[Federal Register: November 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 230)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 72316-72320]
[DOCID:fr28no08-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1238; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-181-AD;
Amendment 39-15753; AD 2008-24-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-
700-1A11 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    During scheduled maintenance inspection, a bolt which connects
the PCU (power control unit) to the elevator surface was found
fractured in the assembly. Further inspection of the assembly
revealed that the bearing on the PCU rod end had seized, which
resulted in damage to the attachment fitting bushing and fracture of
the bolt. Inspection of other in-service airplanes revealed two more
seized PCU attachment joints. However, except seizure, no fractured
bolt was found on these airplanes. Failure of the bolts in both PCUs
on one side could result in disconnection of the elevator control
surface which would lead to flutter and loss of the aircraft.
* * * * *
This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 15, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of December 15,
2008.
    We must receive comments on this AD by December 29, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the airworthiness
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Emergency Airworthiness
Directive CF-2008-31, dated October 9, 2008 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    During scheduled maintenance inspection, a bolt which connects
the PCU (power control unit) to the elevator surface was found
fractured in the assembly. Further inspection of the assembly
revealed that the bearing on the PCU rod end had seized, which
resulted in damage to the attachment fitting bushing and fracture of
the bolt. Inspection of other in-service airplanes revealed two more
seized PCU attachment joints. However, except seizure, no fractured
bolt was found on these airplanes. Failure of the bolts in both PCUs
on one side could result in disconnection of the elevator control
surface which would lead to flutter and loss of the aircraft.
    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is issued to mandate the
inspection and lubrication of all part number (P/N) GT411-3800-5 and
GT411-3800-7 PCU attachment joints.

The required actions include inspections for damage and seizure
(including signs of seizure) of the PCU attachment joints, an
inspection for damage (including wear damage, fretting, corrosion,
galling, scoring, fretting wear, and parts that do not meet inspection
requirements) of the PCU attachment joint components, and applicable
corrective actions. You may obtain further information by examining the
MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued the service information in the following
table. The actions described in the service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

                            Service Bulletins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Service Bulletin         Revision level             Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombardier Alert Service       01..............  October 3, 2008.
 Bulletin A700-1A11-27-024.
Bombardier Alert Service       01..............  October 3, 2008.
 Bulletin A700-27-066.
Bombardier Service Bulletin    Original........  October 9, 2008.
 700-1A11-27-025.
Bombardier Service Bulletin    Original........  October 9, 2008.
 700-27-067.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

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

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
failure of the bolts in both PCUs on one side of the airplane could
cause disconnection of the elevator control surface which could result
in flutter and consequent loss of the airplane. Therefore, we
determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before
issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-1238; Directorate
Identifier 2008-NM-181-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more

detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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:

2008-24-12 Bombardier: Amendment 39-15753. Docket No. FAA-2008-1238;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-181-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective December
15, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-
1A11 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers (S/Ns)
9002 through 9222 inclusive; equipped with elevator power control
units (PCUs) having part number (P/N) GT411-3800-5 or GT411-3800-7.

Subject

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

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    During scheduled maintenance inspection, a bolt which connects
the PCU (power control unit) to the elevator surface was found
fractured in the assembly. Further inspection of the assembly
revealed that the bearing on the PCU rod end had seized, which
resulted in damage to the attachment fitting bushing and fracture of
the bolt. Inspection of other in-service airplanes revealed two more
seized PCU attachment joints. However, except seizure, no fractured
bolt was found on these airplanes. Failure of the bolts in both PCUs
on one side could result in disconnection of the elevator control
surface which would lead to flutter and loss of the aircraft.
    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is issued to mandate the
inspection and lubrication of all part number (P/N) GT411-3800-5 and
GT411-3800-7 PCU attachment joints.

The required actions include inspections for damage and seizure
(including signs of seizure) of the PCU attachment joints, an
inspection for damage (including wear damage, fretting, corrosion,
galling, scoring, fretting wear, and parts that do not meet
inspection requirements) of the PCU attachment joint components, and
applicable corrective actions.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done: For airplanes on which elevator PCUs
with P/N GT411-3800-5 or P/N GT411-3800-7, S/N 0615 and lower, are
installed, excluding P/N GT411-3800-7 PCUs having a serial number
listed in Table 1 of this AD, and excluding P/N GT411-3800-7 PCUs on
which less than 1,000 flight hours have accumulated on the PCUs as
of the effective date of this AD, do the actions specified in
paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD.

    Note 1: Units listed in Table 1 of this AD have been lubricated
by the vendor and the inspections required by paragraphs (f)(1),
(f)(2), (f)(3), and (f)(4) of this AD are not required for those
units.

                         Table 1--Serial Numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    0030       0097       0156       0188      0218      0369      0438
    0031       0101       0161       0190      0222      0406      0453
    0033       0105       0163       0191      0223      0407      0491
    0041       0108       0164       0197      0240      0408      0495
    0046       0109       0165       0198      0262      0413      0504
    0060       0110       0171       0199      0265      0420      0506
    0062       0111       0173       0202      0281      0427      0513
    0066       0119       0174       0205      0296      0429      0533
    0081       0130       0178       0206      0301      0430      0536
    0083       0138       0179       0208      0310      0431      0586
    0087       0141       0181       0210      0323      0433
    0092       0145       0183       0214      0365      0435
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Within 10 flight cycles or 50 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Inspect for
damage and wear and lubricate the PCU attachment joints in
accordance with Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A700-1A11-27-024,
Revision 01, dated October 3, 2008; or Bombardier Alert Service
Bulletin A700-27-066, Revision 01, dated October 3, 2008; as
applicable.
    (2) Within 90 days or 200 flight hours after performing the
actions required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, whichever occurs
first: Repeat the inspection and lubrication of the PCU attachment
joints in accordance with Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A700-
1A11-27-024, Revision 01, dated October 3, 2008; or Bombardier Alert
Service Bulletin A700-27-066, Revision 01, dated October 3, 2008; as
applicable.
    (3) Within 45 days or 100 flight hours after performing the
actions required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, whichever occurs
first: Repeat the inspection and lubrication of the

PCU attachment joints in accordance with Bombardier Alert Service
Bulletin A700-1A11-27-024, Revision 01, dated October 3, 2008; or
Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A700-27-066, Revision 01, dated
October 3, 2008; as applicable. Repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 45 days or 100 flight hours, whichever
occurs first, until paragraph (f)(4) of this AD is accomplished.
    (4) Completion of a disassembly with an inspection for damage,
applicable corrective actions, and lubrication of the PCU attachment
joint components in accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-
1A11-27-025, dated October 9, 2008; or Bombardier Service Bulletin
700-27-067, dated October 9, 2008; as applicable; constitutes
terminating action for the inspections required by paragraphs
(f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD.
    (5) Unless already done, if any damage or seizure is found
during any inspection required by paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), (f)(3),
and (f)(4) of this AD, before further flight, replace the affected
part in accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-27-025,
dated October 9, 2008, or Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-067,
dated October 9, 2008, as applicable.
    (6) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the Bombardier Alert Service Bulletins A700-1A11-27-
024 and A700-27-066, both dated October 2, 2008, are acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD.
    (7) Unless already done, submit a report to Bombardier of all
findings found during any inspection required by this AD, in
accordance with the applicable service bulletin listed in Table 2 of
this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 14 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 14 days after the effective date
of this AD.

                 Table 2--Service Bulletins for Reports
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Service Bulletin         Revision level             Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombardier Alert Service       01..............  October 3, 2008.
 Bulletin; A700-1A11-27-024.
Bombardier Alert Service       01..............  October 3, 2008.
 Bulletin; A700-27-066.
Bombardier Service Bulletin;   Original........  October 9, 2008.
 700-1A11-27-025.
Bombardier Service Bulletin;   Original........  October 9, 2008.
 700-27-067.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
    (1) This AD does not mandate the terminating action specified in
paragraph A.4. of the MCAI; it is included as an optional
terminating action in paragraph (f)(4) of this AD. The planned
compliance times for that action would allow enough time to provide
notice and opportunity for prior public comment on the merits of
those actions. Therefore, we are considering further rulemaking to
require the terminating action on all affected airplanes.
    (2) Paragraph A.3. of the MCAI requires a one-time inspection;
however, since we have changed the terminating action in paragraph
A.4. of the MCAI to an optional action, paragraph (f)(3) of this AD
requires repeating the inspections until the terminating action is
performed.
    (3) This AD does not require the inspection and lubrication of
PCUs specified in Paragraph B. of the MCAI. The planned compliance
times for those actions would allow enough time to provide notice
and opportunity for prior public comment on the merits of those
actions. Therefore, we are considering further rulemaking to address
this issue.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York
ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.
    (4) Special Flight Permits: As described in Section 21.197 and
Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197
and 21.199), special flight permits are not allowed.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Transport Canada Civil Aviation Emergency Airworthiness
Directive CF-2008-31, dated October 9, 2008, and the service
information specified in Table 2 of this AD, for related
information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the service information specified in Table 3 of
this AD 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
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies 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.

               Table 3--Material Incorporated by Reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Service Bulletin         Revision level             Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombardier Alert Service       01..............  October 3, 2008.
 Bulletin A700-1A11-27-024.
Bombardier Alert Service       01..............  October 3, 2008.
 Bulletin A700-27-066.
Bombardier Service Bulletin    Original........  October 9, 2008.
 700-1A11-27-025.
Bombardier Service Bulletin    Original........  October 9, 2008.
 700-27-067.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 16, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8-28103 Filed 11-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 136)]
[Notices]
[Page 40560-40561]
[DOCID:fr15jy08-36]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13228-000]

Wellesley Rosewood Maynard Mills LP; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comment, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

July 9, 2008.
    On May 19, 2008, Wellesley Rosewood Maynard Mills LP filed an
application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act,
proposing to study the feasibility of the Clock Tower Place
Hydroelectric Project, to be located on the Assabet River in the
Maynard area of Middlesex County, Massachusetts.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) Two existing dams, the
larger constructed of dry-laid, cut granite blocks, 9.5-foot-high and
170-foot-long and the smaller a masonry-faced embankment structure,
respectively, for the upper and lower reservoirs which would have water
surface elevations of 177 and 176 feet, MSL, a (2) proposed powerhouse
containing one generating unit having a total installed capacity of 290
kilowatts, a (3) proposed 49-foot-long penstock and twin 300-foot-long
tailrace tunnels, a (4) 1,600-foot-long power canal leading to the
gatehouse, (5) incorporation of an existing transformer to interconnect
equipment with Clock Tower Place at 208y/120 volts, and (5) appurtenant
facilities. The project would have an annual energy generation of
1,241,000 kWh per year.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Robert Buonato, President, Wellesley
Rosewood Maynard Mills LLC, 12 Clock Tower Place, Suite 200, Maynard,
MA 01754; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. FERC Contact: Alyssa Dorval, 202-502-
6735.

    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's website
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-
comments.asp. More information about this project can be viewed or
printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of Commission's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-
13228) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-16207 Filed 7-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 88 (Friday, May 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27443-27444]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10756]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9946-10-OARM; EPA-HQ-OARM-2016-0214]

Public Availability of Environmental Protection Agency FY 2015
Service Contract Inventory

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-117), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is publishing this notice to
advise the public of the availability of the FY 2015 Service Contract
Inventory. This inventory provides information on service contract
actions over $25,000 that were made in FY 2015. The information is
organized by function to show how contracted resources are distributed
throughout the Agency. The inventory has been developed in accordance
with guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget's Office of
Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), Service Contract Inventories
(December 19, 2011). The Environmental Protection Agency has posted its
inventory and a summary of the inventory on the EPA's homepage at the
following link: http://www.epa.gov/oam/inventory/inventory.htm

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding the service
contract inventory should be directed to Linear Cherry in the Office of
Acquisition Management, Policy, Training, and Oversight Division
(3802R), Financial Analysis and Oversight Service Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: (202)

564-4403; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

General Information

How can I get copies of this docket and other related information?

    1. The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OARM-2016-0214. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the FY 2015 Service Contract Inventory Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the FY 2015 Service Contract
Inventory Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

    Dated: April 12, 2016.
John R. Bashista,
Director, Office of Acquisition Management.
[FR Doc. 2016-10756 Filed 5-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10605-10608]
[FR Doc No: 2023-03476]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96914; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2023-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Its Fee Schedule

February 14, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on February 1, 2023, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
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

    Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX'') proposes to
amend its fee schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, 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 its Fee Schedule, effective February
1, 2023. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the rebate
currently provided for Customer-to-Customer orders in Penny and Non-
Penny Securities that add liquidity (currently yielding fee codes PC
and NC, respectively) and to amend the Fee Schedule so that such orders
will be free.
    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 options venues to which market participants
may direct their order flow. Based on publicly available information,
no single options exchange has more than 17% of the market share and
currently the Exchange represents only approximately 6% of the market
share.\3\ Thus, in such a low-concentrated and highly competitive
market, no single options exchange, including the Exchange, possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of option order flow. The
Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain the Exchange's transaction fees, and market participants can
readily trade on competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those
other venues to be more favorable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Monthly Volume
Summary (January 24, 2023), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's Fee Schedule sets forth standard rebates and rates
applied per contract. For example, the Exchange currently provides a
standard rebate of $0.01 per contract for Customer orders in both Penny
and Non-Penny Securities. The Fee Codes and Associated Fees section of
the Fee Schedule also provides for certain fee codes associated with
certain order types and market participants that provide for various
other fees or rebates.
    The Exchange no longer wishes to provide a rebate for Customer-to-
Customer orders in Penny and Non-Penny Securities that add liquidity
and now proposes to amend its Fee Schedule so that such orders will be
free. As such, the Exchange also proposes to adopt new fee codes TP and
TN, which will apply to Customer-to-Customer (i.e., ``Customer (contra
Customer)) orders in Penny and Non-Penny Securities that add liquidity,
respectively; the proposed fee codes assess no fee for such
transactions. The Exchange notes that it currently assesses no charge
or a marginal charge on other Customer transactions. For example, the
Exchange does not charge a transaction fee for Complex Customer-to-
Customer orders (yielding fee code ZC). Customer-to-Customer orders in
Penny and Non-Penny Securities that remove liquidity, as well as
Customer orders that execute against any Non-Customer as the contra-
party in Penny and Non-Penny Securities will still be eligible for the
current rebate (i.e., the standard rebate of $0.01 per contract).
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend the definition of fee code
PC to clarify that such fee code (and corresponding standard rebate)
applies to Customer contra Non-Customer orders in Penny Securities, as
well as Customer contra Customer orders in Penny Securities that remove
liquidity. Similarly, the Exchange proposes to amend the definition of
fee code NC to clarify that such fee code (and related standard rebate)
applies to Customer contra Non-Customer orders in Non-Penny Securities,
as well as Customer contra Customer orders in Non-Penny Securities that
remove liquidity.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\4\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \5\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
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 regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \6\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The proposed rule change
reflects a competitive pricing structure designed to incentivize market
participants to direct their order flow to the Exchange, which the
Exchange believes would enhance market quality to the benefit of all
market participants.
    The Exchange also believes the proposed change to assess no charge
for Customer-to-Customer orders executed in Penny and Non-Penny
Securities which add liquidity is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of
the Act in that the proposal is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory. The Exchange believes that eliminating the rebate for
Customer-to-Customer orders in Penny and Non-Penny Securities that add
liquidity is reasonable because the Exchange is not required to
maintain this rebate. Further, the Exchange believes that it is a
reasonable and equitable change because Customers will still not have
to pay any fee for Customer-to-Customer orders in Penny and Non-Penny
Securities which add liquidity. Moreover, it is in line with other
types of Customer orders for which the Exchange does not assess a fee
or provide a rebate. As described above, the Exchange currently does
not charge a transaction fee or provide a rebate for various other
Customer orders, including Complex Customer-to-Customer orders.
Further, Customers executing an order in Penny and Non-Penny Securities
with a Non-Customer or Customers executing an order in Penny and Non-
Penny Securities which removes liquidity will still be eligible for the
current rebate, i.e., a standard rebate of $0.01 per contract.
    The Exchange believes that, although it is eliminating the rebate
for Customer-to-Customer orders executed in Penny and Non-Penny
Securities which add liquidity, the proposal to not assess any fees for
such transactions will continue to incentivize Customer-to-Customer
order flow in Penny and Non-Penny Securities, which enhances liquidity
on the Exchange. This enhanced Customer liquidity benefits all market
participants

by providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Market Makers.
An increase in Market Maker activity in turn facilitates tighter
spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order
flow from other market participants.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposal to make Customer-to-
Customer orders that add liquidity free is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it will apply equally to all Customer-to-
Customer transactions in Penny and Non-Penny Securities that add
liquidity, i.e. all Customers will be assessed the same amount for
these transactions. Moreover, the Exchange believes that continuing to
not assess any fee to Customer orders is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because, as stated above, Customer order flow enhances
liquidity on the Exchange, in turn providing more trading opportunities
and attracting Market-Makers to facilitate tighter spreads to the
benefit of all market participants. Moreover, the options industry has
a long history of providing preferential pricing to Customers, and the
Exchange's current Fee Schedule currently does so in many places, as do
the fees structures of multiple other exchanges.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., EDGX Options Fee Schedule, ``Fee Codes and
Associated Fees'', which, for example, provides Customer AIM Agency
orders (i.e., orders yielding fee code BC) a rebate and also which
assesses no fee (nor provides any rebate) for QCC Agency and Contra
Customer orders (i.e., yielding fee codes QA and QC, respectively).
See also Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Rate Table--All Products
Excluding Underlying Symbol List A, which, for example, assesses no
fee (nor provides any rebate) for Customer orders in equity options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. In particular, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change does not impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Particularly, the proposal to
eliminate the rebate for Customer-to-Customer orders executed in Penny
and Non-Penny Securities that add liquidity will apply uniformly to all
Customers transacting in Penny and Non-Penny Securities. As described
above, while no fee will continue to be assessed for Customers,
different market participants have different circumstances, such as the
fact that preferential pricing to Customers is a long-standing options
industry practice which serves to enhance Customer order flow, thereby
attracting Market-Makers to facilitate tighter spreads and trading
opportunities to the benefit of all market participants. In addition to
this, the Exchange notes that it currently assesses no charge and
provides no rebate for various other types of Customer orders that
execute against another Customer as a contra party.
    The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change does not impose
any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As previously
discussed, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market.
Members have numerous alternative venues they may participate on and
direct their order flow, including 15 other options exchanges.
Additionally, the Exchange represents a small percentage of the overall
market. Based on publicly available information, no single options
exchange has more than 17% of the market share. Therefore, no exchange
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order flow.
Indeed, participants can readily choose to send their orders to other
exchanges if they deem fee levels at those other venues to be more
favorable. Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically,
in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' The fact that
this market is competitive has also long been recognized by the courts.
In NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit
stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow
is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of
order flow from broker dealers' . . . .''. Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe its proposed fee change imposes 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 neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \9\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the 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-CboeEDGX-2023-008 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2023-008. 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 website (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 website 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-CboeEDGX-2023-008 and should be
submitted on or before March 14, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-03476 Filed 2-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 21, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9847-9850]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3866]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0067]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Kinnickinnic River Containment and Cleanup;
Milwaukee, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Kinnickinnic River in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This zone is intended to
restrict vessels from a portion of the Kinnickinnic River due to the
petroleum cleanup efforts. This temporary safety zone is necessary to
protect the surrounding public and vessels from the hazards associated
with the removal of petroleum product from this area of the
Kinnickinnic River.

DATES: This rule is effective in the CFR on February 21, 2012. This
rule is effective with actual notice for purposes of enforcement at 7
a.m. on January 30, 2012. This rule will remain in effect through 7
a.m. on March 1, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0067 and are available online
by going to www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0067 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the 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, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, contact or email BM1 Adam Kraft, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Lake Michigan, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when an agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under U.S.C. 553 (b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the dangers presented by the
containment and cleanup of petroleum product are immediate and do not
allow time for a notice and comment period. Thus, waiting for a notice
and comment period to run would be impracticable and contrary to the
public interest in that it would prevent the Coast Guard from
protecting the public and vessels on navigable waters from the
aforementioned hazards.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraph, a 30-day notice period would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest.

Background and Purpose

    On January 23, 2012 it was discovered that a large amount of jet
fuel is entering the Kinnickinnic River from an underground fuel leak
in the vicinity of the airport in Milwaukee, WI. The Captain of the
Port, Sector Lake Michigan, has determined that the containment and
cleanup poses a serious risk of injury to persons and property within
this area of the river.

Discussion of Rule

    Because of the aforesaid hazards, the Captain of the Port, Sector
Lake Michigan, has determined that a safety zone is necessary to
protect the public. The safety zone will encompass all U.S. navigable
waters of Kinnickinnic River between the West Becher Street Bridge
located at 43[deg]00[min]37[sec] N 087[deg]54[min]51[sec] W and the
First street bridge located at 43[deg]00[min]30[sec] N
087[deg]54[min]41[sec] W (NAD 83). This rule will be enforced from 7
a.m. on January 30, 2012 until 7 a.m. on March 1, 2012.
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her
designated representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative.
The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). We conclude that this rule is not a significant
regulatory action because we anticipate that it will have minimal
impact on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not
adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will
not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The safety zone will be in
effect along a portion of the river, given the time of year that has
minimal traffic. Moreover, the most prominent marine commercial company
in the area has been notified of the situation and it has chosen to use
an alternate mooring.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor on a portion of Kinnickinnic River between 7 a.m. on
January 30, 2012 and 7 a.m. on March 1, 2012.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: Vessel
traffic will be minimal due to the time of year and the location of the
safety zone.
    In the event that this temporary safety zone affects shipping,
commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of The Port,
Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative to
transit through the safety zone. The Coast Guard will give notice to
the public via a Broadcast to Mariners that the regulation is in
effect.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. Small
businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who
enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and
the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman
evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness
to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or
complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not concern an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a
safety zone and is therefore categorically excluded under paragraph
34(g) of the Instruction.
    A final environmental analysis checklist and categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0067 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0067  Safety Zone; Kinnickinnic River containment and
cleanup, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

    (a) Location. All waters of the Kinnickinnic River between the West
Becher Street Bridge located at 43[deg]00'37'' N 087[deg]54'51'' W and
the First Street Bridge located at 43[deg]00'30'' N 087[deg]54'41'' W
(NAD 83).
    (b) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule is effective and
will be enforced from 7 a.m. on January 30, 2012 until 7 a.m. on March
1, 2012. The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her
designated representative, may suspend the enforcement of this safety
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
section 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated
representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his
or her on-scene representative.
    (3) The ``designated representative'' of the Captain of the Port,
Sector Lake Michigan, is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port,
Sector Lake Michigan, to act on his or her behalf. The designated
representative of the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, will
be on land

in the vicinity of the safety zone and will have constant
communications with the on-scene safety vessels.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or
his or her designated representative to obtain permission to do so. The
Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
    Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated
representative.

    Dated: January 31, 2012.
C. W. Tenney,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan,
Acting.
[FR Doc. 2012-3866 Filed 2-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


78458 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2002 / Notices would be unable to determine if the standards are being met. The required information consists of emissions data and other information that have been determined not to be private. However, any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B   Confidentiality of Business Information ( see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 1764, March 23, 1979). Approximately 127 sources are currently subject to the standard. EPA estimates that three additional sources will become subject to the standard in each of the next three years. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 2 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Respondents/ Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are each truck unloading station, truck loading station, barge and ship unloading station, barge and ship loading station, railcar loading station, railcar unloading station, grain dryer, and all grain handling operations at any grain terminal elevator or any grain storage elevator subject to NSPS subpart DD. Estimated Number of Respondents: 132. Frequency of Response: 155 annually. Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 259. Estimated Total Annual Cost: $ 14,811. Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 9 hours in the total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. This slight increase in burden results from the slight growth in the number of regulated grain elevators.

Dated: December 10, 2002. Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division. [ FR Doc. 02   32398 Filed 12   23   02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OECA   2002   0007; FRL   7427   3]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission of EPA ICR No. 1167.07 ( OMB No. 2060   0063) to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that the following Information Collection Request ( ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) for review and approval: NSPS for Lime Manufacturing, ( OMB Control No. 2060   0063, EPA ICR No. 1167.07). The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost. DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 23, 2003. ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Fried, Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, mail code 2223A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number ( 202) 564   7016, fax number: ( 202) 564   0050; e mail address: fried. gregory@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On June 20, 2002 ( 67 FR 41981), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8( d). EPA received no comments. EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OECA   2002   0007, which is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center ( ECDIC) Docket in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566   1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center ( ECDIC) is ( 202) 566   1514. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( DOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use DOCKET to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified above. Any comments related to this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice, and according to the following detailed instructions: ( 1) Submit your comments to EPA online using DOCKET ( our preferred method), by e mail to oeca@ epa. gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and ( 2) Mail your comments to OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget ( OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in DOCKET as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in DOCKET. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Although identified as an item in the official docket, information claimed as CBI, or whose disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included in the official public docket, and will not be available for public viewing in DOCKET. For further information about the electronic docket, see EPA's Federal VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 19: 49 Dec 23, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24DEN1. SGM 24DEN1 78459 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2002 / Notices Register notice describing the electronic docket at 67 FR 38102 ( May 31, 2002), or go to http:// www. epa. gov./ edocket. Title: NSPS for Lime Manufacturing ( 40 CFR part 60, subpart HH) ( OMB Control No. 2060   0063, EPA ICR Number 1167.07). This is a request to renew an existing approved collection that is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2003. Under the OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS) for Lime Manufacturing Plants were proposed on May 3, 1977 and promulgated on April 26, 1984. These standards apply to each rotary lime kiln used in lime manufacturing, which commenced construction, modification or reconstruction after May 3, 1977. The standards do not apply to facilities used in the manufacture of lime at kraft pulp mills. The purpose of this NSPS is to control the emissions of particulate matter ( PM) from lime manufacturing plants, specifically from the operation of the rotary lime kilns. The standards limit particulate emissions to 0.30 kilogram per megagram ( 0.60 lb/ ton) of stone feed, and limit opacity to 15% when exiting from a dry emission control device. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart HH. There are three types of reporting requirements for owners or operators of facilities under this NSPS: ( 1) Notifications ( e. g., notice for new construction or reconstruction, anticipated and actual startup dates, initial performance test, and demonstration of the CMS); ( 2) a report on the results of the performance test; and ( 3) semiannual reports of instances of occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunctions. The purpose of the notifications are to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to this standard. Performance tests are conducted to ensure that the new plants operate within the boundaries outlined in the standard. The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations. Under this standard the data collected by the affected industry is retained at the facility for a minimum of two years and made available for inspection by the Administrator. The Administrator has judged that PM emissions from lime manufacturing plants cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Owners/ operators of lime manufacturing plants must notify EPA of construction, modification, startups, shutdowns, malfunctions and performance test dates, as well as provide reports on the initial performance test and annual excess emissions. The industry costs associated with the information collection activity in the standards are capital costs and O& M costs associated with continuous emissions monitoring and labor costs associated with recordkeeping and reporting. In order to ensure compliance with the standards promulgated to protect public health, adequate reporting and recordkeeping is necessary. In the absence of such information, enforcement personnel would be unable to determine whether the standards are being met on a continuous basis, as required by the Clean Air Act. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, and are identified on the form and/ or instrument, if applicable. Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 42 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Respondents/ Affected Entities: Lime Manufacturing Plants. Estimated Number of Respondents: 53. Frequency of Response: On occasion, initial, and semiannual. Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 4,434 hours. Estimated Total Annual Cost: $ 91,500. Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 244 hours in the total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. This increase is due to an increase in the number of existing facilities subject to this standard resulting from the availability of more accurate data.

Dated: December 10, 2002. Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division. [ FR Doc. 02   32399 Filed 12   23   02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2002   0283; FRL   7277   5]

Bronopol; Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to Establish a Tolerance for a Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on Food AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of a certain pesticide chemical in or on various food commodities. DATES: Comments, identified by docket ID number OPP   2002   0283, must be received on or before January 23, 2003. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bipin Gandhi, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 308   8380; e mail address: gandhi. bipin@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, pesticide manufacturer, or antimicrobial pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:   Industry ( NAICS 111), e. g., Crop production.   Industry ( NAICS 112), e. g., Animal production.   Industry ( NAICS 311), e. g., Food manufacturing.

VerDate 0ct< 31> 2002 19: 49 Dec 23, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24DEN1. SGM 24DEN1