Martin issued a
JetStar Assessment, dated June 8, 2007, which reviews the history of
the P/N JL1955-7 cylinder failures due to fatigue at the thread relief.
This is the current configuration of most JetStars. The commenter is
aware of six P/N JL1955-7 cylinders that were built as spares. The
commenter states that there is no need to remove all the existing P/N
JL1955-7 NLG cylinders from service. Lockheed Martin has developed a
way to examine these cylinders; Lockheed Martin inspected the six
cylinders that were in stock.
    We disagree with the commenter's assertion that Lockheed Martin has
developed an adequate inspection for the P/N JL1955-7 NLG cylinders
that would detect critical cracking. The JetStar assessment by Lockheed
Martin addresses the service history of the failed cylinder along with
material changes made on P/N JL1955-7, and explores the possibility of
nondestructive inspections. Lockheed Martin concluded that combined
ultrasonic and eddy current inspections would probably be ineffective.
Lockheed Martin also considered a fluorescent penetrant inspection,
provided a time interval could be calculated for continued safe flight
and the cylinder could be disassembled for inspection.
    Based on information provided to the FAA, no available
nondestructive inspection would detect a critical crack in the thread
relief area where the failures are occurring because access to this
area is unavailable. As stated previously, the only way to inspect the
area is to disassemble the steering cylinder--which would destroy the
cylinder. However, according to the provisions of paragraph (l) of the
final rule, we may approve requests for alternative method of
compliances (AMOCs) if the request includes data that prove that the
AMOC would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed
the final rule regarding this issue.

Request for Information on Addressing Unsafe Condition

    Faith Landmark Ministries questions why Lockheed Martin did not
take any action by way of an AD or similar to ensure that all the P/N
JL1955-7 cylinders in the fleet were inspected for problems as soon as
Lockheed Martin noticed the grouping of aircraft serial numbers
experiencing steering cylinder failures or immediately after the
incident that occurred in Houston in 1998, and the subsequent NTSB
report.
    Only the FAA may initiate and issue ADs. Lockheed Martin did report
the in-service failures to the FAA, and communicated with the NTSB as
required. Data were gathered to enable a full assessment. The commenter
made

no specific request to change the NPRM. No change to the final rule is
necessary regarding this issue.

Request for Clarification of Unsafe Condition and Corrective Action

    Faith Landmark Ministries further questions why, when Service
Bulletins 329-300 and 329II-32-8 came out in 2000, they referred only
to ``corrosion problems'' and included no requirement to inspect the
steering cylinder for the mis-machined thread relief that caused the
failure of the steering cylinder in the 1998 incident that resulted
from the unsafe condition and prompted the AD.
    The incident was investigated by the NTSB. Lockheed Martin was in
contact with the NTSB and waiting for a final report and the actual
part before they could properly make the assessment as shown in the
service bulletins. The new revisions of the service bulletins issued in
2007 include an inspection of all threads for burrs or evidence of
cross threading. The commenter made no specific request to change the
NPRM. We have not changed the final rule regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Cost Estimate

    Lockheed Martin states that the estimated cost for the part should
be $14,876.57 per airplane, but the NPRM indicated no cost for parts.
    We infer that the operator requests that we revise the cost
estimate of the NPRM. We agree. The NPRM provided the estimated costs
for the inspection only. This final rule includes the costs for the
conditionally required cylinder replacement.

Request To Revise Description of Unsafe Condition

    Lockheed Martin requests that we revise the Discussion section of
the NPRM to add ``fatigue cracking in the thread relief'' as a possible
cause of the NLG steering cylinder failures.
    We agree with Lockheed Martin's rationale, but the Discussion
section is not repeated in a final rule so we have not changed this
final rule regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Lockheed Martin Address

    Lockheed Martin requests that we revise the NPRM to update its
address. We have changed the appropriate references in the final rule
accordingly.

Request To Remove Life Limit

    Lockheed Martin indicates it plans to revise Service Bulletins 329-
300 and 329II-32-8 to remove the life limit on cylinder assembly P/N
JL1955-9. Lockheed Martin believes that no P/N JL1955-9 cylinders have
been built, as this material will not be the preferred material for
replacement steering cylinders.
    We disagree that the life limit on P/N JL1955-9 should be removed.
We have received no evidence indicating that this part does not have
corrosion or fatigue issues, in light of the incidents that have
occurred. The revised service bulletins did not remove the life limit
on any of the cylinder assemblies. No change to the final rule is
necessary regarding this issue.

Request To Clarify Cost Estimate

    Four Star Int'l, Inc., states that replacement cylinders should be
made available to operators at no cost. The commenter reports that an
NLG steering actuator failed apparently due to stress, with no
corrosion observed. Because Lockheed Martin has since identified the
source of the problem, and because this operator has already paid to
replace the part once, the commenter contends that future parts costs
should be Lockheed Martin's responsibility.
    The operator made no specific request to change the NPRM. Operators
are responsible for maintaining their airplanes to the type design. The
FAA cannot direct payment for replacement parts by any party. Operators
should discuss any issues regarding these costs with the airplane
manufacturer. We have made no change to the final rule regarding this
issue.

Additional Change to NPRM

    Paragraph (g) of the NPRM specified to replace any cylinder
assembly having P/N JL1955-1 or JL1955-3 with a new assembly, and
paragraph (j) of the NPRM (paragraph (k) of this final rule) would have
prohibited the installation of any cylinder assembly having P/N JL1955-
1 or JL1955-3. (P/N JL1955-3 is a cylinder, rather than an assembly.)
Since the P/N JL1955-1 cylinder assembly uses the P/N JL1955-3
cylinder, we have deleted the references to P/N JL1955-3 in the final
rule.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We also determined that
these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 48 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Average
                                 Work      labor                   Cost per     Number of U.S.-
           Action               hours     rate per    Parts        airplane        registered       Fleet cost
                                            hour                                   airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspect for P/N.............          3        $80         $0  $240...........  34.............  $8,160.
Replace assembly............          2         80     14,877  15,037, per      Up to 34.......  Up to $511,258,
                                                                replacement.                      per
                                                                                replacement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a

substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    (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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2008-13-26 Lockheed: Amendment 39-15589. Docket No. FAA-2007-28255;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-023-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective August 12,
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the following airplanes, certificated in
any category.
    (1) Lockheed Model 1329-23A, 1329-23D, and 1329-23E series
airplanes; serial numbers 5001 through 5162 inclusive.
    (2) Lockheed Model 1329-25 series airplanes, serial numbers 5201
through 5240 inclusive.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of numerous failures of the
nose landing gear (NLG) steering cylinder. We are issuing this AD to
prevent the loss of hydraulic pressure and steering control.

Compliance

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

Service Information

    (f) The term ``service bulletin,'' as used in this AD, means the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin
identified in Table 1 of this AD.

                                                               Table 1.--Service Bulletins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Lockheed Service Bulletin               Revision                         Date                                  Affected airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
329-300..............................  D.....................  October 4, 2007....................  1329-23A, 1329-23D, 1329-23E.
329II-32-8...........................  C.....................  October 4, 2007....................  1329-25.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inspection for Cylinder Assembly Part Number

    (g) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect
to determine the part number (P/N) on the steering cylinder assembly
for the nose landing gear (NLG). A review of airplane maintenance
records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number
can be conclusively determined from that review. Replace any
cylinder assembly having P/N JL1955-1 with a new assembly before
further flight in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.

Life Limits

    (h) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Review
the airplane records to determine the total flight cycles
accumulated on the NLG steering cylinder assembly, in accordance
with the applicable service bulletin. Before any steering cylinder
assembly component reaches its life limit, as specified in Table 1
of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service
bulletin, or within 30 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later: Replace the cylinder assembly with a new
assembly in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. If the
steering cylinder assembly's age cannot be positively determined
from the records review, replace it within 30 days after the
effective date of this AD, in accordance with the applicable service
bulletin. Thereafter, replace the cylinder assembly at intervals not
to exceed the life limits as specified in the applicable service
bulletin.

Inspection for Tow Turning Limit Markings

    (i) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Perform
a general visual inspection above the NLG doors to detect missing
tow turning limit markings, in accordance with the applicable
service bulletin. If any markings are absent, restore/apply markings
before further flight in accordance with the applicable service
bulletin.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection
is: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior area,
installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or
irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching
distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to
ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This
level of inspection is made under normally available lighting
conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or
droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or
doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain
proximity to the area being checked.''

Credit for Actions Done per Previous Version of Service Bulletins

    (j) Accomplishment of the actions specified in Lockheed Service
Bulletin 329-300, Revision C, dated September 5, 2006, or 329II-32-
8, Revision B, dated September 5, 2006, as applicable, before the
effective date of this AD, is acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding requirements of this AD.

Parts Installation

    (k) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install on any
airplane a NLG steering cylinder assembly that has P/N JL1955-1.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (l)(1) The Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, ATTN: Hector Hernandez, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and
Equipment Branch, ACE-119A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification
Office, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite 450,
Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (770) 703-
6097; has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (m) You must use Lockheed Service Bulletin 329-300, Revision D,
dated October 4, 2007; or Lockheed Service Bulletin 329II-32-8,
Revision C, dated October 4, 2007; as applicable, to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, 86 South Cobb Drive, Marietta,
Georgia 30063.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 13, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-14470 Filed 7-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60396-60399]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21590]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0794; FRL-10225-01-OAR]

Request for Information: Better Indoor Air Quality Management To
Help Reduce COVID-19 and Other Disease Transmission in Buildings:
Technical Assistance Needs and Priorities To Improve Public Health

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor
Air.

ACTION: Request for information through public comment.

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

SUMMARY: Through this Request for Information (RFI), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) seeks to promote and advance the widespread
adoption of actions that lead to improvements in indoor air quality
(IAQ) in the nation's building stock to help mitigate disease
transmission (e.g., COVID-19). The agency is announcing a 60-day public
comment period to solicit information and recommendations from a broad
array of individuals and organizations with knowledge and

expertise relating to the built environment and health, indoor air
quality, epidemiology, disease transmission, social sciences and other
disciplines. EPA will analyze information received from this RFI to
consider and support the potential development, improvement, and
implementation of technical assistance efforts (e.g., information,
tools, training, guidance) and other strategies (e.g., incentives,
recognition efforts) to support IAQ related improvements in the
nation's building stock, with a particular emphasis on schools and
commercial buildings.

DATES: Comments may be submitted on or before December 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2022-0794 by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov
(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Email: [email protected]. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2022-0794 in the subject line of the message.
     U.S. Postal Service Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA Docket Center, Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Docket Center, WJC West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004.
The Docket Center's hours of operations are 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m.,
Monday-Friday (except Federal Holidays).
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0794 for this rulemaking. Comments received may be
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending
comments, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alisa Smith, Office of Radiation and
Indoor Air/Indoor Environments Division ([email protected], 202-343-
9372) or Ray Lee, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air/Radiation
Protection Division ([email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Submit your comments, identified by Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0794, at https://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or the other methods identified in the ADDRESSES
section. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the
docket. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    You do not need to address every question and should focus on those
where you have relevant expertise or experience. In your comments,
please provide a brief description of yourself and your role or
organization before addressing the question. Please identify the
question(s) you are responding to by question number when submitting
your comments.

1.0 Background

The Clean Air in Buildings Challenge

    In March 2022, the Biden-Harris Administration launched the Clean
Air in Buildings Challenge, a key component of the President's National
COVID-19 Preparedness Plan. The Clean Air in Buildings Challenge is a
call to action and a set of guiding principles and best practices to
encourage and assist building owners and operators with reducing risks
from airborne viruses and other contaminants indoors through the
improvement of indoor air quality. The Clean Air in Buildings Challenge
highlights a range of recommended best practices and resources for
improving ventilation, filtration, air cleaning and indoor air quality
in buildings, which can help to better protect the health of building
occupants and reduce the risk of COVID-19 spread. The Administration
invited and encouraged all building owners and managers--and
organizations of all kinds--to take action based on the Clean Air in
Buildings Challenge best practices guide.
    To further promote awareness of and participation in the Clean Air
in Buildings Challenge, the Administration also committed to identify
ways to recognize leaders in this effort including organizations,
building owners, managers, and operators across sectors and around the
country for steps they take to improve ventilation, filtration, and
indoor air quality to protect and promote public health. The intent of
such recognition would be to provide one means to increase and sustain
awareness of the need to improve ventilation and indoor air quality in
our nation's buildings to protect public health, and to acknowledge
individuals and organizations that have taken these actions and inspire
others to do so while leveraging the National COVID-19 Preparedness
Plan and the Clean Air in Buildings Challenge.
    Ventilation, filtration, and air cleaning in buildings are
essential components of a multilayered approach to preventing disease
transmission, including COVID-19.
    There are straightforward steps that can be taken to reduce the
potential for airborne transmission of COVID-19.\1\ The layout, design,
and operation of a building, including the operation of the heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system, as well as occupant
behaviors, can all impact the potential airborne spread of COVID-19 in
that building. Although improvements to ventilation, filtration and air
cleaning cannot on their own eliminate the risk of airborne
transmission of the virus, increasing ventilation with outdoor air
accompanied by air filtration and air cleaning are important components
of a layered prevention strategy to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and
promote the overall health of building occupants. Additional components
of a layered COVID-19 prevention strategy may include vaccination,
physical distancing, wearing masks, and other precautions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.epa.gov/coronavirus/indoor-air-and-coronavirus-covid-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Significant public health gains can be achieved by improving
building ventilation and filtration.
    Well managed IAQ is a critical component of the pandemic response
and has multiple co-benefits. Improvements in ventilation, filtration,
air cleaning and other indoor air quality parameters are important for
the multiple health impacts they achieve; such actions also support
important performance, productivity, and economic benefits.\2\ For
example, increases in classroom ventilation rates are associated with
improvements in student performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://iaqscience.lbl.gov/.

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

    Challenges and opportunities for improving IAQ in buildings--What
we've learned to date.
    The Administration and Congress have taken unprecedented steps to
ensure that funding is available to support the pandemic response. This
includes funding through the American Rescue Plan which provided $122
billion to schools and billions more to state, local, and tribal
governments which they may use, among other uses of the funds, to
support indoor air quality improvements in schools, small businesses,
industrial settings, commercial buildings, low-income housing, and
transportation hubs.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Dowell D, Lindsley WG, Brooks JT. Reducing SARS-CoV-2 in
Shared Indoor Air. JAMA. Published online June 07, 2022.
doi:10.1001/jama.2022.9970.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    School decision makers are implementing HVAC improvements as one
means to help reduce the spread of COVID-19 and remain open for in
person learning. CDC recently published the results of the National
School COVID-19 Prevention Study, an assessment of ventilation
practices in schools.\4\ This study found ``the most common reported
ventilation improvement strategies by schools were lower-cost
strategies, including relocating activities outdoors (74%), inspecting
and validating existing HVAC systems (71%), and opening doors (67%) or
windows (67%) when safe to do so. Fewer schools reported more resource-
intensive strategies such as replacing or upgrading HVAC systems (39%)
or using HEPA filtration systems in classrooms (28%) or eating areas
(30%). Rural and mid-poverty schools were less likely to report
implementing several resource-intensive strategies.'' Professional
organizations, HVAC-related industries, trade unions, and others are
reporting they are mobilizing their resources to help improve building
assets, operations, and services to improve indoor air quality.
Anecdotally, some school representatives are reporting that they face
challenges implementing improvements that require professional services
because they have not yet been able to efficiently secure qualified
workers in a timely manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Pampati S, Rasberry CN, McConnell L, et al. Ventilation
Improvement Strategies Among K-12 Public Schools--The National
School COVID-19 Prevention Study, United States, February 14-March
27, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2022; 71:770-775. DOE: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7123e2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While recent assessments of the use of federal funds to support
ventilation and other indoor air quality improvements show encouraging
action, there remains important work to do to help schools and other
buildings to improve indoor air. Public health initiatives that inform
the public about indoor air quality have proven impacts. The EPA
environmental tobacco smoke risk assessment provided critical public
health information that led to significant improvements to IAQ through
state, local, and private smoke-free policies and practices in
buildings. The Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and
Ethnic Asthma Disparities has focused support for community-level
interventions on the preventable factors, including indoor
environmental exposures, that underlie persistent and pervasive
disparities in asthma outcomes. The National Radon Action Plan
spearheaded by EPA in collaboration with other Federal agencies and
leading not-for-profit organizations has mobilized a unique public-
private partnership to prevent lung cancer deaths from avoidable radon
exposure in homes and schools. And State weatherization assistance
programs, supported with Federal funds, have linked energy efficiency
with IAQ protective measures such as mold and moisture management, to
deliver healthier homes for thousands of low-income families. The
opportunity exists now to scale up proven practices, fast track
innovative research and development, and mobilize public and private
assets to make sustained improvements to indoor air quality, reduce
COVID-19 risk, and improve school and workplace health and safety.

2.0 Request for Information

    Through this RFI, EPA is seeking input from a diverse array of
stakeholders (e.g., building owners and operators, HVAC professionals,
engineers, building and construction contractors, academics,
architects, industrial hygienists, managers, researchers, Federal,
State, Tribal and local government representatives, school and school
district leaders and facility managers, industry, philanthropists, non-
governmental organizations and the public at large) about actions,
strategies, tools and approaches that support ventilation, filtration
and air cleaning improvements, and other actions that would promote
sustained improvements in indoor air quality in the nation's building
stock to help mitigate disease transmission.
    Responses to this RFI will inform ongoing and future efforts by EPA
and others to support both the implementation and the sustainability of
proven indoor air quality risk reduction measures with a special focus
on activities that will address those aspects of building operations
that can reduce disease transmission indoors.
    EPA is particularly interested in feedback about current
opportunities and priorities that can be implemented quickly and with
existing resources. We are also interested in needs, tools, training,
and other approaches that will lead to sustainable, systems-based
improvements in the nation's building stock over the longer term and
any obstacles and how they may be addressed. This RFI is for
informational gathering purposes only and should not be construed as a
solicitation or as an obligation on the part of EPA.

3.0 Key Questions

    3.1 In your opinion, what approach(es) could the Federal government
consider deploying to move decision makers/owners/managers toward
making and sustaining improved ventilation, filtration, and air
cleaning practices to reduce the risk of disease transmission?
     What could these efforts look like (e.g., awareness
campaigns, job training programs, voluntary labeling or other
recognition programs, financial incentives, rebate programs)?
     How might these efforts function (e.g., public-private
partnership, expansion of existing public and or private programs)?
     Who are the stakeholders for action (general public,
industry, government, academia, public health professionals, schools,
commercial building owners, faith-based community, special-interest
organizations)?
     What technical assistance, tools, resources, and/or
guidance is needed by stakeholders?
    3.2 In your opinion, what are the near-term indoor air quality
related actions that could help schools respond to a COVID-19 disease
surge?
     What specific supports for improving indoor air quality
could be helpful to the school community?
     In addition to Federal tools, guidance, and funding
resources, what other stakeholders are in a position or have assets
that can help schools address IAQ issues?
     What approaches could a school system consider if they are
willing and able to make IAQ changes but are having difficulty securing
labor or supplies to complete their improvements?
    3.3 In your opinion, over the longer term, how can ventilation,
filtration and air cleaning improvements be prioritized and made
standard practices in building design, construction, commissioning,
renovation, and operations and maintenance efforts (e.g.,

building code adoption, training or other efforts to sustain proper
practices such as operation and maintenance of HVAC systems as
designed, weatherization and other retrofit programs)?
     What policies and or practices need to be put in place to
support such efforts?
     Who can take these actions?
     What tools and technical assistance are needed?
     What are the obstacles to implementing appropriate
upgrades to HVAC systems, in schools in particular?
    3.4 In your opinion, what is an effective approach for a building
recognition program (e.g., pledge campaign, performance tiers,
certification program)?
     What do you think are the primary incentives for decision
makers to invest in ventilation, filtration, and air cleaning
improvements and upgrades?
     What are the obstacles that decision makers may be facing?
     What approaches can help ensure buildings and
organizations of all types can participate in a building recognition
program?
     How can equity be integrated into a building recognition
program so that it recognizes various types of significant improvements
while taking into consideration diversity in the quality of existing
buildings and differences in available financial resources? Could
tiered recognition help address this equity consideration and what
tiering approach should be considered?
    3.5 In your opinion, what are key characteristics of a building
recognition program that would be needed to document credible efforts
toward improved ventilation, filtration, and air cleaning in buildings?
     What would be the principal IAQ parameters, measures, or
other characteristics that could be included?
     How could these parameters, measures or other
characteristics be assured or verified?
     What are ways to effectively recognize organizations that
have taken action across a large portion of their building stock or
occupied spaces within their buildings and or expended significant
resources in their efforts?
     How frequently would a building need to be re-certified?
     What else could be noted about a building recognition,
labeling or certification program?
    3.6 In your opinion, what quantifiable metrics or targets could be
helpful in evaluating or assessing ventilation, filtration, and air
cleaning parameters in a building?
     What types of tools or technologies could support real
time assessment of ventilation, filtration and or air cleaning
parameters in a building?
     What qualitative or quantitative features could be helpful
in assessing or describing ventilation, filtration, and air cleaning
parameters in a building?
    3.7 In your opinion, what changes would you recommend to the Clean
Air in Buildings Challenge best practices document to improve public
engagement and participation by a broad set of stakeholders?
    3.8 In your opinion, how might lessons from the COVID pandemic be
useful for long-term efforts to improve ventilation, filtration, air
cleaning and other indoor air quality parameters in the nation's
building stock?
    3.9 What else would you like to note about opportunities and issues
that could improve indoor air quality in the nation's building stock?
    Authority: Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA); Title III Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Clean Air
Act (CAA).

Jonathan D. Edwards,
Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
[FR Doc. 2022-21590 Filed 10-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 185)]
[Notices]
[Page 54794-54795]
[DOCID:fr23se08-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

September 17, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP08-481-001.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC submits Substitute Fourth
Revised Sheet 240 to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, to
be effective 09/01/2008.
    Filed Date: 09/11/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080912-0081.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 22, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-621-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company submits
Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 17, et al., to FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth
Revised Volume No. 1, to be effective 10/01/2008.
    Filed Date: 09/15/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080917-0122.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-622-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company submits
First Revised Sheet No. 229, et al., to FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised
Volume No. 1, to be effective 11/01/2008.
    Filed Date: 09/15/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080917-0123.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time Monday, September 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: CP06-76-003.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Algonquin Gas Transmission LLC submits an application
for amendment to certificate of public convenience and necessity and
request for expedited treatment.
    Filed Date: 09/10/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080916-0030.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 22, 2008.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene

again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have
previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a
new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the
comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the
Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-22140 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 28, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56294-56297]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25605]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82137; File No. SR-MIAX-2017-46]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX Order Feed (``MOR'')

November 21, 2017.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 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 November 17, 2017, Miami International
Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX Options'' or the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed
rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend a proprietary options
market data product.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/ at MIAX Options'
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 and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the MIAX Order Feed (``MOR'') to
reflect the addition of a new feature. The Exchange is proposing to
indicate the Priority Customer \3\ volume represented by derived
orders, in connection with the Exchange's upcoming launch of derived
orders.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that
(i) is not a broker or dealer in securities and (ii) does not place
more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial accounts(s). The term
``Priority Customer Order'' means an order for the account of a
Priority Customer. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 79072 (October 7, 2016), 81 FR
71131 (October 14, 2016) (SR-MIAX-2016-26); see also Exchange Act
Release No. 81967 (October 27, 2017), 82 FR 50916 (November 2, 2017)
(SR-MIAX-2017-44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    The Exchange established MOR in 2015.\5\ MOR is a real-time full
order book data feed that provides information regarding all orders on
the Exchange's order book, including both simple and complex orders, to
enable users to keep track of the entire order book for all symbols
listed on MIAX Options. MOR provides the following information
regarding each order: Product ID, order price, order original volume,
remaining volume open, and origin code (which specifies the order
origin type as Priority Customer, Firm, Broker/Dealer, Market Maker,\6\
non-MIAX Market Maker, or non-Priority Customer). The Exchange amended
the MOR in 2016 in connection with the launch of complex orders on the
Exchange, in order to include such complex orders in MOR.\7\ The
Exchange updates MOR upon receipt of each order or change in status to
any order resting on the book (e.g., routing, trading, or cancelling of
the order). The Exchange makes MOR available, for the applicable fee,
to any user that requests this data feed product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74759 (April 17,
2015), 80 FR 22749 (April 23, 2015) (SR-MIAX-2015-28) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Establish the MIAX Order Feed (``MOR'') Data Product).
    \6\ The term ``Market Makers'' refers to Lead Market Makers
(``LMMs''), Primary Lead Market Makers (``PLMMs''), and Registered
Market Makers (``RMMs'') collectively. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79146 (October 24,
2016), 81 FR 75171 (October 28, 2016) (SR-MIAX-2016-36).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal
    With the introduction of derived orders on the Exchange, the
Exchange now proposes to add a new feature to MOR to indicate the
Priority Customer volume represented by a derived order. A derived
order \8\ is an Exchange-generated limit order on the simple order book
that represents either the bid or offer of one component of a complex
order resting on the Strategy Book.\9\ Derived orders are not routed
outside of the Exchange regardless of the price(s) disseminated by away
markets. The Exchange determines, on a class-by-class basis, whether to
make available derived orders, and communicates such determination to
Members \10\ via a Regulatory Circular. Derived orders are firm orders
(i.e., if executed, firm for the disseminated price and size) that are
included in the MBBO.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Exchange Rule 518(a)(9).
    \9\ The ``Strategy Book'' is the Exchange's electronic book of
complex orders and complex quotes. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(17).
    \10\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
Exchange Rule 100.
    \11\ The term ``MBBO'' means the best bid or offer on the Simple
Order Book (as defined below) on the Exchange. See Exchange Rule
518(a)(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, for both simple orders and complex orders, MOR
identifies the origin type of the order, as well as the order's
original volume and the remaining volume open. As discussed above, one
example of an existing origin type is Priority Customer. Also as
discussed above, MOR currently displays the volume associated with any
such Priority Customer order. However, with the introduction of derived
orders on the Exchange and the inclusion of derived orders within MOR,
the origin type of a derived order, for purposes of display on MOR,
will simply be `derived.' However, a derived order can be created for
and represent an order for any permissible origin type on the Exchange.
And for purposes of display on MOR, a single derived order can
represent multiple orders for multiple permissible origin codes on the
Exchange (provided all such derived orders are for the same product ID
and at the same price). For example, for purposes of display on MOR, a
single derived order could consist of two orders (one with an origin
code of Priority Customer and one with an origin code of Firm). The
Exchange believes that recipients of MOR would be interested in seeing
the Priority Customer volume associated with a derived order (as they
are accustomed to seeing the volume associated with non-derived
Priority Customer orders in MOR), and thus proposes to include, as a
separate feature associated with derived orders displayed in MOR, the
Priority Customer volume associated with such derived orders.
    The proposed new feature to MOR--including Priority Customer volume
represented by derived orders in MOR--while a new feature, is not
completely novel and does not raise any new regulatory issues, as the
Exchange currently makes available Priority Customer origin code
information and Priority Customer volume information with respect to
all (i) simple, non-derived Priority Customer orders on the Exchange,
and (ii) complex Priority Customer orders from which the derived orders
are created. Thus, the Exchange believes that this new feature is not
completely novel and is non-controversial. The Exchange believes that
this new feature will make information that could otherwise already be
discerned by recipients of MOR through looking at complex order
information more easily accessible for users. Without this new feature,
for a derived order displayed on MOR, users would only be able to
identify the simple order as a derived order, and would not know how
much volume of the simple order was represented by Priority Customer
volume. To obtain that information, a user could identify the complex
order in MOR from which

that derived order was created, and discern the origin type and volume
of that complex order, thus determining the origin type (e.g., Priority
Customer) and volume associated with the simple order. The new proposed
feature simply makes information that could otherwise already be
discerned by recipients of MOR through looking at complex order
information more easily accessible for users.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed new feature of MOR will
enhance subscribers' ability to make decisions on trading strategy, and
provide data that should help bring about such decisions in a timely
manner, which will benefit investors and the public interest. The
Exchange also believes that the enhanced feature of MOR will assist
market participants in making routing decisions concerning their
options orders.
    The Exchange makes MOR equally available to any market participant
that wishes to subscribe to it. MOR is designed to enhance a user's
ability to analyze market conditions, and to create and test trading
models and analytical strategies. The Exchange believes that MOR is a
valuable tool that subscribers can use to gain comprehensive insight
into the limit order book in a particular option. The inclusion of
total Priority Customer volume included in a given derived order will
allow subscribers to obtain more insight into order flow and permit
them to make targeted trading decisions.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \12\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \13\ in particular, in that
they are 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, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MOR is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade
by providing all subscribers with limit order book data that should
enable them to make informed decisions on trading strategy on the
Exchange by using MOR to assess current market conditions that directly
affect such decisions The proposed new feature to MOR facilitates
transactions in securities, removes impediments to and perfects the
mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system by
enhancing subscribers' ability to make decisions on trading strategy,
and by providing data that should help bring about such decisions in a
timely manner, all for the benefit of investors and the public
interest. The proposed new feature to MOR removes impediments to, and
is designed to further perfect, the mechanisms of a free and open
market and a national market system by making the MIAX Options market
more transparent and accessible to market participants making routing
decisions concerning their options orders. Additionally, the proposed
new feature to MOR is also designed to protect investors and the public
interest by making information that could otherwise already be
discerned by recipients of MOR through looking at complex order
information more easily accessible for users. Furthermore, the Exchange
believes that the proposed new feature to MOR is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest, by enhancing a user's ability to analyze market
conditions, and to create and test trading models and analytical
strategies. It also enables MIAX Options to compete with such other
exchanges, thereby offering market participants with additional data in
order to seek the market center with the best price and the most
liquidity on which to execute their transactions, all to the benefit of
investors and the public interest, and to the marketplace as a whole.

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

    MIAX Options does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. On the contrary, the Exchange
believes that the proposed new feature to MOR will enhance competition
in the U.S. options markets by providing subscribers on MIAX Options a
market data product with an enhanced feature thereby making it more
competitive with comparable products offered by other exchanges.
    Additionally, respecting intra-market competition, the enhanced
feature in MOR will be available to all subscribers at no additional
cost, thus providing all subscribers to MOR with an even playing field
with respect to information and access to trading on MIAX Options.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2017-46 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2017-46. This file

number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2017-46 and should be
submitted on or before December 19, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-25605 Filed 11-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30189-30190]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12657]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 101 and 105

[Docket No. USCG-2013-1087]

Seafarers' Access to Maritime Facilities

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice to reopen public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is reopening the public comment period for the
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Seafarers' Access to
Maritime Facilities,'' which published in the Federal Register on
December 29, 2014. The NPRM proposed to require each owner or operator
of a facility regulated by the Coast Guard to implement a system that
provides seafarers and other individuals with access between vessels
moored at the facility and the facility gate, in a timely manner and at
no cost to the seafarer or other individual. As originally published,
the comment period for the NPRM closed on February 27, 2015. Several
members of the public have requested additional time to comment on the
NPRM, citing various timing constraints. In order to provide interested
members of the public an additional opportunity to submit comments on
the NPRM, the Coast Guard is reopening the public comment period for 60
days. We are particularly interested in comments on our estimate that
there is a 10.3 percent non-compliance rate of facilities with respect
to providing seafarers' access. In addition to comments on this topic,
we will consider all public comments on the NPRM received during the
reopened comment period. We request that you not re-submit comments
already in the docket.

DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before July 1, 2015
or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-1087 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov;
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001; or
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice, call or email LCDR Kevin McDonald, Cargo and Facilities
Division (CG-FAC-2), Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing material
in the docket, call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
    Submitting comments: If you submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2013-1087) and provide a reason
for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
use ``USCG-2013-1087'' as your search term. Locate the docket for this
rulemaking and follow the instructions on that Web site for submitting
public comments. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period.
    Viewing comments and documents: To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in the NPRM as being available in the docket, go to
http://www.regulations.gov and use ``USCG-2013-1087'' as your search
term. Locate the docket for this rulemaking and follow the instructions
on that Web site for viewing comments and documents in the docket. If
you do not have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online
by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the
ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement
with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management
Facility.
    Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a
Privacy Act system of records notice regarding our public dockets in
the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Regulatory History and Information

    On December 29, 2014, the Coast Guard published an NPRM entitled
``Seafarers' Access to Maritime Facilities'' (79 FR 77981). The NPRM
proposed to require each owner or operator of a facility regulated by
the Coast Guard to implement a system that provides seafarers and other
individuals with access between vessels moored at the facility and the
facility gate in a timely manner and at no cost to the seafarer or
other individual. As originally published, the comment

period for the NPRM expired on February 27, 2015. To date, the Coast
Guard has received approximately 150 public submissions, which are
available for viewing in the online docket for this rulemaking.
    Additionally, on January 23, 2015, the Coast Guard held a public
meeting in Washington, DC, to solicit comments on the proposals in the
NPRM. Approximately 11 parties provided oral comments at the meeting,
and more than 500 parties viewed the meeting online via live video
feed. A video recording of the public meeting is available for viewing
at https://www.youtube.com/embed/1hAjrvUNylY?rel=0.

Background and Purpose

    Since publication of the NPRM, the Coast Guard has received several
written and oral comments requesting an extension of the public comment
period. Commenters cited different reasons for the request to extend
the public comment period, including the timing of the publication, a
delay in submitted comments posting to the electronic docket, and the
complexity of the NPRM's proposals and economic analysis. The
commenters requesting an extended public comment period either
requested an additional 60 days, or they did not specify a number of
additional days. In response to these requests, the Coast Guard is
reopening the public comment period for an additional 60 days. The
Coast Guard will consider all of the public comments posted to the
docket, including those already submitted. We request that you not re-
submit comments that are already in the docket. You may, however,
comment on other documents and comments that are in the docket. If you
choose to do so, please ensure you identify which document or comment
you are responding to.

Request for Comments

    We encourage your participation by submitting your comments to the
Docket Management Facility as specified in the ADDRESSES section above.
Please refer to the NPRM for a detailed discussion of the proposals, as
well as the list of topics included in the request for comments on
specific issues (79 FR 77981, 77987).
    We also encourage you to view the NPRM's accompanying Preliminary
Regulatory Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(Regulatory Analysis), available for viewing in the docket. To view the
Regulatory Analysis, go to http://www.regulations.gov and use ``USCG-
2013-1087'' as your search term. Once you locate and open the docket
folder for this rulemaking, click on ``View all documents and comments
in this Docket.'' From there check the box, ``Supporting & Related
Material,'' on the left side of the screen. This will display a link to
the Regulatory Analysis. We are particularly interested in comments
from the public on our estimate that there is a 10.3 percent non-
compliance rate of facilities with respect to providing seafarers'
access.\1\ Some commenters have suggested that the 10.3 percent non-
compliance rate estimate is too low. We are interested in learning if
there is a better estimate or if there are other sources of information
for obtaining the non-compliance rate. In addition to comments on this
topic, we will consider all public comments on the NPRM received during
the reopened comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See NPRM (79 FR 77987), Item 5 from our list of specific
requests for comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority

    We issue this notice under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 553, 46 U.S.C.
70103 (Note), 46 U.S.C. 70124, 33 U.S.C. 1226, 33 U.S.C. 1231, and
Department of Homeland Security Delegation 0710.1(II)(70, 71, and 97).

    Dated: May 20, 2015.
J.C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Inspections & Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-12657 Filed 5-26-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 199 (Monday, October 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 51934]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22353]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-59-000]

Blue Cloud Wind Energy, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Blue Cloud Wind Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 29, 2018.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
[email protected] or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 9, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-22353 Filed 10-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P