[Federal Register: January 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 11)]
[Notices]
[Page 2961-2962]
[DOCID:fr16ja08-108]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Release No. 34-57114; File No. SR-BSE-2008-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to BOX's Licensing Fees

January 8, 2008.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 2, 2008, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange has designated this proposal as one establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge applicable only to a member,
pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon filing with
the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The BSE is proposing to amend the Fee Schedule of the Boston
Options Exchange (``BOX''). The proposed amendment will increase the
fees for transactions in options on certain indices effected by a
broker-dealer through its proprietary accounts.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange,
on the Exchange's Web site at http://www.bostonstock.com/Regulatory/effective.aspx
, 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
    On November 13, 2006, the Exchange entered into a licensing
agreement (``Agreement'') with The NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc.
(``Nasdaq'') to use various indices and trademarks in connection with
the listing and trading of index options on the full value Nasdaq-
100[reg] Index (``NDX'')\5\ and the reduced value Nasdaq-100[reg] Index
(Mini-NDX[reg] Index (MNX)).\6\ The Agreement established a license
fee, payable by BOX to Nasdaq, of $0.15 per NDX and MNX contracts
traded on BOX. On November 14, 2006, the Exchange established a $0.15
surcharge fee for transactions in options on NDX and MNX.\7\ As with
certain other licensed options, the Exchange adopted a surcharge fee
for trading in these options to defray the licensing costs. The
Exchange believes that charging the BOX Options Participants that trade
these instruments is the most equitable means of recovering the costs
of the license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Nasdaq[reg], Nasdaq-100[reg] and Nasdaq-100 Index[reg] are
registered trademarks of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (which with
its affiliates are the ``Corporations'') and are licensed for use by
the Boston Options Exchange Group in connection with the trading of
options products based on the Nasdaq-100 Index[reg]. The product(s)
have not been passed on by the Corporations as to their legality or
suitability. The product(s) are not issued, endorsed, sold, or
promoted by the Corporations. The Corporations make no warranties
and bear no liability with respect to the product(s). The
Corporations do not guarantee the accuracy and/or uninterrupted
calculation of the Nasdaq-100 Index[reg] or any data included
therein. The Corporations make no warranty, express or implied, as
to results to be obtained by licensee, owners of the product(s), or
any other person or entity from the use of the Nasdaq-100 Index[reg]
or any data included therein. The Corporations make no express or
implied warranties, and expressly disclaim all warranties of
merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use with
respect to the Nasdaq-100 Index or any data included therein.
Without limiting any of the foregoing, in no event shall the
Corporations have any liability for any lost profits or special,
incidental, punitive, indirect or consequential damages, even if
notified of the possibility of such damages.
    \6\ See id.
    \7\ On December 20, 2006, BSE filed Amendment No. 1 to that
proposed rule change. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55000
(December 21, 2006), 71 FR 78479 (December 29, 2006) (SR-BSE-2006-
47).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agreement between the Exchange and Nasdaq was set to expire on
December 31, 2007. The Exchange has recently entered into an extension
of the Agreement for the listing and trading of NDX and MNX options.
The extension imposes a one cent ($0.01) increase in the per contract
license fees charged to BOX by Nasdaq. The proposed rule change would
increase the current surcharge fee for transactions in NDX and MNX
options by one cent (($0.01), to 16 cents ($0.16). This increase will
correspondingly offset the costs incurred by BOX.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\ in particular, which requires that an exchange
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change is establishing or changing a
due, fee, or other charge applicable only to a member, it has become
effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act\10\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(2) thereunder.\11\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of
such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such
rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-BSE-2008-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2008-01. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2008-01 and should be
submitted on or before February 6, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-628 Filed 1-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 140)]
[Notices]
[Page 36542]
[DOCID:fr23jy09-92]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

RDM Sports Group, Inc., et al.; Order of Suspension of Trading

July 20, 2009.

Order of Suspension of Trading

    In the Matter of RDM Sports Group, Inc., Real Del Monte Mining
Corp., Recoton Corp., Red Hot Concepts, Inc., RedHand International,
Inc. (n/k/a African Diamond Co., Inc. or Coal Corp.), Redlaw
Industries, Inc., Republic Resources, Inc., Reward Enterprises, Inc.,
Rhino Enterprises Group, Inc. (n/k/a Physicians Adult Daycare, Inc.),
Ridgeview, Inc., Riverside Group, Inc., and Rocky Mount Undergarment
Co., Inc.; Respondents.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
RDM Sports Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended June 29, 1997.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Real Del Monte Mining Corp. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended December 31, 1997.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Recoton Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 2002.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Red Hot Concepts, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended December 30, 2001.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
RedHand International, Inc. (n/k/a African Diamond Co., Inc. or Coal
Corp.) because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period
ended September 30, 2005.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Redlaw Industries, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended December 31, 1999.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Republic Resources, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 2003.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Reward Enterprises, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended March 31, 2005.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Rhino Enterprises Group, Inc. (n/k/a Physicians Adult Daycare, Inc.)
because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended
September 30, 2001.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Ridgeview, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 1999.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Riverside Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 2002.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Rocky Mount Undergarment Co., Inc. because it has not filed any
periodic reports since the period ended October 1, 1995.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the above-listed
companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on July 20,
2009, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on July 31, 2009.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17517 Filed 7-21-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 16, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31154-31159]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10334]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1474; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00888-T;
Amendment 39-22409; AD 2023-07-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain MHI RJ Aviation ULC Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100
& 440), CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702), CL-600-2C11
(Regional Jet Series 550), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), CL-
600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900), and CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet
Series 1000) airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports from the
supplier that sensing elements of the bleed air leak detection system
were manufactured with insufficient salt fill, which can result in an
inability to detect hot bleed air leaks. This AD requires testing of
all affected overheat detection sensing elements of the bleed air leak
detection system, and replacement if necessary. This AD also prohibits
the installation of affected parts. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 20, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of June 20,
2023.

ADDRESSES:
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-1474; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For service information identified in this final rule,
contact MHI RJ

Aviation Group, Customer Response Center, 3655 Ave. des Grandes-
Tourelles, Suite 110, Boisbriand, Qu[eacute]bec J7H 0E2 Canada; North
America toll-free telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or direct-dial telephone 450-
990-7272; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email mhirj.com">[email protected]mhirj.com; website mhirj.com.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-1474.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Niczky, Aerospace Engineer,
Avionics & Electrical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain MHI RJ Aviation
ULC Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440), CL-600-2C10
(Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702), CL-600-2C11 (Regional Jet Series
550), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet
Series 900), and CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2022 (87 FR
69210). The NPRM was prompted by AD CF-2022-16R1, dated July 5, 2022,
issued by Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada
(referred to after this as the MCAI). The MCAI states that MHI RJ
Aviation ULC received reports from the supplier of the overheat
detection sensing elements of a manufacturing quality escape. Some of
the sensing elements of the bleed air leak detection system were
manufactured with insufficient salt fill, which can result in an
inability to detect hot bleed air leaks and cause damage to surrounding
structures and systems that can prevent continued safe flight and
landing.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require testing of all affected
overheat detection sensing elements of the bleed air leak detection
system, and replacement if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to
prohibit the installation of affected parts. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-1474.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received a comment from the Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA), who supported the NPRM without change.
    The FAA received additional comments from two commenters, including
Endeavor Air and MHI RJ Aviation ULC. The following presents the
comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Not Require Recording of Serial Number and Date Code

    Endeavor Air requested that paragraph (h) of the proposed AD be
revised to not require recording of the sensing element serial number
and date code if not visible, unless the sensing element has failed.
Endeavor Air noted that the service information specifies to fill out a
data sheet for each sensing element and include it with each failed
sensing element, and the data sheet specifies to include the serial
number and date code of the sensing element. Endeavor Air noted that
obtaining the serial number and date code sometimes requires
disassembly of adjacent structure or components, which takes up to two
labor hours per sensing element. The commenter asserted that the cost
of two additional labor hours for the sole purpose of recording
information on a serviceable sensing element constitutes an undue
burden on the operator.
    The FAA agrees to remove the requirement to record the sensing
element serial number and date code if they are not visible without
additional disassembly, provided that the part has not failed. However,
the Sensing Element Name must be recorded on the Test Data Sheet, so it
is clear exactly the sensing element that was tested. Paragraph (h) of
this AD has been revised to provide an exception to this requirement.

Request To Allow Alternative Installation of Placard

    Endeavor Air requested that paragraphs (j)(1)(iii) and (j)(2)(iii)
of the proposed AD be revised to allow the placard on the BLEED AIR
control panel to be installed as specified in the FAA-approved operator
Minimum Equipment List (MEL) procedure, rather than just in accordance
with MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May 25,
2022. Endeavor Air stated that its current MEL procedure for an
inoperative LOOP already requires installation of a placard on the
BLEED Air control panel, though the wording is not identical to that in
MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May 25, 2022.
Endeavor Air stated that this change would help prevent worker
confusion and possible unnecessary work.
    The FAA has reviewed Endeavor Air's MEL procedure and agrees that
it provides the same level of safety as that specified in MHI RJ
Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May 25, 2022,
including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022, Appendix B,
dated October 21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022. The FAA
has revised paragraphs (j)(1)(iii) and (j)(2)(iii) of this AD to allow
installing the placard in accordance with the referenced service
information or the operator's FAA-approved MEL procedure.

Request To Revise Labor Costs

    MHI RJ requested to revise the labor costs in the cost of
compliance section from $85 to $79 per hour. MHI RJ stated that
settlement agreements signed with Liebherr and Kidde are for no more
than $79 per hour, and that operators will be reimbursed for parts and
labor costs by Kidde. Therefore, MH IRJ requested the labor cost be
based on $79 per hour.
    The FAA acknowledges that labor costs may be higher or lower than
the standard rate of $85 per hour used when estimating the labor costs
for complying with AD requirements. However, as stated in this AD,
these costs are merely FAA estimates. Further, the FAA does not control
any settlement agreement or warranty coverage and cannot guarantee that
any given labor rate will be available to operators. This AD has not
been changed with respect to this request.

Conclusion

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the
comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting
this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial
changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted
as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic
burden on any operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision D,
dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14,
2022; and MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May
25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022,
Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14,
2022. This service information specifies procedures for testing
affected bleed air leak detection system sensing elements (i.e., those
marked with a date code before ``A2105'' (which corresponds to January
31, 2021), with a part number defined in this service information) to
determine if they are serviceable, and replacing failed sensing
elements with serviceable ones. This service information also allows
deferring the replacement of an affected part under certain conditions
and allows operating the airplane with certain deactivated defective
sensing elements. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different airplane models. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1,126 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                 Model                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model CL[dash]600[dash]2B19 (526        29 work hours x $85 per               $0          $2,465      $1,296,590
 airplanes).                             hour = $2,465.
Model CL[dash]600[dash]2C10 and         82 work hours x $85 per                0           6,970       4,182,000
 CL[dash]600[dash]2C11,                  hour = $6,970.
 CL[dash]600[dash]2D15 and
 CL[dash]600[dash]2D24, and
 CL[dash]600[dash]2E25 (600 airplanes).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                                     Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Model/serial No.s (S/Ns)                Labor cost                Parts cost           Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CL[dash]600[dash]2B19, S/Ns 7002-    Up to 26 work-hours x $85    Up to $113,200........  Up to $115,410.
 7323.                                per hour = $2,210.
CL-600-2B19, S/Ns 7324-8113........  Up to 24 work-hours x $85    Up to $100,598........  Up to $102,638.
                                      per hour = $2,040.
CL[dash]600[dash]2C10 and            Up to 54 work-hours x $85    Up to $70,758.........  Up to $75,348.
 CL[dash]600[dash]2C11, S/Ns 10002-   per hour = $4,590.
 10347.
CL[dash]600[dash]2D15 and            Up to 58 work-hours x $85    Up to $74,598.........  Up to $79,528.
 CL[dash]600[dash]2D24, S/Ns 15001-   per hour = $4,930.
 15494.
CL[dash]600[dash]2E25, S/Ns 19001-   Up to 62 work-hours times;   Up to $81,478.........  Up to $86,748.
 19064.                               $85 per hour = $5,270.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2023-07-07 MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate Previously Held by
Bombardier, Inc.): Amendment 39-22409; Docket No. FAA-2022-1474;
Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00888-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective June 20, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to MHI RJ Aviation ULC airplanes, certificated
in any category, and identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of
this AD.
    (1) Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes,
serial numbers 7002 through 7990 inclusive, and 8000 through 8113
inclusive.
    (2) Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702) and
CL-600-2C11 (Regional Jet Series 550) airplanes, serial numbers
10002 through 10347 inclusive.
    (3) Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) and Model CL-
600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001
through 15494 inclusive.
    (4) Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000), serial numbers
19001 through 19064 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 36, Pneumatic.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports that sensing elements of the
bleed air leak detection system were manufactured with insufficient
salt fill. The FAA is issuing this AD to address insufficient salt
fill, which can result in an inability to detect hot bleed air
leaks, which can cause damage to surrounding structures and systems
that can prevent continued safe flight and landing.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definitions

    For the purposes of this AD, the definitions specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of this AD apply.
    (1) Group 1 airplanes: The airplanes identified in paragraph
(c)(1) of this AD.
    (2) Group 2 airplanes: The airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(2) through (4) of this AD.
    (3) Affected part: A sensing element marked with a date code
before A2105 and having a part number as defined in Section 1,
Paragraph G(1), of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision D,
dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March
14, 2022, for Group 1 airplanes; and in Appendix B, dated October
21, 2021, of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated
May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14,
2022, and Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022, for Group 2 airplanes;
unless the sensing element has been tested and found to be
serviceable in accordance with paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (ii) or
paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (i) Has been tested as specified in Section 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Kidde Aerospace and Defense Service
Bulletin CFD-26-5 and found to be serviceable; and
    (ii) Has been marked on one face of its connector hex nut and is
packaged as specified in Section 3.C. of the Accomplishment
Instructions--Identification Procedure of the Kidde Aerospace and
Defense Service Bulletin CFD-26-5.
    (4) Serviceable part: A sensing element that is not an affected
part.

(h) Testing

    Perform a test of the bleed air leak detection system sensing
elements to determine if they are serviceable, in accordance with
Section 2, Part A through Part F, of the Accomplishment Instructions
of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision D, dated May 25,
2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022, for
Group 1 airplanes; and Section 2, Part A through Part M, of the
Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025,
Revision C, dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B,
dated March 14, 2022, Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, and
Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022, for Group 2 airplanes; within the
applicable compliance time indicated in figure 1 to paragraph (h) of
this AD. This AD does not require filling out the serial number or
date code of the sensing element in Appendix A, Revision B, dated
March 14, 2022; of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision D,
dated May 25, 2022; or MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025,
Revision C, dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix B, dated October
21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022; as applicable, if
the serial number or date code is not visible without additional
disassembly and the part has not failed. However, the Sensing
Element Name must be recorded on the Test Data Sheet, so it is clear
exactly the sensing element that was tested.

Figure 1 to Paragraph (h)--Compliance Time

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16MY23.001

(i) Replacement

    (1) For Group 1 airplanes: If any sensing element is found not
serviceable during the tests required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
before further flight, replace the sensing element with a
serviceable part in accordance with Section 2, Part A through Part
F, as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ
Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision D, dated May 25, 2022,
including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022.
    (2) For Group 2 airplanes: If any sensing element is found not
serviceable during the tests required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
before further flight, unless deferred in accordance with paragraph
(j) of this AD, replace the sensing element with a serviceable part
in accordance with Section 2, Part A through Part M, as applicable,
of the Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-
36-025, Revision C, dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A,
Revision B, dated March 14, 2022, Appendix B, dated October 21,
2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022.

(j) Deferred Replacement for Group 2 Airplanes

    The replacement of an affected part with a serviceable part for
Group 2 airplanes, as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, may
be deferred up to a maximum of 10 days under the conditions
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) or (2) of this AD.
    (1) A single bleed air leak detection loop (loop A or loop B)
sensing element for a given Part (Part A through Part M of the
Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025,
Revision C, dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B,
dated March 14, 2022, Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, and
Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022) is found not serviceable, provided
that the conditions specified in paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (iv)
of this AD have been satisfied.
    (i) The remaining operative bleed air leak detection loop (loop
A or loop B) sensing elements have been tested and found to be
serviceable in accordance with paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (ii) The applicable maintenance procedures of Appendix C, dated
March 14, 2022, of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C,
dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March
14, 2022, and Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, to deactivate the
defective sensing element are accomplished prior to operation of the
airplane with the defective sensing element inoperative.
    (iii) A placard has been installed on the BLEED AIR control
panel in accordance with Section 2, Part A through Part M, as
applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ Service
Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May 25, 2022, including
Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022, Appendix B, dated
October 21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022; or in
accordance with the operator's FAA-approved Minimum Equipment List
(MEL) procedure.
    (iv) All flightcrew have been advised that the airplane is
dispatched with one out of two bleed air leak detection loops
inoperative.
    (2) Both bleed air leak detection loop A and loop B sensing
elements for a given part (Part A through Part M of the
Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025,
Revision C, dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B,
dated March 14, 2022, Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, and
Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022) are found not

serviceable, provided that the conditions specified in paragraphs
(j)(2)(i) through (iv) of this AD have been satisfied.
    (i) The applicable maintenance procedures of Appendix C, dated
March 14, 2022, of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C,
dated May 25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March
14, 2022, and Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, to deactivate the
defective sensing elements are accomplished prior to operation of
the airplane with the defective sensing elements inoperative.
    (ii) The applicable instructions and limitations of the
operator's existing FAA-approved Minimum Equipment List (MEL) item
36-21-06, sub-item 1, 2, or 3, as applicable, in accordance with
Section 2, Part A through Part M, of the Accomplishment Instructions
of MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May 25,
2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022,
Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14,
2022, are accomplished prior to operation of the airplane with the
defective sensing elements inoperative.
    (iii) A placard has been installed on the BLEED AIR control
panel in accordance with Section 2, Part A through Part M, as
applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of MHI RJ Service
Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May 25, 2022, including
Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022, Appendix B, dated
October 21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14, 2022; or in
accordance with the operator's FAA-approved MEL procedure.
    (iv) All flightcrew have been advised that the airplane is
dispatched with both bleed air leak detection loops inoperative.

(k) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an
affected part on any airplane.

(l) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using the service
information specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (2) of this AD. For
performing the actions specified in the service information for the
Group 1 airplanes: If the sensing element was found not serviceable,
replacement is required before further flight; deferred replacement
of an affected part is prohibited. For performing the actions
specified in the service information for the Group 2 airplanes: If
the sensing element was found not serviceable, deferred replacement
of the affected part is acceptable, as specified in paragraph (j) of
this AD.
    (1) For Group 1 airplanes the applicable service information
specified in paragraphs (l)(1)(i) through (iv) of this AD:
    (i) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, including Appendix A,
dated July 5, 2021.
    (ii) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, including Appendix A,
Revision A, dated October 21, 2021.
    (iii) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision B, dated
December 2, 2021, including Appendix A, Revision A, dated October
21, 2021.
    (iv) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision C, dated
March 14, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14,
2022.
    (2) For Group 2 airplanes the applicable service information
specified in paragraphs (l)(2)(i) through (iii) of this AD:
    (i) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, including Appendix A,
dated July 5, 2021.
    (ii) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision A, dated
October 21, 2021, including Appendix A, Revision A, dated October
21, 2021, and Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021.
    (iii) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision B, dated
March 14, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14,
2022, Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated
March 14, 2022.

(m) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the New York ACO
Branch, mail it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, at the address identified in paragraph (n)(2) of this AD or
email to: [email protected]. If mailing information, also
submit information by email. Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or MHI RJ Aviation ULC's Transport
Canada Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO,
the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(n) Additional Information

    (1) Refer to Transport Canada AD CF-2022-16R1, dated July 5,
2022, for related information. This Transport Canada AD may be found
in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-1474.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Thomas Niczky,
Aerospace Engineer, Avionics & Electrical Systems Section, FAA, New
York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 601R-36-021, Revision D, dated May
25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022.
    (ii) MHI RJ Service Bulletin 670BA-36-025, Revision C, dated May
25, 2022, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March 14, 2022,
Appendix B, dated October 21, 2021, and Appendix C, dated March 14,
2022.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact MHI
RJ Aviation Group, Customer Response Center, 3655 Ave. des Grandes-
Tourelles, Suite 110, Boisbriand, Qu[eacute]bec J7H 0E2 Canada;
North America toll-free telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or direct-dial
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email mhirj.com">[email protected]mhirj.com;
website mhirj.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on April 8, 2023.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-10334 Filed 5-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41304-41306]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18398]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No.: FAA-2016-4756]

Reduction of Remote Communications Outlets Used by Flight Service
Stations in the Conterminous United States

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final policy.

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

SUMMARY: This action sets forth the final policy determination for the
FAA's proposed plan to decommission remote communications outlets (RCO)
used by Flight Service Stations in the conterminous United States,
Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. Based on comments, the FAA has decreased the
number of RCOs planned for decommissioning from 666 to 641, which
includes 404 RCOs and 237 VOR outlets.

DATES: Applicable: August 30, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Teri Bristol, ATO Chief Operating
Officer, Office of the Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202)
267-1240.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA maintains a network of over 2,100 remote communications
outlets (RCOs) throughout the conterminous United States, Hawaii and
Puerto Rico. The RCOs are used by a contract service provider to
communicate with pilots in flight. By using these frequencies, pilots
can obtain weather briefings and file flight plans and receive numerous
other services.
    On April 28, 2016, the FAA published a notice of proposed policy
outlining the plan to reduce the number of radio frequencies used by
Flight Service Stations to communicate with aircraft in flight (81 FR
25484). The FAA noted that a network of 1,223 RCOs and 398 VOR
frequencies cover a vast majority of the conterminous United States and
include duplicate, overlapping, and seldom used frequencies. Based on a
study conducted by MITRE, the FAA proposed a policy to decommission 666
RCOs in the conterminous United States, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico.\1\ The
FAA estimated that, by reducing radio coverage, the agency could save
approximately $2.5 million annually in

maintenance costs alone. Additional savings would be realized once
property leases are terminated and voice-switch communications
infrastructure is decreased.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The FAA noted that the following frequencies would not be
considered for decommissioning: frequencies for emergency use only;
frequencies for military use only, frequencies in the State of
Alaska, and Ground Communications Outlets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussions of Comments

    The FAA received 13 comments on the proposed policy. The following
summary of comments reflects the major issues raised and does not
restate each comment received. The FAA considered all comments received
even if not specifically identified and responded to in this notice.
The FAA made revisions to the policy based on comments received.
    1. An individual commented that the same frequency, 122.2, was
listed twice for Princeton, Minnesota (PNM), one indicated that it
would be retained, and one indicated that it would be removed. The FAA
will retain PNM 122.2. The commenter also indicated that we have an RCO
at Minneapolis that is not on either list. The RCO at Minneapolis,
122.3, will be decommissioned.
    2. Two commenters noted that the Duluth, Minnesota (DLH) frequency
124.8 is not a Flight Service Station frequency. The FAA will remove
DLH frequency 124.8 from the decommissioning list as it is not a Flight
Service Station frequency.
    3. Six commenters requested that the FAA not decommission the
Galian, Ohio (GQQ) remote communications outlet. Several of these
commenters suggested that the frequency was important to corporate,
business, and general aviation traffic using the airport. The FAA will
not decommission 126.8 at GQQ.
    4. Another commenter recommended retaining Du Page, Illinois (DPA)
frequency 122.3. The commenter noted that, if both Waukegan, Illinois
(UGN) and DuPage, Illinois RCOs were decommissioned, the closest remote
communications outlet for pilots flying in the area would be 40-50
miles away--MKE to the North, RFD to the West, IKK to the South and VPZ
to the East. The FAA will not decommission DPA frequency 122.3.
    5. A commenter noted that RCO usage is not uniformly distributed
across the RCO coverage area and asked whether an analysis has been
done to determine what percentage of actual FSS transactions would be
affected. The individual commented that, if, for instance, there is a
mountain pass with notoriously bad weather and pilots frequently call
FSS inflight to get the conditions in that area then reduction of
service in this area should not be considered equivalent to reduction
of service in an area where there are few contacts made to FSS due to
benign weather, few flights, etc.
    Response: Usage data is not available for individual RCOs. The FAA
is retaining coverage across the conterminous United States, Hawaii and
Puerto Rico of greater than 98% at 5,000 agl, 97% at 3,000 agl, and 92%
at 1,000 agl. The FAA specifically excluded mountainous areas in the
western US and also avoided areas where no other Air Traffic
frequencies were available.
    6. The same commenter indicated that he believed that the baseline
coverage should not have excluded VORs that are proposed to be
decommissioned. He suggested that not including these VORs in the
baseline artificially reduces the baseline coverage with respect to the
actual current coverage. He noted that the stated goal was to reduce
coverage by less than 10% but, if the baseline is already reduced, the
result may be a reduction of more than 10% compared with today.
    Response: The VORs proposed for decommissioning were considered a
given and not considered for retention in the proposal. Approximately
237 individual VORs with voice capability, scheduled for
decommissioning through the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON)
program, will be reviewed on a case by case basis. If it is determined
that a significant degradation of service capability exists with the
decommissioning of a specific VOR, steps will be taken to replace it
with a separate RCO.
    7. The same commenter also stated that the proposal reduces
redundancy which is good from a fiscal and complexity standpoint but is
bad when considering that equipment failures happen. He asked whether
an analysis had been done of the current and expected reliability of
the RCO MON including an assessment of how quickly it can be repaired
and what the impact will be on pilots?
    Response: Most, if not all, of our RCOs have standby receivers and
transmitters in case of mechanical malfunction or for use during
routine maintenance. In case of a line outage, FTI has a goal of a
four-hour restoration time and, in case of major equipment malfunction,
Technical Operations has a response time for RCO outages of either 24
or 96 hours depending upon backup and other facilities co-located or
nearby. Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs) are issued for RCO outages as they
occur. The FAA has concluded that, given these facts, there is no
discernable safety impact on the pilot.
    8. Finally, this commenter noted that he was concerned that, with
the elimination of Flight Watch, there would be a further reduction of
inflight weather resources available to pilots. He noted that, while
FIS-B is now available, the coverage area is not 100%, many pilots do
not have the necessary equipment to receive FIS-B information, and many
pilots do not have the skills necessary to interpret the FIS-B data and
rely on FSS personnel. FSS also provides services that FIS-B cannot
duplicate such as opening and closing VFR flight plans.
    Response: The current RCO coverage area was designed at a time when
FSS personnel were handling over 10,000 radio calls per day, today they
handle less than 1,000 calls per day. Technological advances, including
FIS-B, are providing pilots with greater access to inflight weather
resources than ever before. This reduction is meant to align the RCO
infrastructure with pilot demand. While it is true that FIS-B cannot
open or close flight plans, other methods are available for this
service including using another nearby RCO, activation and closure
using the telephone, assumed departures, etc.
    9. Another commenter stated that, with the demise of the En Route
Flight Advisory Service (EFAS), he believed it was unwise to eliminate
122.2 MHz and noted that 122.2 and 121.5 are two of the frequencies
that pilots are taught to commit to memory as they were ``go to''
frequencies in a crisis.
    Response: Where there are multiple frequencies in the same
geographic area, the FAA will retain 122.2 to the degree possible (this
was the case for the RCO located at Columbus, NE). Over 95% of the
current 122.2s are being retained. In addition, Flight Service is
moving to retain 103 frequencies which were previously dedicated to
EFAS. A number of these will be retuned to 122.2 vice 122.0 which will
increase the coverage of 122.2's across the country. The FAA conducts
safety seminars and other outreach programs to educate pilots on the
need to ensure they obtain frequency information for their route of
flight prior to departure.

Final Policy

    In accordance with the above, the FAA is adopting the following
policy statement on the decommissioning of Remote Communications
Outlets used by Flight Service Stations in the conterminous United
States, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico.
    The FAA will reduce the number of radio frequencies used by Flight
Service Stations to communicate with aircraft in flight. Remote
communications outlets in 641 locations will be decommissioned
beginning in late fiscal year 2017. Notices to Airmen

(NOTAMs) will be issued as each frequency is decommissioned.
Frequencies in Alaska and those designated for emergency or military
use are not included.
    A link to maps showing the approximate frequency coverage after the
reduction at various altitudes, with percentages of coverage can be
found here: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/systemops/fs/media/Radio_Reduction_Fed_Reg.pdf.
    A link to the frequencies that will be decommissioned can be found
here: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/systemops/fs/media/RCO_Master_List.xlsx.
    The FAA posted frequently asked Questions and Answers regarding the
Reduction of Remote Communications Outlets Used by Flight Service
Stations in the Conterminous United States on http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/systemops/fs/media/RCO_Reduction_FAQ_030217.pdf.
    These Questions and Answers will be periodically updated until FAA
charts and publications are revised to reflect the changes in this
notice.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2017.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017-18398 Filed 8-29-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 144)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 44142-44144]
[DOCID:fr28jy10-12]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[EPA-R10-OAR-2008-0391; FRL-9180-2]

Determination of Attainment for PM-10; Fort Hall PM-10
Nonattainment Area, Idaho

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing its determination that the Fort Hall PM-10
nonattainment area on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation in Idaho has
attained the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for particulate
matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 10 microns
(PM-10) under the

Clean Air Act. EPA's final determination that the Fort Hall PM-10
nonattainment area has attained the 24[dash]hour PM-10 National Ambient
Air Quality Standard is based on EPA's review of complete, quality-
assured air quality data for the three-year period ending December 31,
2009. Currently available preliminary data for 2010 indicate that the
area continues to attain the standard.
    EPA's determination of attainment is not equivalent to a
redesignation to attainment under Clean Air Act section 107(d)(3). The
Fort Hall PM-10 nonattainment area's designation for PM-10 will remain
moderate nonattainment until such time as the area is redesignated to
attainment as provided in Clean Air Act section 107(d)(3).

DATES: This action is effective on August 27, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the information supporting this action are
available for inspection at EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste, and
Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington
98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Deneen, EPA Region 10, Office of
Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,
Washington 98101, or at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we'',
``us'' or ``our'' are used, we mean EPA. Information is organized as
follows:

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for this action?
II. What comments did we receive on the proposed action?
III. What is our final action?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this action?

    On May 13, 2010, EPA proposed to determine that the Fort Hall PM-10
nonattainment area on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation in Idaho has
attained the 24-hour PM-10 National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act. 75 FR 26898. We proposed this
determination of attainment based upon three years of complete,
quality-assured ambient air monitoring data that showed the area
monitored attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS for the 2007-2009 monitoring
period. Preliminary data available for 2010 indicate that the area
continues to attain the standard and show no exceedances of the
standard in 2010. Additional background and our rationale for this
determination can be found in the proposed rule.

II. What comments did we receive on the proposed action?

    We received one comment letter on the proposed action, which
supported our proposed action.

III. What is our final action?

    We are finalizing our determination that the Fort Hall PM-10
nonattainment area on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation in Idaho has
attained the 24-hour PM-10 standard, based on complete, quality-assured
air monitoring data for 2007-2009, and currently available preliminary
data for 2010. This determination of attainment is not a redesignation
to attainment under CAA section 107(d)(3). The designation status in 40
CFR part 81 for the Fort Hall PM-10 nonattainment area will remain
moderate nonattainment until such time as the area is redesignated to
attainment as provided in CAA section 107(d)(3). If in the future EPA
determines, after notice- and- comment rulemaking, that the area is no
longer attaining the PM-10 NAAQS, EPA will publish such determination
in the Federal Register.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action merely makes a determination of attainment based upon
air quality and does not impose additional requirements. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
rule merely makes a required determination based on air quality data
and neither imposes substantial direct compliance costs on tribal
governments, nor preempts tribal law. Therefore, the requirements of
section 5(b) and 5(c) of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
Consistent with EPA policy, EPA nonetheless provided a consultation
opportunity to the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in a letter to the Chairman
of the Fort Hall Business Council, dated January 25, 2010, offering the
Tribes the opportunity to consult on this determination and have
meaningful and timely input into the proposed decision. EPA received no
request from the Tribes for consultation on this determination.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rules in the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 27, 2010. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: July 15, 2010.
Michael A. Bussell,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2010-18564 Filed 7-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P