Haze Amendment No. 1.                                                                          begins.].                             Appendix A.4, and
                                                                                introductory
                                                                                elements that
                                                                                pertain to the NOX
                                                                                requirements for
                                                                                Coyote Station;
                                                                                excluding all
                                                                                other portions of
                                                                                the submittal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the Federal Register notice cited in this column
  for the particular provision.

* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.1825 is added as follows:

Sec.  52.1825  Federal Implementation Plan for Regional Haze.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies to each owner and operator
of the following coal-fired electric generating units (EGUs) in the
State of North Dakota: Coal Creek Station, Units 1 and 2; Antelope
Valley Station, Units 1 and 2.
    (b) Definitions. Terms not defined below shall have the meaning
given them in the Clean Air Act or EPA's regulations implementing the
Clean Air Act. For purposes of this section:
    (1) Boiler operating day means a 24-hour period between 12 midnight
and the following midnight during which any fuel is combusted at any
time in the EGU. It is not necessary for fuel to be combusted for the
entire 24-hour period.
    (2) Continuous emission monitoring system or CEMS means the
equipment required by this section to sample, analyze, measure, and
provide, by means of readings recorded at least once every 15 minutes
(using an automated data acquisition and handling system (DAHS)), a
permanent record of NOX emissions, other pollutant
emissions, diluent, or stack gas volumetric flow rate.
    (3) NOX means nitrogen oxides.
    (4) Owner/operator means any person who owns or who operates,
controls, or supervises an EGU identified in paragraph (a) of this
section.
    (5) Unit means any of the EGUs identified in paragraph (a) of this
section.
    (c) Emissions limitations. (1) The owners/operators subject to this
section shall not emit or cause to be emitted NOX in excess
of the following limitations, in pounds per million British thermal
units (lb/MMBtu), averaged over a rolling 30-day period:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               NOX Emission limit (lb/
                Source name                            MMBtu)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coal Creek Station, Units 1 and 2.........  0.13, averaged across both
                                             units.
Antelope Valley Station, Unit 1...........  0.17.
Antelope Valley Station, Unit 2...........  0.17.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (2) These emission limitations shall apply at all times, including
startups, shutdowns, emergencies, and malfunctions.
    (d) Compliance date. The owners and operators of Coal Creek Station
shall comply with the emissions limitation and other requirements of
this section within five (5) years of the effective date of this rule,
unless otherwise indicated in specific paragraphs. The owners and
operators of Antelope Valley Station shall comply with the emissions
limitations and other requirements of this section as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than July 31, 2018, unless otherwise
indicated in specific paragraphs.
    (e) Compliance determination--(1) CEMS. At all times after the
compliance date specified in paragraph (d) of this section, the owner/
operator of each unit shall maintain, calibrate, and operate a CEMS, in
full compliance with the requirements found at 40 CFR part 75, to
accurately measure NOX, diluent, and stack gas volumetric
flow rate from each unit. The CEMS shall be used to determine
compliance with the

emission limitations in paragraph (c) of this section for each unit.
    (2) Method. (i) For any hour in which fuel is combusted in a unit,
the owner/operator of each unit shall calculate the hourly average
NOX concentration in lb/MMBtu at the CEMS in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR part 75. At the end of each boiler operating
day, the owner/operator shall calculate and record a new 30-day rolling
average emission rate in lb/MMBtu from the arithmetic average of all
valid hourly emission rates from the CEMS for the current boiler
operating day and the previous 29 successive boiler operating days.
    (ii) An hourly average NOX emission rate in lb/MMBtu is
valid only if the minimum number of data points, as specified in 40 CFR
part 75, is acquired by both the NOX pollutant concentration
monitor and the diluent monitor (O2 or CO2).
    (iii) Data reported to meet the requirements of this section shall
not include data substituted using the missing data substitution
procedures of subpart D of 40 CFR part 75, nor shall the data have been
bias adjusted according to the procedures of 40 CFR part 75.
    (f) Recordkeeping. Owner/operator shall maintain the following
records for at least five years:
    (1) All CEMS data, including the date, place, and time of sampling
or measurement; parameters sampled or measured; and results.
    (2) Records of quality assurance and quality control activities for
emissions measuring systems including, but not limited to, any records
required by 40 CFR part 75.
    (3) Records of all major maintenance activities conducted on
emission units, air pollution control equipment, and CEMS.
    (4) Any other records required by 40 CFR part 75.
    (g) Reporting. All reports under this section shall be submitted to
the Director, Office of Enforcement, Compliance and Environmental
Justice, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mail Code
8ENF-AT, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
    (1) Owner/operator shall submit quarterly excess emissions reports
no later than the 30th day following the end of each calendar quarter.
Excess emissions means emissions that exceed the emissions limits
specified in paragraph (c) of this section. The reports shall include
the magnitude, date(s), and duration of each period of excess
emissions, specific identification of each period of excess emissions
that occurs during startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions of the unit,
the nature and cause of any malfunction (if known), and the corrective
action taken or preventative measures adopted.
    (2) Owner/operator shall submit quarterly CEMS performance reports,
to include dates and duration of each period during which the CEMS was
inoperative (except for zero and span adjustments and calibration
checks), reason(s) why the CEMS was inoperative and steps taken to
prevent recurrence, any CEMS repairs or adjustments, and results of any
CEMS performance tests required by 40 CFR part 75 (Relative Accuracy
Test Audits, Relative Accuracy Audits, and Cylinder Gas Audits).
    (3) When no excess emissions have occurred or the CEMS has not been
inoperative, repaired, or adjusted during the reporting period, such
information shall be stated in the report.
    (h) Notifications. (1) Owner/operator shall submit notification of
commencement of construction of any equipment which is being
constructed to comply with the NOX emission limits in
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (2) Owner/operator shall submit semi-annual progress reports on
construction of any such equipment.
    (3) Owner/operator shall submit notification of initial startup of
any such equipment.
    (i) Equipment operation. At all times, owner/operator shall
maintain each unit, including associated air pollution control
equipment, in a manner consistent with good air pollution control
practices for minimizing emissions.
    (j) Credible Evidence. Nothing in this section shall preclude the
use, including the exclusive use, of any credible evidence or
information, relevant to whether a source would have been in compliance
with requirements of this section if the appropriate performance or
compliance test procedures or method had been performed.

[FR Doc. 2012-6586 Filed 4-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 147 (Thursday, July 31, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44320-44321]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16999]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 27 and 29

Interest in Restructure of Rotorcraft Airworthiness Standards

ACTION: Notice of Disposition of Comments.

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

SUMMARY: This notice disposes of public comments received by the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in response to a Federal Register
notice published on February 22, 2013, requesting comments on a
potential restructuring of the rotorcraft airworthiness standards of
Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 27 (normal
category rotorcraft) and 29 (transport category rotorcraft).
Specifically, the agency sought comments on the necessity of updates to
parts 27 and 29, including whether to change the existing weight- and
seat-based applicability standards for normal and transport rotorcraft.
Based on the comments received, the FAA is terminating this docket.
Commenters indicated a substantial interest in revising or
restructuring the certification standards for parts 27 and 29, and the
FAA's Rotorcraft Directorate will begin establishing the appropriate
forums to involve interested parties.

DATES: The docket is terminated as of July 31, 2014.

ADDRESSES: FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group
(ASW-111), 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Regulations and Policy Group (ASW-111), 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth,
Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>. The
primary contacts are: John VanHoudt (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or ASW-111 Manager Jorge R. Castillo (telephone:
817-222-5110, email: jorge.r.castillo@faa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Discussion

    Currently, rotorcraft with a maximum weight of 7,000 pounds or less
and nine passenger seats or less are certificated as normal category
rotorcraft under part 27; rotorcraft with a maximum weight greater than
7,000 pounds or with 10 or more passenger seats are certificated as
transport category rotorcraft under part 29.
    The FAA and rotorcraft industry have discussed potential revisions
to the ``applicability'' rules for rotorcraft certificated under parts
27 and 29 since the early 1990s. In February 1994, the FAA held a
public meeting to determine a course of action in the best interest of
the public and the aviation community. An Aviation Rulemaking Advisory
Committee working group was established with representatives from the
FAA, the Joint Aviation Authorities, and Transport Canada Civil
Aviation, as well as from U.S. and European helicopter manufacturers.
In February 1995, the committee established the Rotorcraft Gross Weight
and Passenger Issues Working Group, and tasked the group with
recommending new or revised requirements for increasing the gross
weight and passenger limitations for normal category rotorcraft. There
was agreement within the group to increase the gross weight limitation
of part 27 from 6,000 to 7,000 pounds with added passenger safety
requirements. The FAA implemented this regulatory change in a 1999
final rule (64 FR 45092, August 18, 1999).
    We continue to recognize that the evolution of parts 27 and 29 has
not kept pace with technology and the capability of rotorcraft produced
currently. The FAA is therefore interested in investigating new
approaches that would make the rotorcraft airworthiness regulations
more efficient and adaptable to future technology. Additionally, the
FAA has found that, without a rulemaking effort to extensively revise
the rotorcraft standards, we are left with the option of issuing
multiple special conditions for the same technologies.
    The FAA published a Federal Register notice on February 22, 2013
(78 FR 12254), requesting comments on ``Interest in Restructure of
Rotorcraft Airworthiness Standards.'' Specifically, we requested
comment on (1) to what extent commenters believed the certification
standards need to be changed in order to remain relevant; (2) whether
the current standards need to be completely changed, as opposed to more
targeted changes; (3) whether the applicability rules should be changed
from weight- and passenger-based standards, and, if so, how; and (4)
commenters' willingness to participate in a rulemaking committee. We
received 48 comments to the docket number FAA-2013-0144.

Comments Summary

    Of the 48 comments received, the majority were from operators and
their affiliates. There were also comments from another civil aviation
authority (Transport Canada Civil Aviation); various rotorcraft-
affiliated organizations (including the Aerospace Industries
Association, the American Helicopter Society International, the
Association of Air Medical Services, the General Aviation Manufacturers
Association, and Helicopter Association International); vendors and
manufacturers (including Bell Helicopter, Eurocopter, and Marenco
Swisshelicopter); and others. These comments indicated a substantial
interest in favor of some form of revision or restructure of the
rotorcraft design certification standards in parts 27 and 29 and
expressed that the current regulatory scheme is outdated by technology
and impedes the development of new rotorcraft models. Only three
commenters stated the weight and passenger thresholds of the current
regulations should remain unchanged. Most commenters recommended that
the FAA approach this effort in a deliberate and methodical manner,
including forming a group in coordination with industry to evaluate
parts 27 and 29 and provide recommendations to the FAA prior to
initiating a formal rulemaking action. Commenters also expressed a need
to coordinate this effort with other civil aviation authorities.
Additionally, many commenters expressed interest in participating in
the process of updating the regulations.

Termination of This Docket and Future Agency Action

    Based on these comments, the FAA has determined that there is
sufficient interest in the rotorcraft community to pursue further
collaboration towards possible revisions to parts 27 and 29. The FAA is
therefore terminating this docket. The Rotorcraft Directorate will
begin establishing the appropriate forum(s) and involving interested

parties. The FAA will also reach out to our bilateral partners (i.e.,
Transport Canada Civil Aviation and the European Aviation Safety
Agency) and invite their participation in this effort. Parties
interested in this initiative may look forward to future public
announcements on upcoming developments.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on July 10, 2014.
Kimberly K. Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-16999 Filed 7-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 246 (Monday, December 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70621-70622]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27632]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0287]

Driver Qualification Files: Application for Exemption; Knight-
Swift Transportation Holdings, Inc.

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings,
Inc. (Knight-Swift) has applied for an exemption from regulations
requiring motor carriers to obtain the motor vehicle record (MVR) of
its drivers holding a commercial driver's license (CDL) whenever the
driver's MVR is updated by a new medical examination. Knight-Swift
seeks exemption only when a newly-hired driver undergoes a medical
examination. Knight-Swift suggests that in these cases it be permitted
to satisfy this requirement by obtaining other proof of the results of
the medical examination. FMCSA requests public comments on the request
for exemption. The application is available in the docket.

DATES: January 22, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2019-0287 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The on-line FDMS is available 24 hours each
day, 365 days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received
your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or
postcard or print the acknowledgement page that appears after
submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this notice
contact Ms. La Tonya Mimms, Chief, Driver and Carrier Operations
Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards;
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2019-0287), indicate the specific section of this
document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for
suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency

can contact you if it has questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2019-0287'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to www.regulations.gov and insert
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2019-0287'' in the ``Keyword'' box and click
``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' button and choose the
document listed to review. If you do not have access to the internet,
you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations. FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in
the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.
    The Agency reviews the safety analyses and the public comments, and
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reason for the grant or denial and, if granted,
the specific person or class of persons receiving the exemption, and
the regulatory provision or provisions from which exemption is granted.
The notice must also specify the effective period of the exemption (up
to 5 years), and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).

    Issued on: December 17, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-27632 Filed 12-20-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37633-37635]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16150]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-D-0967]

Intent to Exempt Certain Unclassified, Class II, and Class I
Reserved Medical Devices From Premarket Notification Requirements;
Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff;
Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of the guidance entitled ``Intent to Exempt Certain
Unclassified, Class II, and Class I Reserved Medical Devices from
Premarket Notification Requirements.'' This guidance describes FDA's
intent to exempt certain unclassified medical devices (that FDA intends
to classify into class I or II), certain class II medical devices, and
certain class I medical devices from premarket notification
requirements. FDA believes the devices identified in this guidance
document are sufficiently well understood and do not require premarket
notification to assure their safety and effectiveness.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on this guidance at
any time. General comments on Agency guidance documents are welcome at
any time.

ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for
download from the Internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written
requests for a single hard copy of the guidance document entitled
``Intent to Exempt Certain Unclassified, Class II, and Class I Reserved
Medical Devices from Premarket Notification Requirements'' to the
Office of the Center Director, Guidance and Policy Development, Center
for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-
0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in
processing your request.
    Submit electronic comments on the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela C. Krueger, Center for Devices
and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1666, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-6380.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the commitment letter (section 1.G of the Performance Goals and
Procedures) that was drafted as part of the reauthorization process for
the Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2012, part of the Food and
Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-144), FDA
committed to identifying low-risk medical devices to exempt from
premarket notification requirements. This guidance describes FDA's
intent to exempt certain unclassified medical devices (that FDA intends
to classify into class I or II), certain class II medical devices, and
certain class I medical devices (that no longer meet the ``reserved''
criteria in section 510(l) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360(l))) from premarket notification
requirements. FDA believes the devices identified in this guidance
document are sufficiently well understood and do not require 510(k)
notification to assure their safety and effectiveness.
    The draft of this guidance was made available in the Federal
Register on August 1, 2014 (79 FR 44804). The comment period closed on
September 30, 2014. FDA received one comment on the draft guidance
requesting that devices classified under 21 CFR 880.6760 (Protective
restraint, product code OYS, Patient Bed with Canopy/Restraints) be
considered for inclusion in the guidance document. FDA considered the
comment and determined it was appropriate to add this device type to
the final guidance.
    In the process of finalizing the guidance document, the Center for
Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) reviewed additional medical
device product codes not included in the draft guidance and determined
that there were additional device types which are sufficiently well
understood and do not require premarket notification (510(k)) to assure
their safety and effectiveness. As a result, the following device types
(product codes) were added to the final guidance document: EIB--
Syringe, Irrigating (Dental); EWD--Protector, Hearing (Insert); EWE--
Protector, Hearing (Circumaural); LEZ--Aids, Speech Training for the
Hearing Impaired (AC-Powered and Patient-Contact); LFA--Aids, Speech
Training for the Hearing Impaired (Battery-Operated or Non-Patient);
KLX--Electroglottograph; LZI--Device, Assistive Listening; LRL--
Cushion, Hemorrhoid; KMJ--Lubricant, Patient; OYS--Patient Bed with
Canopy/Restraint (see above); HCD--Cannula, Ventricular; GYK--
Instrument, Shunt System Implantation; LHM--System, Thermographic,
Liquid Crystal; KYA--System, Thermographic, Liquid Crystal, Nonpowered
(Adjunctive Use); NUR--Pad, Interlabial; and LZW--Monitor, Spine
Curvature.
    Additionally, CDRH reviewed the device types (product codes)
included in the draft guidance document and determined that two device
types (product codes) originally proposed in the draft guidance
document should not be included in the final guidance as devices for
which FDA intends to exempt from premarket notification requirements:
FLL--Thermometer, Electrical, Clinical (21 CFR 880.2910); and GWO--
Plate, Cranioplasty, Preformed, Alterable (21 CFR 882.5320). CDRH
determined that premarket notification (510(k)) is necessary to assure
the safety and effectiveness of these devices. Notably, the FLL product
code currently covers thermometers with a range of technologies and
intended uses, including those used to screen for potential pandemic
contagious diseases. CDRH believes that some thermometer types may be
candidates for exemption from premarket notification requirements at a
later date, but that thermometers should first be further categorized
by technology and/or intended use into distinct product codes. CDRH is
actively reviewing this issue and will further consider which of the
sub-types may be appropriate to exempt from premarket notification
requirements. In addition, CDRH believes that premarket notification
(510(k)) is necessary to provide a reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness for cranioplasty plates (GWO), which are permanent
implants and may be constructed of polymeric materials and/or may be
resorbable, because FDA must evaluate the material properties and
resorption rate in relation to bone healing. CDRH recognizes that
manufacturers may not have submitted a 510(k) for these two device
types following publication of the draft guidance. As a result, CDRH is
providing such manufacturers 90 days following the publication of this
notice to submit a 510(k) for these device types; however, distribution
and marketing of such devices must cease if a manufacturer receives an
order from FDA declaring the device to be not substantially equivalent
to any legally marketed predicate device. Finally, CDRH changed the
product code listed in the guidance document for Ophthalmic Cameras (21
CFR 886.1120) from HKI--Camera, Ophthalmic, AC-Powered to PJZ--Camera,
Ophthalmic, AC-Powered, General Use to clarify the type of AC-powered
Ophthalmic Camera CDRH intended to exempt. CDRH also removed LQX--
Device, Finger-Sucking (21 CFR 890.3475) from the final guidance
because this device type is already classified as class I (general
controls) and exempt from premarket notification. Finger-sucking
devices (LQX) and cranioplasty plates (GWO) were unintentionally
included in the draft guidance.

III. Significance of Guidance

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of the FDA on the Intent to Exempt Certain
Unclassified, Class II, and Class I Reserved Medical Devices from
Premarket Notification Requirements. It does not establish any rights
for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an
alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

IV. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the guidance may do so by
downloading an electronic copy from the Internet. A search capability
for all CDRH guidance documents is available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. Guidance documents are also available at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of
``Intent to Exempt Certain Unclassified, Class II, and Class I Reserved
Medical Devices from Premarket Notification Requirements'' may send an
email request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to receive an electronic
copy of the document. Please use the document number 1300046 to
identify the guidance you are requesting.

V. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E, have been

approved under OMB control number 0910-0120.

VI. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: June 26, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-16150 Filed 6-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 12, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70473-70475]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24579]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79054; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-137]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the NYSE
Arca Equities Schedule of Fees and Charges for Exchange Services To
Revise the Requirements for the Current Step Up Tier

    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 September 29, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') 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 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 the NYSE Arca Equities Schedule of
Fees and Charges for Exchange Services (the ``Fee Schedule'') to revise
the requirements for the current Step Up Tier. The Exchange proposes to
implement the fee change effective October 3, 2016. 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 the Fee Schedule to revise the
requirements for the current Step Up Tier. The Exchange proposes to
implement the fee change effective October 3, 2016.
Step Up Tier
    The Exchange recently adopted a Step Up Pricing Tier.\4\ Currently,
ETP Holders and Market Makers qualify for a Step Up Tier credit of
$0.0029 per share for providing liquidity in Tape A and Tape C
Securities and $0.0028 per share for providing liquidity in Tape B
Securities. The Step Up Tier credits apply to ETP Holders and Market
Makers that, on a daily basis, measured monthly,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78892 (September 21,
2016), 81 FR 66315 (September 27, 2016) (SR-NYSEArca-2016-128) (the
``Step Up Tier Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) directly execute providing average daily volume (``ADV'') on
NYSE Arca in an amount that is an increase of no less than 0.15% of
United States consolidated average daily volume (``US CADV'') in Tape
A, Tape B and Tape C Securities for that month over the ETP Holder's or
Market Maker's providing ADV in July 2016 (``Baseline Month''), and
    (ii) set a new Best Bid or Offer (``BBO'') on the Exchange with at
least 40% of the ETP Holder's or Market Maker's providing ADV.
    As an incentive for ETP Holders and Market Makers to direct their
order flow to the Exchange, for the months of September 2016 and
October 2016 only, the Exchange adopted lower providing ADV criteria
for ETP Holders and Market Makers to qualify for the Step Up Tier
credits. For the billing month of September 2016 only, the Step Up Tier
credit applied to ETP Holders and Market Makers that, on a daily basis,
measured monthly,
    (i) directly executed providing ADV on NYSE Arca in an amount that
was an increase of no less than 0.045% of US CADV in Tape A, Tape B and
Tape C Securities for that month over the ETP Holder's or Market
Maker's providing ADV in the Baseline Month, and
    (ii) set a new BBO on the Exchange with at least 40% of the ETP
Holder's or Market Maker's providing ADV.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Step Up Tier Filing adopted lower requirements for ETP
Holders and Market Makers to qualify for the Step Up Tier credits
for the months of September 2016 and October 2016. Given this
proposed rule change would become effective October 3, 2016 and
would no longer be applicable for September 2016, the Exchange
proposes to delete from the Fee Schedule reference to the Step Up
Tier credits applicable to ETP Holders and Market Makers for the
month of September 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed in the Step Up Tier Filing, for the billing month of
October 2016 only, the Step Up credit would be applicable to ETP
Holders and Market Makers that, on a daily basis, measured monthly,
    (i) directly execute providing ADV on NYSE Arca in an amount that
is an increase of no less than 0.09% of US CADV in Tape A, Tape B and
Tape C Securities for that month over the ETP Holder's or Market
Maker's providing ADV in the Baseline Month, and
    (ii) set a new BBO on the Exchange with at least 40% of the ETP
Holder's and Market Maker's providing ADV.
    The Exchange proposes to revise the requirement for the Step Up
Tier that would be applicable to ETP Holders and Market Makers, with a
lower requirement for October 2016, to provide market participants with
an incentive to direct their orders to the Exchange.
    The Exchange is proposing a change to the second part of the
current Step Up Tier by requiring ETP Holders and Market Makers to set
a new BBO on the Exchange with at least 25% in each of the ETP Holder's
or Market Maker's Tape A, Tape B and Tape C providing ADV.
Specifically, as proposed, the Step Up Credit would be applicable to
ETP Holders and Market Makers that, on a daily basis, measured monthly,
    (i) directly execute providing ADV on NYSE Arca in an amount that
is an increase of no less than 0.15% of US CADV in Tape A, Tape B and
Tape C Securities for that month over the ETP Holder's or Market
Maker's providing ADV in the Baseline Month, and
    (ii) set a new BBO on the Exchange with at least 25% in each of the
ETP Holder's or Market Maker's Tape A, Tape B and Tape C providing ADV.
    The Exchange is not proposing any change to the first part of the
Step Up Tier or to the level of credits payable under the Step Up Tier.
    To illustrate, an ETP Holder who has a providing ADV of 15 million
shares in the Baseline Month would be required to execute, at a
minimum, an additional 9.75 million shares of providing ADV if CADV is
6.5 billion shares in the billing month, or 0.15% over the Baseline
Month, for a total providing ADV of 24.75 million shares for the
billing month. Further, of the 24.75 million shares, assume 10.75
million shares are in Tape A Securities, and 7 million shares are each
in Tape B and Tape C Securities. The ETP Holder would be

required to have a providing ADV that sets a new BBO on the Exchange of
at least 2.6875 million shares in Tape A Securities, and 1.750 million
shares each in Tape B and Tape C Securities.
    For the billing month of October 2016 only, the Step Up credit
would be applicable to ETP Holders and Market Makers that, on a daily
basis, measured monthly,
    (i) directly execute providing ADV on NYSE Arca in an amount that
is an increase of no less than 0.09% of US CADV in Tape A, Tape B and
Tape C Securities for that month over the ETP Holder's or Market
Maker's providing ADV in the Baseline Month, and
    (ii) set a new BBO on the Exchange with at least 25% in each of the
ETP Holder's or Market Maker's Tape A, Tape B and Tape C providing ADV.
    The Exchange believes revising the requirement for ETP Holders and
Market Makers to set a new BBO on the Exchange with at least 25% in
each of the ETP Holder's or Market Maker's Tape A, Tape B and Tape C
providing ADV should allow a greater number of participants to qualify
for the credit and will also encourage ETP Holders and Market Makers to
provide liquidity across more symbols traded on the Exchange to the
benefit of all market participants who trade on the Exchange.
    The Exchange notes that if an ETP Holder or Market Maker qualifies
for more than one tier in the Fee Schedule, the Exchange would apply
the most favorable rate available under such tiers.
    The goal of the Step-Up Tier when adopted by the Exchange in
September 2016 was to incentivize ETP Holders and Market Makers to
increase the orders sent directly to NYSE Arca and therefore provide
liquidity that supports the quality of price discovery and promotes
market transparency. The Exchange believes the proposed change to the
Step Up Tier furthers that goal by encouraging ETP Holders and Market
Makers to direct their order flow in more securities traded on the
Exchange rather than just a subset of securities.
    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other problem, and the Exchange is not aware of any significant problem
that the affected market participants would have in complying with the
proposed changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and
other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. The Exchange believes
that the proposal does not constitute an inequitable allocation of
fees, as all similarly situated market participants will be subject to
the same fees and credits and access to the Exchange's market is
offered on fair and non-discriminatory terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that amendments [sic] to the Step Up Tier is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
proposed amendment would continue to directly relate to the activity of
ETP Holders and Market Makers and would apply uniformly to all
similarly situated ETP Holders and Market Makers that send orders to
the Exchange. The Exchange further believes that lowering the level for
setting a new BBO on the Exchange from 40% to 25% of adding ADV is
reasonable because it may allow a greater number of ETP Holders and
Market Makers to qualify for the Step up Tier credits. The Exchange
believes adopting separate BBO requirements for each of Tape A, Tape B
and Tape C securities is reasonable because it would create an
incentive for ETP Holders and Market Makers to improve displayed quotes
on the Exchange for securities in each Tape, which would benefit all
market participants in securities of each tape.
    As the Exchange noted in the Step Up Tier Filing, the Exchange
believes that the Step-Up Tier is intended to provide market
participants with an incentive to increase the orders sent directly to
NYSE Arca and thereby provide liquidity that supports the quality of
price discovery and promotes market transparency. The Exchange believes
the proposed amendment to the Step Up Tier will continue to provide
market participants with the incentive to direct their order flow to
the Exchange. Moreover, the amendment to the Step Up Tier would benefit
market participants whose targeted order flow would provide meaningful
added levels of liquidity thereby contributing to the depth and market
quality on the Exchange. In addition, the Exchange believes the
proposed amendment to the Step Up Tier should result in more market
participants providing order flow and therefore more market
participants would be eligible to receive the credits for their orders.
    The Exchange believes that adopting lower providing ADV criteria
for October 2016 is reasonable because it may allow a greater number of
ETP Holders and Market Makers to qualify for the proposed credits while
also providing ETP Holders and Market Makers the opportunity to
gradually increase their activity in order to qualify for the credits.
The Exchange believes that adopting lower providing ADV criteria for
October 2016 is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because
the lower criteria would apply uniformly to all ETP Holders and Market
Makers during October 2016.
    Volume-based rebates such as the ones currently in place on the
Exchange have been widely adopted in the cash equities markets and are
equitable because they are open to all ETP Holders and Market Makers on
an equal basis and provide additional benefits or discounts that are
reasonably related to the value to an exchange's market quality
associated with higher levels of market activity, such as higher levels
of liquidity provision and/or growth patterns, and introduction of
higher volumes of orders into the price and volume discovery processes.
    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 the foregoing 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,\8\ 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. Instead, the Exchange believes that the proposal
to amend the Step Up Tier would continue to encourage the submission of
additional liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for ETP Holders and Market Makers. The Exchange believes that this
could promote competition between the Exchange and other execution
venues, including those that currently offer similar order types and
comparable transaction pricing, by

encouraging additional orders to be sent to the Exchange for execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 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 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 fees and rebates 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 fees and credits in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited. As a result of all of these considerations, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the
ability of ETP Holders 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 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 foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \9\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-
4 \10\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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) \11\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 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-NYSEArca-2016-137 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-137. 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-NYSEArca-2016-137 and should
be submitted on or before November 2, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Dated: October 5, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-24579 Filed 10-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


WHAT’S NEW

OFFICIAL OPENING OF PETROJAM ETHANOL LIMITED

Petrojam Ethanol Limited (PEL), is a wholly owned subsidiary of Petrojam
Limited.   Petrojam Ethanol Limited has upgraded and expanded the
Ethanol Dehydration Plant with funds from Petrojam Limited and Coimex
Trading Company of Brazil, to produce fuel grade ethanol from hydrous
alcohol.  Production of ethanol commenced in September 2005 and both
PEL and Coimex have entered into an agreement to market the ethanol
produced to the United States of America. The official opening of the
newly refurbished plant took place on November 23, 2005.

PETROCARIBE AGREEMENT:  A BI-LATERAL AGREEMENT TO UPGRADE THE REFINERY

On August 23, 2005, the PetroCaribe Energy Cooperation Agreement was
signed between Jamaica and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela for
collaboration on a joint project to upgrade the Petrojam Refinery.
This PetroCaribe Bilateral Agreement will also bring both long-term and
short-term benefits to Jamaica’s energy sector.

 Work on the upgrade of the Refinery has already begun with plans
already far advanced in the redesign of the Plant for increasing
production throughput from 36,000 barrels per day to 50,000 barrels per
day.  This will allow Petrojam to export petroleum products to
neighbouring countries.

The upgrade, estimated to cost US$300 million, will be undertaken by
Petrojam in partnership with the State-owned Petroleum Company of
Venezuela (PDVSA) and is scheduled for completion in 2009.  Venezuela
will also share technical expertise to ensure the smooth implementation
of the upgraded facility.  To ensure full participation at all levels
of the project, PDVSA has established an office in Jamaica to manage
Venezuela’s input in the project.  The Petrojam Refinery, a small
refinery with a simple hydro-skimming design, typically produces about
45% of heavy fuel oil, a low margin product from the type of crude oil
it normally processes.  The upgrade will redesign and reconfigure the
Refinery to process heavier, less costly crude oil from Venezuela, which
will reduce the proportion of heavy fuel oil produced, and increase
profitability on the sale of refinery products, manufactured by the
upgraded refinery.

Website: http://www.pcj.com/petrojam/whats_new.htm


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 246 (Wednesday, December 23, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 79735-79738]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32055]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-7525; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-064-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
certain The Boeing Company Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series
airplanes; Model 757 airplanes; and Model 767 airplanes. This proposed
AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded autopilot engagement events
resulting in incorrect stabilizer trim adjustment during takeoff. This
proposed AD would require, depending on the model/configuration for
Model 747 airplanes, installing an on-ground stabilizer autotrim
inhibit system, doing routine functional testing of the automatic
stabilizer trim inhibit system and corrective actions if necessary; for
Model 757 airplanes and Model 767 airplanes, installing relays and
related wiring to open and close the flight control computer (FCC)
analog output that controls the stabilizer trim adjustment, doing
routine functional testing of the automatic stabilizer trim inhibit
system, and corrective actions if necessary; and for Model 767-300, and
-300F series airplanes, installing new operational program software
(OPS) into the FCCs. We are proposing this AD to prevent stabilizer
mistrim, which could result in a high-speed rejected takeoff and runway
overrun, or reduced controllability of the airplane after takeoff due
to insufficient pitch control.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 8,
2016.

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 proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, 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-2015-
7525.

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-2015-
7525; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fnu Winarto, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2015-7525;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-064-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed 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 proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received reports of uncommanded autopilot engagement events
resulting in incorrect stabilizer trim adjustment during takeoff. The
current configuration of affected airplanes allows engagement of the
autopilot while on the ground. This engagement can result in the
stabilizer trim being positioned to a trim setting outside of the
acceptable takeoff setting range. The root cause is unknown, but the
erroneous autopilot engage request is believed to have come from the
mode control panel (MCP) and to have been caused by contamination
within the MCP. Incorrect stabilizer trim adjustment during takeoff, if
not corrected, could result in a high-speed rejected takeoff and runway
overrun, or reduced controllability of the airplane after takeoff due
to insufficient pitch control.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed the following service information.
     Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-22-2256,
dated March 6, 2015. This service information describes procedures for
installing an on-ground stabilizer autotrim inhibit system, and doing
functional testing.
     Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-22-0096,
dated March 23, 2015. This service information describes procedures for
modifying relays and wiring to open and close the FCC analog output
that controls the stabilizer trim adjustment, and doing functional
testing.
     Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-22-0143,
Revision 1, dated July 6, 2015. This service information describes
procedures for modifying relays and wiring to open and close the FCC
analog output that controls the stabilizer trim adjustment, and doing
functional testing.
     Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-22-0146,
Revision 1, dated June 25, 2015. This service information describes
procedures for installing new OPS into the FCCs.
    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 of this
NPRM.

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 these same type
designs.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously. 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-2015-
7525.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    For Model 747 airplanes, this proposed AD would require doing post-
modification routine functional testing of the automatic stabilizer
trim inhibit system, and corrective actions if necessary, at intervals
not to exceed 1,500 flight hours. The service information does not
require these actions.

Explanation of ``RC'' Steps in Service Information

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the
Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee
(ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement was a new process for
annotating which steps in the service information are required for
compliance with an AD. Differentiating these steps from other tasks in
the service information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's
understanding of crucial AD requirements and help provide consistent
judgment in AD compliance. The steps identified as Required for
Compliance (RC) in any service information identified previously have a
direct effect on detecting, preventing, resolving, or eliminating an
identified unsafe condition.
    For service information that contains steps that are labeled as RC,
the following provisions apply: (1) The steps labeled as RC, including
substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step,
must be done to comply with the AD, and an AMOC is required for any
deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures; and
(2) steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods
in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program
without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including
substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and
the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 1,220 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on  U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost          Parts cost     Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model 747 series airplane        123 work-hours x $85             $2,714  $13,169...........  $1,790,984.
 modification (136 airplanes).    per hour = $10,455.
Model 747 series airplane        4 work-hours x $85 per                0  $340 per test.....  $46,240 per test.
 functional test (136             hour = $340.
 airplanes).
Model 757 series airplane        83 work-hours x $85 per           3,236  $10,291...........  $6,977,298.
 modification (678 airplanes).    hour = $7,055.
Model 757 series airplane        3 work-hours x $85 per                0  $255 per test.....  $172,890 per test.
 functional test (678             hour = $255 per test.
 airplanes).
Model 767 series airplane        121 work-hours x $85              6,076  $16,361...........  $6,642,566.
 modification (406 airplanes).    per hour = $10,285.
Model 767 series airplane        1 work-hour x $85 per                 0  $85...............  $1,955.
 software modification (23        hour = $85.
 airplanes).
Model 767 series airplane        5 work-hours x $85 per                0  $425 per test.....  $172,550 per test.
 functional test (406             hour = $425 per test.
 airplanes).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed
AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all available costs in our
cost estimate.
    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.

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-2015-7525; Directorate Identifier
2015-NM-064-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 8, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to certain The Boeing Company airplanes,
certificated in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(4) of this AD.
    (1) Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes, as
identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-22-2256,
dated March 6, 2015.
    (2) Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB, and -300 series airplanes, as
identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-22-0096,
dated March 23, 2015.
    (3) Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes, as
identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-22-0143,
Revision 1, dated July 6, 2015.
    (4) Model 767-300, and -300F series airplanes, as identified in
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-22-0146, Revision 1,
dated June 25, 2015.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 22, Auto flight.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded autopilot
engagement events resulting in incorrect stabilizer trim adjustment
during takeoff. We are issuing this AD to prevent stabilizer
mistrim, which could result in a high-speed rejected takeoff and
runway overrun, or reduced controllability of the airplane after
takeoff due to insufficient pitch control.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Model 747 Airplane Modification and Repetitive Functional Testing

    For airplanes identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD: Within
24 months after the effective date of this AD, install new wiring
and relays to reroute the four autotrim arm signals through new or
existing air/ground determination source select switches, and do
functional testing, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-22-
2256, dated March 6, 2015. If the functional test fails, before
further flight, do corrective actions, repeat the test, and do all
applicable corrective actions until the functional test is passed,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 747-22-2256, dated March 6, 2015. Repeat
the functional test of the automatic stabilizer trim system
specified in step 250. of paragraph 3.B. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-22-
2256, dated March 6, 2015, thereafter at intervals not to exceed
1,500 flight hours. If any functional test fails, before further
flight, do corrective actions, repeat the test, and do all
applicable corrective actions until the functional test is passed,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 747-22-2256, dated March 6, 2015.

(h) Model 757 Airplane Modification and Repetitive Functional Testing

    For airplanes identified in paragraph (c)(2) of this AD: Within
24 months after the effective date of this AD, install wiring to
inhibit the automatic stabilizer trim arm discrete when the airplane
is on ground, install a two-position momentary contact test switch
in the main equipment center, and do the functional test and all
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 757-22-
0096, dated March 23, 2015. Repeat the functional test of the
automatic stabilizer trim system and all applicable corrective
actions specified in step 11. of paragraph 3.B. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 757-22-0096, dated March 23, 2015, thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 1,500 flight hours.

(i) Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER Series Airplane Modification
and Repetitive Functional Testing

    For airplanes identified in paragraph (c)(3) of this AD: Within
24 months after the effective date of this AD, install relays and
wiring to open and close the flight control computer (FCC) analog
output that controls the stabilizer trim adjustment, install a
momentary action ground test switch, and do the functional testing
and all applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 767-22-0143, Revision 1, dated July 6, 2015. Repeat the
functional test of the automatic stabilizer trim system and all
applicable corrective actions specified in steps 5.a. through 5.g.
of Paragraph 3.B. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-22-0143, Revision 1, dated
July 6, 2015, thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,500 flight
hours.

(j) Model 767-300 and -300F Series Airplane Modification

    For airplanes identified in paragraph (c)(4) of this AD: Within
16 months after the effective date of this AD, install new
operational program software into the FCCs, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 767-22-0146, Revision 1, dated June 25, 2015.

(k) Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 767-22-0143, dated March 6, 2015.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (j) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 767-22-0146, dated March 24, 2015.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle 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. 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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (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, Seattle ACO, 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.
    (4) For service information that contains steps that are labeled
as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs
(l)(4)(i) and (l)(4)(ii) apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Fnu Winarto,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 8, 2015.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-32055 Filed 12-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 198)]
[Notices]
[Page 60494-60495]
[DOCID:fr13oc06-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-200-154]

CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company; Notice Of Negotiated
Rate Filing

October 5, 2006.
    Take notice that on October 3, 2006, CenterPoint Energy Gas
Transmission Company (CEGT) tendered for filing and approval a
negotiated rate agreement between CEGT and Norphlet Chemical
Incorporated. CEGT has entered into an agreement to provide firm
transportation service to this shipper under Rate Schedule FT and
requests the Commission accept and approve the transaction under which
transportation service will commence upon the later of December 1,
2006, or the ``in-service'' date following completion of necessary
delivery facilities.
    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 and 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 in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    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>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-16984 Filed 10-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69034-69036]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21877]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 3, 162 and 165

[Docket Number USCG-2023-0811]

Coast Guard Sector Juneau; Sector Name Conforming Amendment

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule makes non-substantive changes to Coast Guard
regulations in association with a change in the Coast Guard's internal
organization. The purpose of this rule is to reflect that U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Juneau has been renamed U.S. Coast Guard Sector Southeast
Alaska. This rule will have no substantive effect on the regulated
public.

DATES: This rule is effective October 5, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2023-0811 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Stephen Speer, District 17 Legal Office, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

AOR Area of responsibility
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OCMI Officer in Charge of Marine Inspections
OFCO Operating Facility Change Order
SAR Search and Rescue
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    For the last several years, the Coast Guard has sought to better
align the names of its assets to correspond to the area of
responsibility which they serve. Review of the missions and engagements
within the southeastern Alaska region highlighted that ``Sector
Juneau'' alone did not adequately capture the breadth and range of
Coast Guard operations and relationships throughout southeast Alaska.
The Coast Guard has approved the name change to U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Southeast Alaska to acknowledge the long-standing commitment to all
communities of southeast Alaska and to reaffirm the multi-mission
support that the Coast Guard provides to ensure safety at sea and
enhanced maritime governance. The geographic boundaries of Sector
Southeast Alaska are not changing, and its office is not moving from
Juneau, AK.
    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) before
this final rule. The Coast Guard finds that this rule is exempt from
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)
because the changes it makes are conforming amendments involving agency
organization. The Coast Guard also finds good cause exists under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) for not publishing an NPRM because the changes will
have no substantive effect on the public and notice and comment are
therefore unnecessary. For the same reasons, the Coast Guard finds good
cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make the rule effective fewer
than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 14 U.S.C.
504(a)(2), as delegated at 33 CFR 1.05-1(h), to issue regulations
necessary to implement technical, organizational, and conforming
amendments and corrections to rules, regulations, and notices.
    On July 17, 2023, the Coast Guard issued Operating Facility Change
Order (OFCO) No. 020-23 which changed the official unit name of U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Juneau to U.S. Coast Guard Sector Southeast Alaska.
The previous name of Sector Juneau is described and reflected in
regulations, which also contain contact details and other references to
Sector Juneau. These conforming amendments update those regulations so
that they contain current information.
    Under 14 U.S.C. 504(a)(2), the Commandant of the Coast Guard has
the authority to establish and prescribe the purpose of Coast Guard
Shore establishments. This authority has been delegated to the Chief of
the Coast Guard's Office of Regulations and Administrative Law under 33
CFR 1.05-1(h).

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    OFCO No. 020-23, issued July 17, 2023, changed the official unit
name of U.S. Coast Guard Sector Juneau to U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Southeast Alaska. The July 2023 OFCO did not change the area of
responsibility (AOR). The AOR of U.S. Coast Guard Sector Southeast
Alaska is identical to that of what was U.S. Coast Guard Sector Juneau.
All authorities and responsibilities previously assigned to Commander,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Juneau have been assigned to Commander, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Southeast Alaska. Additionally, all authorities that
were vested in the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Juneau as it
pertains to the COTP, the OCMI, the Federal On Scene Coordinator, the
Federal Maritime Security Coordinator, and the Search and Rescue
Coordinator, have been assigned to Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Southeast Alaska. This rule does not change any sector, OCMI, or COTP
zone boundary lines, nor does it have any substantive impact on
existing regulated navigation area, safety zone, or security zone
regulation, or any naval vessel protection zones.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review). Accordingly,
this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the finding that
the name change will have no substantive effect on the public.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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.
    For the reasons stated in section V.A. above, this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on any member of the public,
including ``small entities.''
    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.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, 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.

E. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule consists only of
an organizational amendment. It is categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L3 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1, Implementation of the National
Environmental Policy Act.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 3

    Organizations and functions (Government agencies).

33 CFR Part 162

    Navigation (water), Waterways.

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 parts 3, 162 and 165 as follows:

PART 3--COAST GUARD AREAS, DISTRICTS, SECTORS, MARINE INSPECTION
ZONES, AND CAPTAIN OF THE PORT ZONES

0
1. The authority citation for part 3 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 14 U.S.C. 501, 504; Public Law 107-296, 116 Stat.
2135; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1,
Revision No. 01.3.

Sec.  3.85-10  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  3.85-10--
0
a. In the section heading, remove the text ``Juneau:'',
0
b. In the first sentence, remove the word ``Juneau's'' and add, in its
place, the words ``Southeast Alaska's'', and
0
c. In the second sentence, remove the word ``Juneau's''.

PART 162--INLAND WATERWAYS NAVIGATION REGULATIONS

0
3. The authority citation for part 162 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034; DHS Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision
No. 01.3.

Sec.  162.240  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  162.240 amend paragraph (d) by removing the word ``Juneau''
and adding, in its place, the words ``Southeast Alaska''.

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

Sec.  165.1712  [Amended]

0
6. In Sec.  165.1712(d)(3), remove the word ``Juneau'' and add, in its
place, the words ``Southeast Alaska''.

Michael Cunningham,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-21877 Filed 10-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P