[Federal Register: April 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 76)]
[Notices]
[Page 19915]
[DOCID:fr20ap07-47]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket Nos. ER01-642-001, ER01-1335-011, ER01-1011-013, ER07-312-001]

Cottonwood Energy Company LP; Magnolia Energy LP; Rosebud Energy
LP; Dogwood Energy LLC; Notice of Filing

April 16, 2007.
    Take notice that on April 11, 2007, Cottonwood Energy Company LP,
Magnolia Energy LP, Redbud Energy LP and Dogwood Energy LLC filed an
amendment to its March 16, 2007 triennial market power update report.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 23, 2007.

Philis J. Posey,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-7511 Filed 4-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31081-31083]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10248]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97465; File No. SR-Phlx-2023-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Equity 7,
Section 3(a)(1)

May 9, 2023.
    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 May 1, 2023, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Equity 7, Section 3(a)(1) to exclude
certain days for purposes of calculating Consolidated Volume and
trading activity, as described further below.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, 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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Equity 7,
Section 3(a)(1) to exclude certain days for purposes of calculating
Consolidated Volume and trading activity. Specifically, the Exchange
also proposes to amend Equity 7, Section 3(a)(1) to exclude the
following from calculations of total Consolidated Volume and the
member's trading activity for purposes of volume calculations for
equity pricing tiers/incentives: (1) the dates on which stock options,
stock index options, and stock index futures expire (i.e., the third
Friday of March, June, September, and December) (``Triple Witch
Dates''); (2) the dates on which the MSCI Equity Indexes are rebalanced
(i.e., on a quarterly basis) (``MSCI Rebalance Dates''); (3) the dates
on which the S&P 400, S&P 500, and S&P 600 Indexes are rebalanced
(i.e., on a quarterly basis) (``S&P Rebalance Dates''); and (4) the
date of the annual reconstitution of the Nasdaq-100 and Nasdaq
Biotechnology Indexes (``Nasdaq Reconstitution Date''). Currently, the
Exchange excludes the date of the annual reconstitution of the Russell
Investments Indexes from calculations of total Consolidated Volume and
the member's trading activity for purposes of volume calculations for
equity pricing tiers/incentives.
    For the same reasons that the Exchange currently excludes the date
of the annual reconstitution of the Russell Investments Indexes from
these calculations, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to exclude
Triple Witch Dates, MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P Rebalance Dates, and the
Nasdaq Reconstitution Date from these calculations in the same manner,
as trading volumes on such days are generally far in excess of volumes
on other days during the month, and market participants that are not
otherwise active on the Exchange to a great extent often participate on
the Exchange on such dates to rebalance holdings, or in the case of
Triple Witch Dates, to close out or roll over positions prior to
expiration. The Exchange believes this change to normal activity may
affect a member's ability to meet the applicable volume thresholds
under its volume-based tiers. The Exchange notes that the proposed
exclusion of Triple Witch Dates, MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P Rebalance
Dates, and the Nasdaq Reconstitution Date from the relevant
calculations would be applied in the same manner that the Exchange
currently excludes the date of the annual reconstitution of the Russell
Investments Indexes from such calculations.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b) of the Act,\3\ in general, and furthers the objectives of sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\4\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is
not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory to exclude Triple Witch Dates, MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P
Rebalance Dates, and the Nasdaq Reconstitution Date from calculations
of total Consolidated Volume and the member's trading activity for
purposes of volume calculations for equity pricing tiers/incentives. As
described above, Triple Witch Dates, MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P
Rebalance Dates, and the Nasdaq Reconstitution Date typically have
extraordinarily high and/or abnormally distributed trading volumes
which, in turn, may affect a member's ability to meet the applicable
volume thresholds under its transaction pricing tiers/incentives, and
the Exchange believes that excluding such days from the relevant
calculations for purposes of determining a member's qualification for
such tiers/incentives would help to avoid penalizing members that might
otherwise have met the requirements to qualify for such tiers/
incentives. The Exchange believes that the proposal is reasonable
because it will diminish the likelihood of a de facto price increase
occurring because a member is not able to reach a volume percentage on
that date that it reaches on other trading days during the month.
    The Exchange further believes that the change is consistent with an
equitable allocation of fees and is not unfairly discriminatory.
Specifically, because trading activity on Triple Witch Dates, MSCI
Rebalance Dates, S&P Rebalance Dates, and the Nasdaq Reconstitution
Date will be excluded from determinations of a member's percentage of
Consolidated Volume, the Exchange believes it will be easier for
members to determine the volume required to meet a certain percentage
of participation than would otherwise be the case. To the extent that a
member has been active on the Exchange at a significant level
throughout the month, excluding the Triple Witch Dates, MSCI Rebalance
Dates, S&P Rebalance Dates, and the Nasdaq Reconstitution Date, on
which its percentage of Consolidated Volume is likely to be lower than
on other days, will increase its overall percentage for the month.
Conversely, even if a member was more active on Triple Witch Dates,
MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P Rebalance Dates, and the Nasdaq
Reconstitution Date than on other dates, it is unlikely that its
activity on one day would be able to increase its overall monthly
percentage to a meaningful extent. Thus, the Exchange believes that the
change will benefit members that are in a position to achieve volume
levels required by the Exchange's pricing schedule but without harming
the ability of any members to reach such levels.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that the change does not unfairly
burden competition because it will help to preserve or improve the
pricing status that would apply to members' trading activity in the
absence of Triple Witch Dates, MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P Rebalance
Dates, and the Nasdaq Reconstitution Date, and therefore will not
impact the ability of such members to compete. The proposed rule change
would apply to all members uniformly, in that each member's volume
activities for purposes of pricing tiers/incentives would continue to
be calculated in a uniform manner and would now exclude Triple Witch
Dates, MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P Rebalance Dates, and the Nasdaq
Reconstitution Date.

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that its proposal will place any
category of Exchange participant at a competitive disadvantage.
    The Exchange intends for its proposed changes to amend the
calculation of Consolidated Volume and trading activity at Equity 7,
Section 3(a)(1) to avoid penalizing members that might otherwise have
met the applicable volume thresholds to qualify for the Exchange's
transaction pricing tiers/incentives if not for the abnormal

trading volumes and market conditions typically experienced in the
equities markets on the Triple Witch Dates, MSCI Rebalance Dates, S&P
Rebalance Dates, and the Nasdaq Reconstitution Date. The proposed
exclusion of such dates from the relevant calculations would apply to
all members uniformly and in the same manner that the Exchange
currently excludes the date of the annual reconstitution of the Russell
Investments Indexes from such calculations.
    The Exchange notes that its members are free to trade on other
venues to the extent they believe that the proposal is not attractive.
As one can observe by looking at any market share chart, price
competition between exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and market
share moving freely between exchanges in reaction to fee and credit
changes.
Intermarket Competition
    In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it
operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants
can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its credits and fees to remain competitive with
other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been
exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own credits and
fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust
their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to
which credit or fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited. The proposal is reflective of this
competition.
    Even as one of the largest U.S. equities exchanges by volume, the
Exchange has less than 20% market share, which in most markets could
hardly be categorized as having enough market power to burden
competition. Moreover, as noted above, price competition between
exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and market share moving freely
between exchanges in reaction to fee and credit changes. This is in
addition to free flow of order flow to and among off-exchange venues,
which comprises upwards of 50% of industry volume.
    The Exchange believes the proposal to exclude certain dates from
calculating Consolidated Volume and trading activity is not concerned
with competitive issues, but rather relates to calculation
methodologies applicable to its pricing tiers/incentives.
    If the changes proposed herein are unattractive to market
participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as
a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
changes will impair the ability of members or competing order execution
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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 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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please
include File Number SR-PHLX-2023-16 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-PHLX-2023-16. 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 (https://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. Do
not include personal identifiable information in submissions; you
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. We may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication
submitted material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PHLX-2023-16 and should
be submitted on or before June 5, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-10248 Filed 5-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 61 (Friday, March 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11973-11974]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06132]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9990-96-ORD]

Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods;
Designation of One New Equivalent Method

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of the designation of a new equivalent method for
monitoring ambient air quality.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has designated one new equivalent method for measuring
concentrations of ozone (O3) in ambient air.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Vanderpool, Exposure Methods
and Measurement Division (MD-D205-03), National Exposure Research
Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with regulations at 40 CFR
part 53, the EPA evaluates various methods for monitoring the
concentrations of those ambient air pollutants for which EPA has
established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) as set forth
in 40 CFR part 50. Monitoring methods that are determined to meet
specific requirements for adequacy are designated by the EPA as either
reference or equivalent methods (as applicable), thereby permitting
their use under 40 CFR part 58 by States and other agencies for
determining compliance with the NAAQS. A list of all reference or
equivalent methods that have been previously designated by EPA may be
found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html.
    The EPA hereby announces the designation of one new equivalent
method for measuring concentrations of O3 in ambient air.
This designation is made under the provisions of 40 CFR part 53, as
amended on October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65291-65468).
    The new equivalent method for O3 is an automated method
(analyzer) utilizing the measurement principle based on UV photometry.
This newly designated equivalent method is identified as follows:
    EQOA-0219-251, ``KENTEK Inc. Model MEZUS 410 O3
Analyzer,'' UV photometric analyzer operated in a range of 0-0.5 ppm,
with 0.5 [micro]m, 47 mm diameter Teflon[supreg] filter installed,
operated at temperatures between 20 [deg]C and 30 [deg]C, with
temperature and pressure compensation, at a nominal sampling flow rate
of 800 cc/min, using a 5 minute averaging time, with either 105VAC-
125VAC or 200VAC-240VAC input power options installed, 230-watt power
consumption, equipped with 7 inch LCD touch screen display, and
operated according to the KENTEK Inc. Model MEZUS 410 Ozone Analyzer
User's Instruction Manual.
    This application for a reference method determination for this
O3 method was received by the Office of Research and
Development on January 29, 2019. This analyzer is commercially
available from the applicant, Kentek Inc., Hansin S-MECA 65, Techno 3-
ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34016, Korea.
    A representative test analyzer was tested in accordance with the
applicable test procedures specified in 40 CFR part 53, as amended on
October 26, 2015. After reviewing the results of those tests and other
information submitted by the applicant, EPA has determined, in
accordance with part 53, that this method should be designated as an
equivalent method.
    As a designated equivalent method, this method is acceptable for
use by states and other air monitoring agencies under the requirements
of 40 CFR part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. For such purposes,
this method must be used in strict accordance with the operation or
instruction manual associated with the method and subject to any
specifications and limitations (e.g., configuration or operational
settings) specified in the designated method description (see the
identification of the method above).
    Use of the method also should be in general accordance with the
guidance and recommendations of applicable sections of the ``Quality
Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume I,''
EPA/600/R-94/038a and ``Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurement Systems, Volume II, Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Program,'' EPA-454/B-13-003, (both available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qalist.html). Provisions concerning modification of such methods
by users are specified under Section 2.8 (Modifications of Methods by
Users) of Appendix C to 40 CFR part 58.
    Consistent or repeated noncompliance with any of these conditions
should be reported to: Director, Exposure Methods and Measurement
Division (MD-E205-01), National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711.

    Designation of this equivalent method is intended to assist the
States in establishing and operating their air quality surveillance
systems under 40 CFR part 58. Questions concerning the commercial
availability or technical aspects of the method should be directed to
the applicant.

    Dated: March 8, 2019.
Timothy Watkins,
Director, National Exposure Research Laboratory.
[FR Doc. 2019-06132 Filed 3-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 13 (Monday, January 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 7817]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01350]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER11-47-008; ER12-1540-006; ER12-1541-006; ER12-
1542-006; ER12-1544-006; ER10-2981-008; ER14-2475-005; ER14-2476-005;
ER14-2477-005; ER14-594-010; ER11-46-011; ER11-41-008; ER12-2343-006;
ER13-1896-012.
    Applicants: Appalachian Power Company, Indiana Michigan Power
Company, Kentucky Power Company, Kingsport Power Company, Wheeling
Power Company, AEP Texas Central Company, AEP Texas North Company,
Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Southwestern Electric Power
Company, Ohio Power Company, AEP Energy Partners, Inc., AEP Retail
Energy Partners LLC, AEP Energy, Inc., AEP Generation Resources Inc.
    Description: Notice of Non-material Change of Status of the AEP
Companies.
    Filed Date: 1/13/17.
    Accession Number: 20170113-5094.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2227-002
    Applicants: Kelly Creek Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Kelly Creek
Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/13/17.
    Accession Number: 20170113-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2240-003.
    Applicants: Rush Springs Wind Energy, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-material Change in Status of Rush
Springs Wind Energy, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/12/17.
    Accession Number: 20170112-5181.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/2/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-135-002.
    Applicants: DesertLink, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to 2 to be effective 12/
19/2016.
    Filed Date: 1/12/17.
    Accession Number: 20170112-5147, 20170112-5168.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/2/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-786-000.
    Applicants: Luz Solar Partners Ltd., IV.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Luz Solar Partners Ltd., IV
Application for Market-Based Rates to be effective 1/31/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/12/17.
    Accession Number: 20170112-5174.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/2/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 13, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-01350 Filed 1-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 148 (Monday, August 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46078-46080]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18881]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75535; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2015-54]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending NYSE MKT Rule
500--Equities To Extend the Operation of the Pilot Program that Allows
``UTP Securities'' To Be Traded on the Exchange Pursuant to a Grant of
Unlisted Trading Privileges Until October 31, 2015

July 28, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on July 17, 2015, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE MKT Rule 500--Equities to
extend the operation of the pilot program that allows ``UTP
Securities'' to be traded on the Exchange pursuant to a grant of
unlisted trading privileges. The pilot program is currently scheduled
to expire on July 31, 2015; the Exchange proposes to extend it until
the earlier of Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
approval to make such pilot permanent or October 31, 2015. The text of
the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE MKT Rule 500--Equities to
extend the operation of the pilot program that allows ``UTP
Securities'' to be traded on the Exchange pursuant to a grant of
unlisted trading privileges.\4\ The pilot program is currently
scheduled to expire on July 31, 2015; the Exchange proposes to extend
it until the earlier of Commission approval to make such pilot
permanent or October 31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``UTP Securities'' is included within the definition of
``security'' as that term is used in the NYSE MKT Equities Rules.
See NYSE MKT Rule 3--Equities. In accordance with this definition,
UTP Securities are admitted to dealings on the Exchange on an
``issued,'' ``when issued,'' or ``when distributed'' basis. See NYSE
MKT Rule 501--Equities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE MKT Rules 500-525--Equities, as a pilot program, govern the
trading of any ``UTP Securities'' on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted
trading privileges (``UTP Pilot Program'').\5\ The Exchange

hereby seeks to extend the operation of the UTP Pilot Program,
currently scheduled to expire on July 31, 2015, until the earlier of
Commission approval to make such pilot permanent or October 31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62479 (July 9,
2010), 75 FR 41264 (July 15, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-31). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 62857 (September 7, 2010), 75
FR 55837 (September 14, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-89); 63601 (December
22, 2010), 75 FR 82117 (December 29, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-124);
64746 (June 24, 2011), 76 FR 38446 (June 30, 2011) (SR-NYSEAmex-
2011-45); 66040 (December 23, 2011), 76 FR 82324 (December 30, 2011)
(SR-NYSEAmex-2011-104); 67497 (July 25, 2012), 77 FR 45404 (July 31,
2012) (SR-NYSEMKT-2012-25); 68561 (January 2, 2013), 78 FR 1290
(January 8, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2012-86); 69814 (June 20, 2013), 78 FR
38762 (June 27, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-53); 71363 (January 21,
2014), 79 FR 4373 (January 27, 2014) (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-01); 72624
(July 16, 2014), 79 FR 42595 (July 22, 2014) (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-59);
and 73969 (December 31, 2014), 80 FR 914 (January 7, 2015) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2014-112). The UTP Pilot Program was originally limited to
securities listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq
Securities''), but the Exchange recently expanded the UTP Pilot
Program beyond Nasdaq Securities. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 71952 (April 16, 2014), 79 FR 22558 (April 22, 2014)
(SR-NYSEMKT-2014-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The UTP Pilot Program includes any security, other than a security
that is listed on the Exchange, that (i) is designated as an ``eligible
security'' pursuant to the ``UTP Plan,'' \6\ (ii) has been admitted to
dealings on the Exchange pursuant to a grant of unlisted trading
privileges in accordance with Section 12(f) of the Act,\7\ and (iii) if
it is an ``Exchange Traded Product'' (``ETP'') that does not have any
component security that is listed or traded on the Exchange or the New
York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''); provided, however, that the Invesco
PowerShares QQQTM (the ``QQQ''TM) may be admitted
to dealings on the Exchange pursuant to a grant of unlisted trading
privileges although one or more component securities of the QQQ may be
listed or traded on the Exchange or the NYSE, subject to the conditions
of Rule 504(b)(5)--Equities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ With respect to Nasdaq Securities, the term ``UTP Plan''
means the Joint Self-Regulatory Organization Plan Governing the
Collection, Consolidation and Dissemination of Quotation and
Transaction Information for Nasdaq-listed Securities Traded on
Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privilege Basis, as amended from
time to time, filed with and approved by the Commission. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70953 (November 27, 2013), 78 FR
72932 (December 4, 2013) (File No. S7-24-89). The Exchange's
predecessor, the American Stock Exchange LLC, joined the UTP Plan in
2001. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55647 (April 19,
2007), 72 FR 20891 (April 26, 2007) (File No. S7-24-89). In March
2009, the Exchange changed its name to NYSE Amex LLC, and, in May
2012, the Exchange subsequently changed its name to NYSE MKT LLC.
See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 59575 (March 13, 2009), 74
FR 11803 (March 19, 2009) (SR-NYSEALTR-2009-24) and 67037 (May 21,
2012), 77 FR 31415 (May 25, 2012) (SR-NYSEAmex-2012-32). With
respect to all other UTP Securities, the term ``UTP Plan'' means the
Consolidated Tape Association Plan for the Dissemination of Last
Sale Prices of Transactions in Eligible Securities, as amended from
time to time, filed with and approved by the Commission. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 10787 (May 10, 1974), 39 FR
17799 (May 20, 1974) (declaring the CTA Plan effective). See also
Securities Exchange Release No. 70794 (October 31, 2013), 78 FR
66789 (November 6, 2013) (SR-CTA-2013-05).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78l.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that its New Market Model Pilot (``NMM Pilot''),
which, among other things, eliminated the function of specialists on
the Exchange and created a new category of market participant, the
Designated Market Maker (``DMM''),\8\ is also scheduled to end on July
31, 2015.\9\ The timing of the operation of the UTP Pilot Program was
designed to correspond to that of the NMM Pilot. In approving the UTP
Pilot Program, the Commission acknowledged that the rules relating to
DMM benefits and duties in trading Nasdaq Securities on the Exchange
pursuant to the UTP Pilot Program are consistent with the Act \10\ and
noted the similarity to the NMM Pilot, particularly with respect to DMM
obligations and benefits \11\--the Exchange considers the same to be
true with respect to all UTP Securities, including for ETPs that are
included in the UTP Pilot Program. Furthermore, the UTP Pilot Program
rules pertaining to the assignment of securities to DMMs are
substantially similar to the rules implemented through the NMM
Pilot.\12\ The Exchange has similarly filed to extend the operation of
the NMM Pilot until the earlier of Commission approval to make the NMM
Pilot permanent or October 31, 2015.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See NYSE MKT Rule 103--Equities.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60758 (October 1,
2009), 74 FR 51639 (October 7, 2009) (SR-NYSEAmex-2009-65). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 61030 (November 19, 2009), 74
FR 62365 (November 27, 2009) (SR-NYSEAmex-2009-83); 61725 (March 17,
2010), 75 FR 14223 (March 24, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-28); 62820
(September 1, 2010), 75 FR 54935 (September 9, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-
2010-86); 63615 (December 29, 2010), 76 FR 611 (January 5, 2011)
(SR-NYSEAmex-2010-123); 64773 (June 29, 2011), 76 FR 39453 (July 6,
2011) (SR-NYSEAmex-2011-43); 66042 (December 23, 2011), 76 FR 82326
(December 30, 2011) (SR-NYSEAmex-2011-102); 67495 (July 25, 2012),
77 FR 45406 (July 31, 2012) (SR-NYSEMKT-2012-21); 68559 (January 2,
2013), 78 FR 1286 (January 8, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2012-84); 69812
(June 20, 2013), 78 FR 38766 (June 27, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-51);
71342 (January 17, 2014), 79 FR 4197 (January 24, 2014) (SR-NYSEMKT-
2014-02); 72622 (July 16, 2014). 79 FR 42600 (July 22, 2014) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2014-57);); and 73946 (December 24, 2014), 80 FR 60 (January
2, 2015) (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-109) (extending Pilot to July 31, 2015).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78.
    \11\ See SR-NYSEAmex-2010-31, supra note 5, at 41271.
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ See SR-NYSEMKT-2015-52. The New York Stock Exchange LLC
(``NYSE'') has submitted a proposed rule change to make the NYSE NMM
Pilot permanent. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75153 (June
11, 2015), 80 FR 34717 (June 17, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-26).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Extension of the UTP Pilot Program in tandem with the NMM Pilot,
both from July 31, 2015 until the earlier of Commission approval to
make such pilots permanent or October 31, 2015, will provide for the
uninterrupted trading of UTP Securities on the Exchange on an unlisted
trading privileges basis and thus continue to encourage the additional
utilization of, and interaction with, the Exchange, and provide market
participants with improved price discovery, increased liquidity, more
competitive quotes and greater price improvement for UTP Securities.
    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that member
organizations would have in complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. In particular,
the Exchange believes that its proposal to extend the UTP Pilot Program
is consistent with (i) Section 6(b) of the Act,\14\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in
particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, 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; (ii) Section
11A(a)(1) of the Act,\16\ in that it seeks to ensure the economically
efficient execution of securities transactions and fair competition
among brokers and dealers and among exchange markets; and (iii) Section
12(f) of the Act,\17\ which governs the trading of securities pursuant
to unlisted trading privileges consistent with the maintenance of fair
and orderly markets, the protection of investors and the public
interest, and the impact of extending the existing markets for such
securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that extending the UTP Pilot
Program would provide for the uninterrupted trading of UTP Securities
on the Exchange on an unlisted trading privileges basis and thus
continue to encourage the additional utilization of, and interaction
with, the Exchange, thereby providing market participants with
additional price discovery, increased liquidity, more competitive
quotes and potentially greater price improvement for UTP Securities.
Additionally, under the UTP Pilot Program, UTP Securities trade on the
Exchange pursuant to rules governing the trading of Exchange-Listed
securities that previously have been approved by the Commission.
Accordingly, this proposed rule change would permit the

Exchange to extend the effectiveness of the UTP Pilot Program in tandem
with the NMM Pilot, which the Exchange has similarly proposed to extend
until the earlier of Commission approval to make such pilot permanent
or October 31, 2015.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See supra note13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition. For these reasons, the Exchange
believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\19\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that extending the UTP Pilot
Program will promote competition in the trading of UTP Securities and
thereby provide market participants with opportunities for improved
price discovery, increased liquidity, more competitive quotes, and
greater price improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting the services it offers and the
requirements it imposes to remain competitive with other U.S. equity
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\21\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \22\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\23\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange notes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that waiver
will ensure that member organizations and the public can continue to
benefit from the pilot program without interruption after July 31,
2015. The Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and
designates the proposal operative upon filing.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \24\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \25\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2015-54 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-NYSEMKT-2015-54. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-NYSEMKT-2015-54, and should
be submitted on or before August 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-18881 Filed 7-31-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21946-21948]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09977]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0392; Product Identifier 2018-NM-044-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500
series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report indicating
that cracks were found on the fuselage frame webs at stations forward
and aft of the overwing emergency exits between stringers S-7 and S-8.
This proposed AD would require repetitive high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspections for cracking of the fuselage frame webs at certain
stations between stringers S-7 and S-8 and applicable on-condition
actions. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 25, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards 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 on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0392.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0392; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Truong, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-627-
5210; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0392;
Product Identifier 2018-NM-044-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM 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 proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received a report indicating that cracks were found on the
fuselage frame webs at stations forward and aft of the overwing
emergency exits between stringers S-7 and S-8. Cracks were found at
multiple stations and ranged in length from 2.4 inches to 2.55 inches.
The cracks started at the end fastener common to the uppermost shear
tie above the emergency exit doors, where there is high load transfer
due to high shear flows around the emergency exit doors. The cracks are
the result of fatigue loading caused by cyclic pressurization of the
fuselage. This condition, if not addressed, could result in fuselage
frame web cracking, which may lead to subsequent failure of the
surrounding structure, and ultimately result in rapid decompression and
loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1371 RB,
dated January 19, 2018. The service information describes procedures
for repetitive HFEC inspections for cracking of the fuselage frame webs
at certain stations between stringers S-7 and S-8 and applicable on-
condition actions. The on-condition action is repair. 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.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions
identified in the Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1371 RB,
dated January 19, 2018, described previously, except for any
differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this
proposed AD.
    For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0392.

Explanation of Requirements Bulletin

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the
Airworthiness Directives Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee
(AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a process for
annotating which steps in the service information are ``required for
compliance'' (RC) with an AD. Boeing has implemented this RC concept
into Boeing service bulletins.
    In an effort to further improve the quality of ADs and AD-related
Boeing service information, a joint process improvement initiative was
worked between the FAA and Boeing. The initiative resulted in the
development of a new process in which the service information more
clearly identifies the actions needed to address the unsafe condition
in the ``Accomplishment Instructions.'' The new process results in a
Boeing Requirements Bulletin, which contains only the actions needed to
address the unsafe condition (i.e., only the RC actions).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 63 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on  U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost     Cost per  product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repetitive inspections...........  Up to 14 work-hours              $0  Up to $1,190 per     Up to $74,790 per
                                    x $85 per hour =                     inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                    $1,190 per
                                    inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
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.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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 Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2018-0392; Product Identifier
2018-NM-044-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 25, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that cracks were
found on the

fuselage frame webs at stations forward and aft of the overwing
emergency exits between stringers S-7 and S-8. We are issuing this
AD to address fuselage frame web cracking, which may lead to
subsequent failure of the surrounding structure, and ultimately
result in rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of
the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions for Group 1 Airplanes

    For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin 737-53A1371 RB, dated January 19, 2018: Within 120 days
after the effective date of this AD, inspect the fuselage frame webs
at station (STA) 616 and STA 639 between stringers S-7 and S-8 and
do all applicable repairs, using a method approved in accordance
with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(h) Required Actions for Groups 2 Through 4 Airplanes

    Except for airplanes identified in paragraph (g) of this AD and
except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD: At the applicable
times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing Alert
Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1371 RB, dated January 19, 2018, do all
applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
737-53A1371 RB, dated January 19, 2018.

    Note 1 to paragraph (h) of this AD:  Guidance for accomplishing
the actions required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1371, dated January 19, 2018, which is referred to
in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1371 RB, dated January
19, 2018.

(i) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Requirements Service Bulletin 737-
53A1371 RB, dated January 19, 2018, uses the phrase ``the original
issue date of Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1371 RB,'' this AD
requires using ``the effective date of this AD.''
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1371 RB,
dated January 19, 2018, specifies contacting Boeing, this AD
requires repair using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority
to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards
District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, to make those findings. To be
approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration
deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact David Truong,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5224; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th
St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on April 27, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-09977 Filed 5-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 118 (Friday, June 19, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35295-35297]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15158]

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

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0085; FRL-9929-35-Region 8]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Rules, General Requirements and Test Methods; Utah

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of Utah on January 28, 2010, September 16, 2010, June 18, 2013,
and August 29, 2014. These submittals revise the rules, general
requirements and test methods for the State of Utah. The amendments
also update the version of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
incorporated by reference into the rules of the State of Utah. EPA is
not taking action on an April 26, 2012 submittal or a November 4, 2013
submittal because they have been superseded by the August 29, 2014
submittal. EPA is taking this action in accordance with section 110 of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 20, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2015-0085, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted
Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal
holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2015-0085. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA, without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to section I, General
Information, of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy
of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jody Ostendorf, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. Analysis of the State Submittals
III. What Action is EPA Taking Today?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews

I. General Information

What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI). Do not
submit CBI to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For
CBI information on a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the
outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically
within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as
CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register volume,
date, and page number);
     Follow directions and organize your comments;
     Explain why you agree or disagree;
     Suggest alternatives and substitute language for your
requested changes;

     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used;
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced;
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives;
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats; and,
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Analysis of the State Submittals

    In this proposed rulemaking, we are proposing to approve four
submittals into Utah's SIP. The January 28, 2010 submittal revises
R307-405-2, Permits: Major Sources in Attainment or Unclassified Areas
(PSD) and R307-102, General Requirements: Broadly Applicable
Requirements. The submittal revises R307-405-2, which incorporates by
reference the federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
permitting program in 40 CFR 52.21. Changes include the exclusion of
ethanol production facilities from the definition of chemical process
plants, and the clarification in the record keeping requirements for a
modification where there is a ``reasonable possibility'' that the
change would result in a significant increase of any regulated New
Source Review (NSR) pollutant. The ethanol exclusion Final Rule was
issued by EPA (72 FR 24060, May 1, 2007). EPA approved Utah's revised
rules to implement the non-vacated provisions of EPA's NSR Reform
regulations (76 FR 41712, July 15, 2011). EPA proposes to approve this
part of the submittal.
    The January 28, 2010 SIP revision also updates the incorporation by
reference date of the 40 CFR to July 1, 2008. EPA is not taking action
on this proposed update because it was superseded by the August 29,
2014 submittal that we are acting on in this document.
    EPA also proposes to approve R307-102, General Requirements:
Broadly Applicable Requirements, which changes the authorization from
Title 63-46b-4 to Title 63G-4-202, due to the recodification of Title
63 made by House Bill 63 Chapter 328, Laws of Utah 2008.
    The January 28, 2010 submittal revised R307-101-2, Definitions, to
update the threshold limit values to the 2009 American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists publication of Threshold Limit
Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents & Biological
Exposure Indices. However, a March 19, 2014 letter from the Governor
withdrew the January 28, 2010 submittal of R307-101-2. No further
action is required on this submittal.
    The September 16, 2010 submittal revises R307-101-2, to add the
definition of PM2.5, and General Requirements: Definitions.
The existing R307-101-2 was approved by EPA on September 2, 2008 (73 FR
51222).The definition of ``PM2.5,'' consistent with the
definition at 40 CFR 50.7, means particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers as measured by
an EPA reference or equivalent method. We propose to approve this
definition of PM2.5.
    The September 16, 2010 submittal also updates R307-214, National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants to add 12 new federal
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards that may apply
to sources of hazardous air pollutants in Utah. The amendments to R307-
101-3 and R307-214 update the version of the Code of Federal
Regulations incorporated by reference into the rules of the State of
Utah.
    However, a March 19, 2014 letter from the Governor withdrew the
request to approve the September 16, 2010 submittal regarding R307-214,
National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants, which is the
Utah Air Quality rule that incorporates by reference provisions of 40
CFR parts 61 and 63. There is no requirement for parts 61 and 63 to be
incorporated into Utah's SIP, so no further action is required on that
part of the submittal. EPA is not taking action on the proposed update
to the version of the Code of Federal Regulations for R307-101-3,
because it was superseded by the August 29, 2014 submittal that EPA is
proposing to approve in this document.
    The June 18, 2013 submittal revises R307-401-15, Air Strippers and
Soil Venting Projects, to refer to the most recent test methods and to
allow sources to use future updated federally-approved methods. The
existing rule was (conditionally) approved by EPA (79 FR 27190, May 13,
2014), after EPA received a commitment letter from the State of Utah to
remove the Director's Discretion language within one year or EPA's
action would revert to a disapproval. The State submitted proposed
revised language within the one-year deadline and requested that EPA
approve the following language in R307-401-15(3)(a), ``Emissions
estimates of volatile organic compounds shall be based on test data
obtained in accordance with the test method in the EPA document SW-846,
Test #8260c or 8261a, or the most recent EPA revision of either test
method if approved by the director.'' Utah also proposes to revise
R307-401-15(3)(b), to now state, ``Emissions estimates of hazardous air
pollutants shall be based on test data obtained in accordance with the
test method in EPA document SW-846, Test #8021B or the most recent EPA
revision of the test method if approved by the director.'' This
language provides the certainty required to ensure the appropriate EPA
approved test is used and, because EPA routinely updates test methods,
this language allows the State to use the most current version of the
test method without having to do a SIP revision. We propose to approve
these revisions.
    The June 18, 2013 submittal also proposes a non-substantive change
to re-number R307-410-5(1)[(d)] to R307-410-5(1)(c)(i)(C). EPA is not
acting on this proposed change because EPA disapproved R307-410-5,
Documentation of Ambient Air Impacts for Hazardous Air Pollutants on
February 6, 2014 due to lack of EPA authority to approve provisions
that only address hazardous air pollutants in a SIP revision under CAA
section 110 (79 FR 7072).
    The April 26, 2012 submittal revises R307-101-3, General
Requirements; Version of Code of Federal Regulations Incorporated by
Reference. EPA is not taking action on this submittal because it was
superseded by the August 29, 2014 submittal that EPA is acting on in
this document.
    The November 4, 2013 submittal also revises R307-101-3, General
Requirements; Version of Code of Federal Regulations Incorporated by
Reference. EPA is not taking action on this submittal because it was
superseded by the August 29, 2014 submittal that EPA is acting on in
this document.
    The August 29, 2014 submittal amends R307-101-3, General
Requirements, Version of Code of Federal Regulations Incorporated by
Reference and supersedes and replaces all previous versions of
submittals received on January 28, 2010, September16, 2010, April 26,
2012 and November 4, 2013. No further EPA action is required on those
earlier submittals. The existing rule was approved by EPA on September
2, 2008 (73 FR 51222). Except as specifically identified in an
individual rule, the version of the CFR incorporated throughout R307 is
dated July 1, 2013.
    The August 29, 2014 submittal amends R307-101-3 to include four

chemical compounds on the list of compounds excluded from the
definition of VOC, as found in EPA rule at 40 CFR 51.100(s), on the
basis that each of these compounds makes a negligible contribution to
tropospheric ozone formation. These compounds consist of four
hydrofluoropolyethers (HFPEs) which are identified as HCF2OCF2H (also
known as HFE-134), HCF2OCF2OCF2H (also known as HFE-236cal2),
HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (also known as HFE-338pcc13), and HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H
(also known as H-Galden 1040X or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)). If
an entity uses or produces any of these four HFPE compounds (these
being in the family of products known by the trade name H-Galden) and
is subject to the EPA regulations limiting the use of VOC in a product,
limiting the VOC emissions from a facility, or otherwise controlling
the use of VOC for purposes related to attaining the ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), then the compound will not be
counted as a VOC in determining whether these regulatory obligations
have been met.
    This EPA rule, Air Quality: Revision to Definition of Volatile
Organic Compounds--Exclusion of a Group of Four Hydrofluoropolyethers
(HFPEs), was finalized on February 12, 2013 (78 FR 9823). EPA proposes
to approve this SIP revision.
    Finally, the August 29, 2014 submittal updates the version of the
CFR incorporated by reference into the rules of the State of Utah to
reflect that 40 CFR 60.56c(d)(2) of subpart Ec was removed from federal
regulation (78 FR 28052). That provision previously excluded Hospital
Medical Infectious Waste Incinerators (HMIWI) units from having to
comply with standards during periods of Startup Shutdown Malfunction
(SSM) provided that no hospital waste or medical/infectious waste was
being charged to the unit during those SSM periods. That provision was
removed from federal regulation on May 13, 2013 (78 FR 28052). EPA
proposes to approve this SIP revision.

III. What action is EPA taking today?

    EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revisions submitted by Utah on
January 28, 2010, September 16, 2010, June 18, 2013 and August 29,
2014. We are proposing to approve the January 28, 2010 revisions to
R307-405-2, with exception to the proposed change to the incorporation
by reference date, and proposing to approve all of the revisions to
R307-102. We are proposing to approve the June 18, 2013 SIP revisions,
with the exception of the non-substantive change to re-number R307-410-
5(1)[(d)] to R307-410-5(1)(c)(i)(C). The August 29, 2014 submittal's
newly amended rule supersedes and replaces all previous versions of
submittals of R307-101-3, General Requirements, Version of Code of
Federal Regulations Incorporated by Reference. EPA proposes to approve
the August 29, 2014 revisions. Previous submittals were received on
January 28, 2010, September 16, 2010, April 26, 2012 and November 4,
2013. No further EPA action is required on these earlier submittals.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the Utah Division of Air Quality rules regarding rules,
general requirements, and test methods discussed in section II,
Analysis of the State Submittals, of this preamble. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these documents generally available
electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the
appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for
more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
actions, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves some state law as
meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 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
in 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: June 3, 2015.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2015-15158 Filed 6-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P