[Federal Register: February 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 39)]
[Notices]
[Page 10435-10436]
[DOCID:fr27fe08-44]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0019; FRL-8352-1]

Pesticide Products; Registration Applications

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of applications to register
pesticide products containing new active ingredients not included in
any currently registered products pursuant to the provisions of section
3(c)(4) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), as amended.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 28, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0019, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2008-0019. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to
http://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced Search,'' then ``Docket
Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the
``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov
website to view the docket index or access available documents.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either in the electronic docket at http://
www.regulations.gov, or, if only

available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mari L. Duggard, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
     ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Registration Application

    EPA received applications as follows to register pesticide products
containing active ingredients not included in any previously registered
products pursuant to the provision of section 3(c)(4) of FIFRA. Notice
of receipt of these applications does not imply a decision by the
Agency on the applications.

Application Form

    File Symbol: 84316-R. Applicant: Moss Buster LLC 3002 Fair Lane,
Mason City, IA 50401. Product name: Moss Buster. Herbicide. Active
ingredient: Oregano Oil at 1%. Proposal classification/Use: Biochemical
herbicide spot treatment for control of moss. (M. Duggard).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pest.

    Dated: February 14, 2008.
Janet L. Andersen,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E8-3618 Filed 2-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


MEMORANDUM
TO: Air and Radiation Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0401
FROM: EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality
DATE: January 27, 2014
SUBJECT: Teleconference with ICM, Inc.
On January 23, 2014, Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) staff held a teleconference with staff of ICM, Inc. This memorandum provides written documentation and a brief summary of this teleconference.
This teleconference discussed ICM technologies used to convert cellulosic material to ethanol as relative to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: RFS Pathways II and Technical Amendments to the RFS 2 Standards (Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0401). OTAQ staff participating included Sharyn Lie, Vincent Camobreco, Robert Larson, Christopher Ramig, Jon Monger, Aaron Levy, Michael Prince, Joseph Sopata, and AAAS fellows Lauren Rafelski and David Babson.
ICM  representatives participating included Douglas Rivers; Jeremy Javers; and Jesse Spooner.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 200 (Monday, October 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 64096]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26721]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1984-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

South Dakota; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for State of South Dakota (FEMA-1984-DR), dated May 13, 2011, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: October 3, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Gary R.
Stanley, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this disaster.

    This action terminates the appointment of Mark A. Neveau as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-26721 Filed 10-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


                                  Memorandum

TO:  Rulemaking Docket

FROM:  Keith Barnett, US EPA, Environmental Engineer

SUBJECT:  Combustion in a Cement Kiln and Cement Kilns' Use of Tires as Fuel

DATE:  April 25, 2011

      A cement kiln  that combusts any non-hazardous solid waste is subject to regulation as a Commercial or Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) unit pursuant to section 129 (g) (1) of the Clean Air Act.  In order for a cement kiln to be classified as a CISWI unit, it must have an input that is a non-hazardous solid waste, and the cement kiln must "combust" the solid waste.   EPA has recently promulgated a definition of non-hazardous secondary materials which are solid wastes.   See 76 FR 15456   (March 21, 2011).

      This memorandum describes the Portland cement production process and discusses whether certain secondary materials used in that process are combusted in the kiln.  This memorandum also addresses the question of whether tires burned by certain cement kilns in their performance testing would have been defined as solid wastes under the recently-promulgated definition of non-hazardous secondary materials that are solid wastes had that definition applied at the time of the burning.

      Since combustion is not defined in the CAA, we use a  common definition of combust which is "an act or instance of burning" or "a chemical process (as an oxidation) accompanied by the evolution of light and heat".

Basic Kiln Process

      In a cement kiln, there are two types of inputs, fuels and ingredients.  Fuels provide the energy necessary to produce the heat required to raise the temperature of the ingredients to the level required for clinker formation.  Ingredients provide the materials that make up the actual clinker mass. The ingredients are also called kiln feed or raw meal.

      Figure 1 presents a schematic of a typical long wet or dry cement kiln.  Ingredients are introduced into the back or cold end of the kiln at 300 to 500 ˚F (cold here being a relative term).  The materials gradually move down the kiln over a period of 60-90 minutes and increase in temperature until they reach the temperature required for clinker formation (about 2600 to 2700 ˚F).  The ingredients undergo several different reactions as the temperature increases.  It is important that the mix move slowly enough to allow each reaction to be completed at the appropriate temperature.  Because the initial reactions are endothermic (energy absorbing), it is difficult to heat the mix up to a higher temperature until a given reaction is complete.

                  Figure 1.  Schematic of a long cement kiln

      In contrast to ingredients, fuels are introduced into the hot sections of the kiln (either the front end or mid kiln) where gas temperatures are 1800 to 4000 ˚F.  At these high temperatures the fuels immediately burn when introduced into the kiln.  Fuels are never introduced into the cold end of the kiln.  If they were, they would slowly heat resulting in creation of significant amounts of carbon monoxide emissions and a loss of fuel heating value.

      The process in a preheater or preheat precalciner kiln is similar to a long kiln.  Ingredients (feed) enter the top of the preheater tower, which is the equivalent of the cold end of a long kiln (see further discussion below).[3]  The raw meal passes down the tower while hot gases rise up, gradually heating the raw meal.  By the time the time the materials have reached the bottom of the preheater tower the ingredients have partially calcined.3  A preheater tower is likely to have 4-6 stages.

      Fuels enter a preheater kiln at the front end of the kiln and also may be introduced at the bottom of the preheater tower.   In the case of the precalciner kiln, fuel is introduced into a separate vessel typically located between the last two stages of the preheater tower.  However, as is the case with a long kiln, the fuels are introduced into high temperature zones where combustion of the fuels occurs.

              Figure 2.  Preheater or Preheater/Precalciner kiln

      Combustion does not occur in the cold end of the cement kiln.  As explained above,  materials placed in the cold end of the kiln are heated gradually until they reach the temperature where clinker formation takes place (as opposed to the hot zone of a cement kiln where higher temperatures are applied as quickly as possible, not gradually).  This is not a chemical process marked by the evolution of light and heat.  Rather, it is analogous to cooking as opposed to burning.

	In a letter dated April 8, 2011, the Portland Cement Association (PCA) questioned whether the cold end of a preheater/precalciner kiln engages in combustion when ingredients are added at that point.   The top of the preheater tower in a preheater/precalciner kiln functions identically to the cold end of a long kiln.  Ingredients are gradually heated  -  cooked rather than burned.  Again, this is not a chemical process marked by the evolution of light and heat.  As such, the top of the preheater tower equates to the cold end of a long kiln and the ingredients are not combusted in those areas of the kiln.
      PCA's April 8 letter also raised a related  question concerning ingredients added at different levels of the preheater tower, rather than the top of the tower.  (See April 8 letter p. 3 asking whether ingredients placed in "preheater towers that use the heat produced by the kiln to preheat the ingredients as they move through the various stages of the tower" would be combusted.)  We believe that until the material reaches a high temperature zone of the kiln, which is the zone where fuel is being added,  combustion does not occur for the reasons just given: ingredients are being heated gradually through a controlled process   For example, some long kilns feed tire fuel at a mid-kiln location, so combustion occurs at mid-kiln.  However, the colder parts of the kiln represent areas where materials are still being gradually heated.  In preheater/precalciner kilns, this would also apply to the various level of the preheater tower until the materials reached a point where fuel is being introduced, either into a precalciner or the feed shelf of the rotary part of the preheater kiln.

Ingredients processed in high temperature areas of the kiln

      Cement kilns process many secondary materials as ingredients, and almost always do so by introducing these materials into the cold end of the cement kiln (where combustion of ingredients does not occur, as explained above).  In its April 8 letter, PCA notes that ingredients are sometimes introduced into the hot (fuel) end of the kiln, and asks whether those materials are combusted within the meaning of CAA section 129 (g).

      The high temperature regions of cement kilns can engage in combustion, as when fuels are burned.  However, the secondary material ingredients used by cement kilns would not be combusted, as explained below.

      Two types of materials are removed from the kiln exhaust gases, typically by the air pollution control devices for particulates, and returned to the process as ingredients. The first is incompletely calcined material that is recycled back into the kiln as a normal part of the clinker manufacturing process. The second is other fine-grained, solid material removed from the system to allow the clinker to meet specific quality standards or to maintain process stabilization. See PCA Letter of April 8, 2011, p. 3.  These materials are often referred to as cement kiln dust.

      The PCA letter noted that both of these materials may be reintroduced to the kilns in various places, depending on the kiln design and process.  However, in this letter the PCA noted that in the case of preheater, preheater/precalciner, and long dry kilns that CKD is mixed with the raw meal feed and enter the cold section of the kiln. Therefore, these materials would not be considered to be combusted for the reason stated previously.

      However, as noted in the April 8 PCA letter, in the case of wet kilns, cement kiln dust may be added to higher temperature zone regions (mid-kiln and the hot end).  Cement kiln dust in this case mainly consists of a material that has previously been heated and even partially calcined.  Therefore, this material would be expected to be inert from the standpoint of combustion, i.e., it would not oxidize producing heat and light.  In fact, cement kiln dust injected in hot end of the kiln within or in close proximity to the flame has the effect of cooling the flame. This demonstrates the fact that these materials do not create heat and thus do not combust.

      In its April 8 letter, PCA states that the only ingredients presently placed in kilns' combustion zones (occasionally) are the cement kiln dusts.  However, PCA raises the possibility of other hypothetical ingredients being added to a cement kiln's combustion zone.  It is not necessary to address hypothetical possibilities here.  In addition, we believe the potential for placing non-inert ingredients into kiln combustion zones is unlikely for two reasons.  First, the raw materials must be chemically homogeneous. Since ingredients must be combined and ground together in the raw mill and thoroughly mixed, feeding separate ingredients into other areas of the kiln would mean less through mixing of the ingredients.  In addition, for the reason discussed on page 3 (necessity to heat ingredients gradually), introducing raw materials into a hot section of the kiln would be expected to reduce kiln thermal efficiency.  It is also worth noting that non-hazardous secondary materials used as an ingredient in a combustion unit are not solid wastes, 40 CFR section 241.3 (b), assuming the legitimacy criteria in section 241.3 (d) are satisfied.
      .
Tires Used as Fuel

	As part of the development of the CISWI rule, we requested additional information on the tire-derived fuels used by all cement kilns in the proposed CISWI rule data base based on their historic practices.  This included over 30 cement kilns that previously reported using some type of tire derived fuels and included all the larger cement companies. Specifically, the ICR asked these questions regarding  tires combusted during the emissions tests for the kilns:  a) what is the source of the whole tires the kiln combusted; b) did they come from tire piles or landfills, or from an established tire program, defined in the ICR as "one which harvests tires from vehicles and businesses, and then manages the tires carefully so they are not thrown away between collection and eventual use as fuel, for example by use of a tracking system", and c)  if the kiln received tires from sources other than an established program, did they undergo processing to produce a tire derived fuel?

	In general, virtually all of the respondents indicated that they had obtained all of the tires they burned from established tire programs (as defined in the ICR).  However, the kilns acknowledged that they could not account for the source of every tire provided by these programs.  PCA, in its April 8 letter likewise indicated that "[s]ome companies obtain tires from brokers and do not know the source of all tires" (April 8 Letter, n. 5).  Some of the ICR respondents further indicated that they knew that these established programs occasionally (for example, once a year, or several days a year) would obtain tires from sources other than commercial sources, tire dealerships and other standard collection points.  Examples mentioned in the responses are the annual tire `amnesty day' or other cleanup programs whereby established programs (or in one instance, the kiln itself) accepts tires from individuals.

	It is EPA's position that ultimate users are not responsible for knowing the source of all tires obtained from an established tire collection program.  The certification required by 40 CFR section 60. 2175 (w) requires a non-waste tire user to certify that tires were obtained from an established tire collection program, that the tires are not discarded and are handled as valuable commodities from the point of removal through arrival at the burning facility.  EPA does not interpret this language as requiring knowledge of each individual tire as this is a practical impossibility.  In certifying, users also should not assume that tires from established programs which participate in occasional cleanup day are discarded  -  both because there is no information that the tires from the cleanup efforts were discarded (and these programs are designed to prevent discarding) and whether the kiln received tires from the sporadic cleanup days in any case.  Rather, EPA interprets the certification requirement to be satisfied if the user deals with an established tire collection program (as defined in Part 241) which program can provide the user with reasonable assurance that it manages tires carefully from point of collection to point of burning and which does not receive tires which have been abandoned in landfills or otherwise abandoned.   Virtually all of the respondents to the ICR stated that they dealt with such established tire collection programs, and provided information reasonably supporting that conclusion (or otherwise provided sufficient information from which EPA determined that the tires came from established tire management programs).  In those instances where the kilns indicated that some of the tires they received from an established tire program had been discarded or suspected that that was the case, EPA counted the kiln as a CISWI (had the solid waste definition applied at the time of the performance test) in this analysis.

	The responses are summarized (by quotation or near literal paraphrase) in the following table:

Company
                                Plant Location
                               Type of Tire Fuel
Tire Sources and Processing
Ash Grove Cement
                                     Inkom
                                  Whole Tires
   * Receives tires from `four county landfills' serving as staging areas (areas where tires are collected for recycling rather than disposal) which landfills are `designated to receive and store tires' by State of Idaho as part of the used tire management system (which system is `distinct from the municipal solid waste management system')
   * Sufficient information to determine that tires come from an established program and that kiln would not have been a CISWI
Ash Grove Cement
                                Durkee, Oregon
                                  Whole Tires
   * Receives whole tires from seven sources, two are landfills which have areas designated as tire staging areas
   * Oregon regulations for used tires similar to Idaho
   * Sufficient information to determine that tires come from an established program and that kiln would not have been a CISWI
Ash Grove Cement
                                  Midlothian
                                  Whole Tires
   * Receives tires from one privately owned and operated waste management facility.
   * Kiln has anecdotal information that supplier occasionally picks up tires from illegal dumpsites, though most (but not all) of these tires are unsuitable for Ash Grove and are shredded and sent elsewhere.
   * Would probably have been a CISWI
Ash Grove Cement
                               Leamington, Utah
                                  Whole Tires
   * Burns only Tire chips.  No information on ultimate source of tires.
   * Per other responses (i.e. Holcim Devil's Slide), UT has a state licensed program which oversees safe collection and management of tires
   * Based on features of state law, tires come from an established tire collection program and kiln would not have been a CISWI
Ash Grove Cement
                                    Seattle
                                  Whole Tires
   * Receives tires from one privately owned and operated tire source.  State of Washington regulates transport and storage of tires
   * Based on features of state law, tires come from an established tire collection program and kiln and kiln would not have been a CISWI
Buzzi
                                    Oglesby
                                  Whole Tires
   * Vast majority of whole tire fuel supplied from brokers that obtained tires directly from the generators (tire stores, etc.) and meets definition of established tire program
   * Program regulated by State of Illinois
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Buzzi
                                Pryor, Oklahoma
                                  Whole Tires
   * Unable to determine , but does not presently burn TDF at all
   * Not a CISWI based on existence of OK rules for tire collection programs noted by other cement kilns (which assure safe management after collection and predominantly remove tires from vehicles)
Buzzi
                                   Maryneal
                                  Whole Tires
   * Vast majority of whole tire fuel supplied from brokers that obtained tires directly from the generators (tire stores, etc.)  `To the best of our knowledge, this TDF was from an established management program administered under
Texas Administrative Code Title 30, Part 1, Chapter 328, Subchapter F.'
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Cal Portland
                                    Colton
                                  Whole Tires
   * Established tire management program run by county.  The county's main tire source was not specified in the response but is likely tire shops, etc.
   * This county also collects tires from the public and from illegal tire piles a few times a year.  These tires are sorted and some eventually are sent to the cement kiln.
   * Would probably have been a CISWI due to known use of discarded tires
Cemex
                                   Demopolis
                                  Whole Tires
   * Tires are sourced through tire brokers through an established tire management program
   * The ultimate source of the tires is not specified, but the tire must meet certain CEMEX specifications.  The company cannot rule out the possibility that landfilled  or disposed tires may be included
   * CEXEX does partner with local municipalities to provide an outlet for amnesty tire collections which are designed "to avoid illegal tire dumps" and consist of individuals bringing tires to a kiln and not being charged a disposal fee.
   * All CEMEX kilns use only whole tires
   * Would not have been CISWIs
Cemex
                              Brooksville - North
                                  Whole Tires
   *
Cemex
                                     Miami
                              Whole Tires and TDF
   *
Cemex
                               Brooksville-South
                                      TDF
   *
Cemex
                                  Clinchfield
                                      TDF
   *
Cemex
                                   Knoxville
                                  Whole Tires
   *
Cemex
                                   Blacones
                                      TDF
   *
Essroc
                                   Bessemer
                                  Whole Tires
   * Has always used an established tire management program, `one which harvests tires from vehicles and businesses, and then manages  the tires carefully so they are not thrown away between collection and eventual use as a fuel'
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Essroc
                                   Frederick
                                  Whole Tires
   *
Florida Rock
                                   Newberry
                                  Whole Tires
   * Receives tires from a private company.  Tires are collected directly from the source that removes the tire from the vehicle.
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Holcim
                                  Midlothian
                                      TDF
   * Tire Chips obtained from the Ada OK facility with no other processing
   * OK  has a tire cleanup program, and facility also accepts tires from businesses and tire stores; never from landfills
   * Would not have been a CISWI due to use of tire fuel (but is CISWI based on other secondary fuels).
Holcim
                                    Morgan
                                      TDF
   * Receives tires from a private company under a State program.  The tires are processed into tire chips at Ada facility
   * Holcim Ada does not accept landfill tires (see previous write-up for Midlothian)
   * Sufficient information provided to determine that obtains tire from an established program
   * Would not have been a CISWI due to use of tire fuel (but is CISWI based on other secondary fuels).
Holcim (This facility was not on the CISWI List)
                                      Ada
                                  Whole Tires
   * Tires from businesses and tire stores and from Oklahoma clean-up program.
   * Chips tires on site for other facilities.
   * Holcim in general does not accept landfill tires
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Holcim (This facility was not on the CISWI List)
                                  Hagerstown
                                  Whole Tires
   * Tires from businesses and tire stores.
   * Holcim in general does not accept landfill tires
   * Sufficient information provided to determine that obtains tire from an established program and would not have been a CISWI
Lafarge
                                    Roberta
                                      TDF
   * Sources from tire manufacturer or a local retailer under and established tire management program
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Lafarge
Joppa
Whole Tires
   * Tires from a variety of sources including tire manufacturers, tire retail outlets, tire collection forms, auto and racing organizations, and tire processers.
   * Well established tire management program approved by the State of South Carolina
   * On rare occasions the plant participates in community cleanup and/or state funded cleanup efforts.
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Lafarge
Tulsa
Whole Tires
   * Tire brokers who process tires under established tire management programs.
   * A State program allows reimbursement if 5 percent of the tires come from tire piles, landfills, or community clean-up efforts.  (No mention if Lafarge or their tire brokers participate)
   * Would not have been a CISWI, since it obtains tires from an established tire collection program and there is no  indication discarded tires are burned by the kiln
Lafarge
Whitehall
Whole Tires
   * Sources from tire dealers or automotive shops under an established tire management program
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Lafarge
Harleyville
Whole Tires
   * Tires from a variety of sources including tire manufacturers, tire retail outlets, tire collection firms, auto and racing organizations, and tire processers.
   * Well established tire management program approved by the State of South Carolina
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Lafarge
Seattle
Whole Tires
   * Tires obtained from retailers in an established tire management program under State regulation
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Lehigh Cement
                                     Leeds
                                  Whole Tires
   * Use an established tire management program
   * All Lehigh plants use whole tires
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Lehigh Cement
                                    Redding
                                  Whole Tires
   *
Lehigh Cement
                                  Evansville
                                  Whole Tires
   *
Lehigh Cement
                                     York
                                      TDF
   *
Mitsubishi Cement
                                Lucerne Valley
                                  Whole Tires
   * Established tire management program  but no absolute assurance that some tires could have been discarded
   * Would not have been a CISWI
Monarch Cement
                                    Monarch
                                  Whole Tires
   * Established tire management program
   * Would not have been a CISWI
National Cement of CA
                                    Encino
                                      TDF
   * Tire chips and tire fluff.  Fluff is from a facility that produces crumb rubber products.
   * Ultimate tire source not specified.
   * Status not certain, but reasonable to assume not a CISWI because of California rules establishing tire management programs and  due to producing TDF to specification

Conclusion

	Based on this information presented above, we conclude that no cement kiln would have been  classified as a CISWI unit based on the use of secondary materials as an ingredient had the solid waste definition in Part 241 been promulgated at the time of the testing or the time of promulgation of the final NESHAP.  In addition, all cement kilns surveyed obtained tire fuels from an established tire collection program.  With the exception of the facilities that either acknowledged accepting tires that had been discarded or provided information from which some acceptance can reliably be inferred, the use of tire derived fuel by itself would not have resulted in a cement kiln being defined as a CISWI unit.


[Federal Register: January 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2207]
[DOCID:fr13ja06-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-169-000]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Tariff Filing

January 6, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 30, 2005, National Fuel Gas Supply
Corporation (National) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume No. 1, Eighty Fifth Revised Sheet No. 9,
to become effective January 1, 2006.
    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. E6-296 Filed 1-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


`Initial Response to Order' Screen (Populated)

`Initial Response to Order' Screen Develop Information, Form or Join Consortium, or Submit Existing Information

`Initial Response to Order' Screen  (Request an Exemption)

`Initial Response to Order' Screen Claim You Are Not Subject to Test Order

`Initial Response to Order' Screen Discontinue Manufacturing or Importing of Chemical

`Technical Contact' Screen

`Submitting Official Information' Screen

`Instructions for Substantiating Confidential Business Information (CBI) Claims' Screen


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 208 (Monday, October 28, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57726-57727]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23489]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund
Effective Date

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Docket Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISO New England Inc.....................  EL19-90-000
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C..............  EL19-91-000
Southwest Power Pool, Inc...............  EL19-92-000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 17, 2019, the Commission issued an order in Docket Nos.
EL19-

90-000, EL19-91-000, and EL19-92-000, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2018), instituting proceedings
to consider whether the above-captioned entities may be implementing
exemptions for immediate need reliability projects that the Commission
permitted to Order No. 1000's \1\ requirement to eliminate provisions
in Commission-jurisdictional tariffs and agreements that establish a
federal right of first refusal for an incumbent transmission developer
with respect to transmission facilities selected in a regional
transmission plan for purposes of cost allocation in a manner that is
inconsistent than what the Commission directed, and therefore may be
unjust and unreasonable, unduly preferential and discriminatory. ISO
New England Inc., et al., 169 FERC 61,054 (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation by Transmission
Owning and Operating Public Utilities, Order No. 1000, 136 FERC
61,051 (2011), order on reh'g, Order No. 1000-A, 139 FERC 61,132,
order on reh'g and clarification, Order No. 1000-B, 141 FERC 61,044
(2012), aff'd sub nom. S.C. Pub. Serv. Auth. v. FERC, 762 F.3d 41
(D.C. Cir. 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The refund effective date in Docket Nos. EL19-90-000, EL19-91-000,
and EL19-92-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA,
will be the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket Nos. EL19-90-
000, EL19-91-000, and EL19-92-000 must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance
with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.214 (2019), within 21 days of the date of issuance of the
order.

    Dated: October 18, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-23489 Filed 10-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 193)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51464-51465]
[DOCID:fr07oc09-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0367; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-10-AD;
Amendment 39-16023; AD 2009-19-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Teledyne Continental Motors O-470, IO-
470, TSIO-470, IO-520, TSIO-520, IO-550, and IOF-550 Series
Reciprocating Engines; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting airworthiness directive (AD) 2009-19-06,
which published in the Federal Register on September 22, 2009. That AD
applies to Teledyne Continental Motors O-470, IO-470, TSIO-470, IO-520,
TSIO-520, IO-550, and IOF-550 series reciprocating engines. The two
references to the AD number are incorrect due to a software problem
with the automated AD number assignment system. This document corrects
those references. In all other respects, the original document remains
the same.

DATES: Effective October 7, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Holton, Engineer, Propulsion,
Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 22, 2009, we published a final
rule AD, FR Doc. E9-22287, in the Federal Register (74 FR 48141). That
AD applies to Teledyne Continental Motors O-470, IO-470, TSIO-470, IO-
520, TSIO-520, IO-550, and IOF-550 series reciprocating engines. We
need to make the following correction:

Sec.  39.13  [Corrected].

0
On page 48141, in the second column, in the third line below 14 CFR
Part 39, ``AD 2009-19-06'' is corrected to read ``AD 2009-19-07''.
0
On page 48142, in the third column, in the eighth line below PART 39-
AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES, ``2009-19-06 Teledyne Continental Motors'' is
corrected to read ``2009-19-07 Teledyne Continental Motors''.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on September 29, 2009.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9-24088 Filed 10-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 138]
[FR Doc No: 2015-33059]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Suspected
Unapproved Parts Notification

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The information collected on the FAA Form 8120-11 is
reported voluntarily by manufacturers, repair stations, aircraft owner/
operators, air carriers, and the general public who wish to report
suspected unapproved parts to the FAA for review. The report
information is collected and correlated by the FAA, Aviation Safety
Hotline Program Office, and used to determine if an unapproved part
investigation is warranted.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by February 3, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronda Thompson at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0552.
    Title: Suspected Unapproved Parts Notification.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 8120-11.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on October 22, 2015 (80 FR 64054). The information
collected on the FAA Form 8120-11 is reported voluntarily by
manufacturers, repair stations, aircraft owner/operators, air carriers,
and the general public who wish to report suspected unapproved parts to
the FAA for review. The report information is collected and correlated
by the FAA, Aviation Safety Hotline Program Office, and used to
determine if an unapproved part investigation is warranted. When
unapproved parts are confirmed that are likely to exist on other
products or aircraft of the same or similar design or are being used in
other facilities, the information is used as a basis for an aviation
industry alert or notification. Alerts are used to inform industry of
situations essential to the prevention of accidents, if the information
had not been collected. The consequence to the aviation community would
be the inability to determine whether or not unapproved parts are being
offered for sale or use for installation on type-certificated products.
    Respondents: Approximately 150 manufactures, repair stations,
aircraft owners/operators, and air carriers.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 75 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 23, 2015.
Ronda Thompson,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy &
Records Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2015-33059 Filed 12-31-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53925-53928]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23280]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84458; File Nos. SR-DTC-2018-009; SR-FICC-2018-010; SR-
NSCC-2018-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Changes To Amend the Clearing Agency Frameworks

October 19, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 11, 2018, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC''), Fixed
Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC''), and National Securities
Clearing Corporation (``NSCC,'' and together with DTC and FICC, the
``Clearing Agencies'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule changes as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared primarily by the
Clearing Agencies. The Clearing Agencies filed the proposed rule
changes pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule changes from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agencies' Statements of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Changes

    The proposed rule changes would amend the Clearing Agency Stress
Testing Framework (Market Risk) (``Stress Testing Framework''),
Clearing Agency Liquidity Risk Management Framework (``Liquidity Risk
Management Framework''), Clearing Agency Model Risk Management
Framework (``Model Risk Management Framework''), Clearing Agency
Operational Risk Management Framework (``Operational Risk Management
Framework''), Clearing Agency Risk Management Framework (``Risk
Management Framework''), Clearing Agency Securities Valuation Framework
(``Securities Valuation Framework''), Clearing Agency Policy on Capital
Requirements (``Capital Policy''), and Clearing Agency Capital
Replenishment Plan (``Capital Replenishment Plan,'' and, together with
the Stress Testing Framework, Liquidity Risk Management Framework,
Model Risk Management Framework, Operational Risk Management Framework,
Risk Management Framework, Securities Valuation Framework and Capital
Policy, the ``Clearing Agency Frameworks'' or ``Frameworks'') of the
Clearing Agencies.
    Specifically, the proposed rule changes would (1) amend each of the
Clearing Agency Frameworks to incorporate and align with an existing
delegation of authority to the General Counsel and Deputy General
Counsels of the Clearing Agencies to approve certain changes to the
Clearing Agency Frameworks; (2) revise the identification of the
individuals who own and manage the Frameworks, where applicable; (3)
make further corrections and clarifications to the Stress Testing
Framework, including revisions to the description of responsibilities
of certain groups and expansion of reverse stress testing analyses, as
further described below; and (4) correct the description of an
assumption underlying a stress scenario in the Liquidity Risk
Management Framework, as further described below.

II. Clearing Agencies' Statements of the Purpose of, and Statutory
Basis for, the Proposed Rule Changes

    In their filings with the Commission, the Clearing Agencies
included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule changes and discussed any comments they received on the
proposed rule changes. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Clearing Agencies have
prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agencies' Statements of the Purpose of, and Statutory
Basis for, the Proposed Rule Changes

1. Purpose
    The Clearing Agencies adopted the Clearing Agency Frameworks \5\ in
order to set forth the manner in which each of the Clearing Agencies
addresses certain risks as required by Rule 17Ad-22(e) under the
Act,\6\ as described in the Initial Filings. In addition to setting
forth the manner in which each of the Clearing Agencies addresses the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e), each Framework also contains a section
titled ``Framework Ownership and Change Management'' that, among other
matters, identifies the title of the individual or group who owns and
is responsible for managing the Framework and describes the required
governance process for review and approval of changes to the Framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 82368 (December 19,
2017), 82 FR 61082 (December 26, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-005; SR-FICC-
2017-009; SR-NSCC-2017-006) (Stress Testing Framework); 82377
(December 21, 2017), 82 FR 61617 (December 28, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-
004; SR-NSCC-2017-005; SR-FICC-2017-008) (Liquidity Risk Management
Framework); 81485 (August 25, 2017), 82 FR 41433 (August 31, 2017)
(SR-DTC-2017-008; SR-FICC-2017-014; SR-NSCC-2017-008) (Model Risk
Management Framework); 81745 (September 28, 2017), 82 FR 46332
(October 4, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-014; SR-NSCC-2017-013; SR-FICC-2017-
017) (Operational Risk Management Framework); 81635 (September 15,
2017), 82 FR 44224 (September 21, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-013; SR-NSCC-
2017-012; SR-FICC-2017-016) (Risk Management Framework); 82006
(November 2, 2017), 82 FR 51892 (November 8, 2017) (SR-DTC-2017-016;
SR-NSCC-2017-016; SR-FICC-2017-020) (Securities Valuation
Framework); 81105 (July 7, 2017), 82 FR 32399 (July 13, 2017) (SR-
DTC-2017-003, SR-FICC-2017-007, SR-NSCC-2017-004) (Capital Policy
and Capital Replenishment Plan) (each, an ``Initial Filing'' and
collectively, ``Initial Filings'').
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Clearing Agencies are proposing to (1) amend each of the
Clearing Agency Frameworks in order to align with an existing
delegation of authority to the General Counsel and Deputy General
Counsels of the Clearing Agencies to approve certain changes to the
Clearing Agency Frameworks; (2) revise the identification of the
individuals who own and manage the Frameworks, where applicable; (3)
make further corrections and clarifications to the Stress Testing
Framework, including revisions to the description of responsibilities
of certain groups and expansion of the reverse stress testing analyses,
as further described below; and (4) correct the description of an
assumption underlying a stress scenario in the Liquidity Risk
Management Framework, as further described below.

i. Proposed Amendments Regarding Delegation of Authority for Change
Management
    Currently, most of the Clearing Agency Frameworks (with the
exception of the Capital Policy and Capital Replenishment Plan) include
a statement within the ``Framework Ownership and Change Management''
section that any change to the Framework must be approved by the
Boards, or such committees as may be delegated authority by the Boards
from time to time pursuant to their charters. The Capital Policy and
Capital Replenishment Plan each provide that ``routine'' changes to
these documents be approved by the DTCC Treasury Group,\7\ which owns
these documents, and that ``material'' changes to these documents be
approved by the Boards, or such committees as may be delegated
authority by the Boards from time to time pursuant to their charters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The parent company of the Clearing Agencies is The
Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (``DTCC''). DTCC operates on
a shared services model with respect to the Clearing Agencies and
its other subsidiaries. Most corporate functions are established and
managed on an enterprise-wide basis pursuant to intercompany
agreements under which it is generally DTCC that provides a relevant
service to a subsidiary, including the Clearing Agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Boards have delegated to the General Counsel and the Deputy
General Counsels of the Clearing Agencies the authority to approve
certain proposed rule changes of the Clearing Agencies and the filings
with respect to such proposed rule changes required by Rule 19b-4 under
the Act.\8\ Specifically, the Boards have delegated to the General
Counsel and Deputy General Counsels of the Clearing Agencies authority
to approve (1) proposed rule changes that may be filed pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\9\ (2) proposed rule changes that
constitute clarifications, corrections or minor changes in the rules of
the Clearing Agencies but that will not be filed pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\10\ in each case, other than any rule change
where the aggregate annual fees generated as a result of such rule
change are anticipated to be more than $1,000,000 at the time of the
filing, and (3) all proposed changes that are subject to an advance
notice as required by Rule 19b-4(n) under the Act \11\ but do not
constitute a change to the rules of Clearing Agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the statement within the ``Framework Ownership and
Change Management'' section of the Clearing Agency Frameworks that the
Boards or committees of the Board must approve changes to the Clearing
Agency Frameworks is inconsistent with these existing delegations of
approval authority. As such, the Clearing Agencies are proposing to
amend each of the Clearing Agency Frameworks to clarify that changes to
the Clearing Agency Frameworks may be approved by (1) the Boards, (2)
such Board committees as may be delegated authority by the Boards from
time to time pursuant to their charters, or (3), with respect to
certain changes, the General Counsel or Deputy General Counsels of the
Clearing Agencies, pursuant to authority delegated by the Boards and
with the advice and direction of the Framework owner.
    The proposed change would make the Clearing Agency Frameworks
consistent with existing internal delegations of authority and would
also facilitate expedited review and approval of changes that may not
require the review and approval of the Boards or committees of the
Boards.
ii. Proposed Revision to the Identification of the Clearing Agency
Frameworks' Owners
    The ``Framework Ownership and Change Management'' section in most
of the Clearing Agency Frameworks (with the exception of the Capital
Policy and the Capital Replenishment Plan) \12\ also identifies the
individual who owns and manages that Framework. Currently, each of the
Frameworks identifies the title of that individual. The Clearing
Agencies are proposing to revise each of the Clearing Agency Frameworks
to remove the title of that individual and instead provide that the
individual who owns and manages the Framework is an officer within the
applicable business group. The proposed change would permit the
Clearing Agencies to change the title of the individual who owns and
manages the Clearing Agency Frameworks, so long as that individual is
an officer of the Clearing Agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Capital Policy and the Capital Replenishment Plan are
both owned by the DTCC Treasury Group. Therefore, the Clearing
Agencies are not proposing changes to these documents with respect
to their ownership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iii. Proposed Revisions to Stress Testing Framework
    The Stress Testing Framework describes the procedures by which the
Clearing Agencies perform stress testing of each of their respective
total prefunded financial resources, exclusive of assessments for
additional contributions or other resources that are not prefunded that
may be available to the Clearing Agencies and is maintained by the
Clearing Agencies pursuant to Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Act.\13\ In
addition to the proposed changes discussed above, the Clearing Agencies
are proposing to make the following changes to the Stress Testing
Framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 5; 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Clearing Agencies are proposing to enhance the
descriptions of certain matters within the Stress Testing Framework
that would clarify, but would not substantively change, those
statements. The proposed revisions would enhance the clarity of the
current description of the purpose of the Clearing Agencies' stress
testing methodologies and the description of the monthly review and
evaluation of the stress testing results and underlying parameters and
assumptions. The proposed changes would state that the monthly review
would include (1) analyses of model parameters, model assumptions, and
model performance; and (2) evaluation of the set of stress scenarios to
confirm their continued comprehensiveness and relevance.
    Second, the Clearing Agencies are proposing to revise the Stress
Testing Framework to update the responsibilities of certain groups
within the DTCC Group Chief Risk Office (``GCRO''). For example, the
Clearing Agencies are proposing to revise the Stress Testing Framework
to reflect that, due to a recent reorganization within the GCRO,
certain tasks that were previously the responsibility of the Market
Analytics group were delegated to the Systemic Risk Office, including
the responsibility for designing macroeconomic scenarios that are used
in the development of hypothetical scenarios used in stress testing.
Additionally, the Clearing Agencies are separately proposing to revise
the Stress Testing Framework to clarify that certain responsibilities
of the Data and Portfolio Analytics group (``DPA'') require input from
other groups within the Quantitative Risk Management team (``QRM'') of
the GCRO by replacing ``DPA'' with ``QRM'' in the descriptions of these
responsibilities.
    Finally, the Clearing Agencies are proposing to update the
descriptions of reverse stress testing analyses within the Stress
Testing Framework to reflect the current practice of performing these
analyses for each of the Clearing Agencies.\14\ Reverse stress testing

analyses are performed on at least a semi-annual basis and provide
another means for testing the sufficiency of the Clearing Agencies'
respective prefunded financial resources, in addition to the stress
testing that is performed by the Clearing Agencies pursuant to the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Act.\15\ The Stress
Testing Framework currently states that the reverse stress testing
analyses are performed for FICC and NSCC. Since the implementation of
the Stress Testing Framework, the Clearing Agencies have expanded these
analyses to cover DTC as well. Therefore, the Clearing Agencies are
proposing to update the Stress Testing Framework to reflect the current
practice of performing reverse stress testing analyses for each of the
Clearing Agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Reverse stress testing is a method for identifying events
that may cause a Clearing Agency to exhaust its prefunded financial
resources. Reverse stress testing could involve, for example,
assuming that a particular set of circumstances, or event, does
exhaust a Clearing Agency's prefunded financial resources, and then
determining the size of security price movements in those
circumstances.
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iv. Proposed Correction to Liquidity Risk Management Framework
    The Liquidity Risk Management Framework sets forth the manner in
which each of the Clearing Agencies measures, monitors and manages the
liquidity risks that arise in or are borne by such Clearing Agency,
including (i) the manner in which each Clearing Agency deploys its
liquidity tools to meet its settlement obligations on an ongoing and
timely basis and (ii) each applicable Clearing Agency's use of intraday
liquidity, in accordance with applicable legal requirements. The
Liquidity Risk Management Framework assists the Clearing Agencies with
the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7) under the Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra note 5; 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the proposed changes discussed above, the Clearing
Agencies are proposing to correct an error in the examples of
assumptions that may be used in the Level 1 stress scenarios that are
used in the Clearing Agencies' daily liquidity analyses, as described
in the Initial Filing. Currently, the Liquidity Risk Management
Framework states that these assumptions may include the simultaneous
default, without prior warning, of all members of the affiliated family
with the largest settlement obligations. The proposed change would
remove ``without prior warning,'' which was included in error, as the
assumption that may be used for Level 1 stress scenarios would assume
some prior warning or expectation of this event.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Clearing Agencies believe that the proposed changes are
consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act, which requires, in
part, that the rules of a registered clearing agency be designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, and to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds
which are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which
it is responsible, for the reasons described below.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change to reflect the existing delegation of authority
to the General Counsel and Deputy General Counsels of the Clearing
Agencies to approve certain changes to the Clearing Agency Frameworks
would align the change management process applicable to the Frameworks
to existing governance and delegations of authority within the Clearing
Agencies. The proposed change would also permit an expedited review and
approval of changes that do not require action by the Boards or Board
committees. In this way, the proposed change would simplify the steps
necessary for the Clearing Agencies to make certain non-material
changes to the Clearing Agency Frameworks, subject to required
regulatory review and approval of such changes. The proposed change to
revise the identification of the individual who owns and manages
certain of the Clearing Agency Frameworks to an officer within the
relevant business unit would provide the Clearing Agencies with
flexibility to change that individual or the title of that individual,
while ensuring the owner has an appropriate level of authority.
    The other proposed changes to the Stress Testing Framework and the
Liquidity Risk Management Framework would clarify and correct the
descriptions of certain matters, as described above. For example, the
proposed change to clarify in the Stress Testing Framework that reverse
stress testing may be performed for each of the Clearing Agencies would
update this Framework to reflect current practice and would correct the
existing statements that such analyses are only performed for FICC and
NSCC. By creating clearer descriptions, updating descriptions to
reflect current practice, and correcting errors, the Clearing Agencies
believe that the proposed changes would make these Frameworks more
effective in providing an overview of the important risk management
activities described therein.
    As described in the Initial Filings, the risk management functions
described in the Clearing Agency Frameworks allow the Clearing Agencies
to continue the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities and can continue to assure the safeguarding of securities
and funds which are in their custody or control or for which they are
responsible notwithstanding the default of a member of an affiliated
family. The proposed changes to improve the clarity and accuracy of the
descriptions of these functions within the Clearing Agency Frameworks
would assist the Clearing Agencies in carrying out these risk
management functions. Therefore, the Clearing Agencies believe the
proposed changes are consistent with the requirements of Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agencies' Statements on Burden on Competition

    The Clearing Agencies do not believe that the proposed changes to
the Clearing Agency Frameworks described above would have any impact,
or impose any burden, on competition. As described above, the proposed
rule changes would improve the change management process applicable to
the Clearing Agency Frameworks, and would improve the clarity and
accuracy of the descriptions of certain matters within the Frameworks.
Therefore, the proposed changes are technical and non-material in
nature, relating mostly to the operation of the Clearing Agency
Frameworks rather than the risk management functions described therein.
    Further, the Clearing Agencies do not believe that the proposed
change to update the Stress Testing Framework to state that reverse
stress testing may be performed for each of the Clearing Agencies would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition. The proposed
change would reflect the recent expansion of reverse stress testing to
cover DTC and, similar to the use of reverse stress testing with NSCC
and FICC, these analyses are applied consistently to all DTC
participants.
    As such, the Clearing Agencies do not believe that the proposed
rule changes would have any impact on competition.

(C) Clearing Agencies' Statements on Comments on the Proposed Rule
Changes Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Clearing Agencies have not solicited or received any written
comments relating to this proposal. The Clearing Agencies will notify
the

Commission of any written comments received by the Clearing Agencies.

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

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

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \21\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\22\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id.
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Clearing Agencies have asked the Commission to designate a
shorter time for the proposal to become operative. The Clearing
Agencies state that the proposed rule changes would allow the Clearing
Agencies to maintain clear and accurate internal procedures, and avoid
any errors in carrying out the important responsibilities described
therein. The Commission believes that allowing the Clearing Agencies to
maintain clear and accurate internal procedures and avoid potential
confusion in carrying out their responsibilities is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest given the important
role that the Clearing Agencies play in the financial markets.
Accordingly, the Commission waives the 30-day operative delay and
designates the proposed rule changes to be operative upon filing.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
changes, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
changes if they appear 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.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Numbers SR-DTC-2018-009, SR-FICC-2018-010, or SR-NSCC-2018-009 on
the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Numbers SR-DTC-2018-009, SR-FICC-
2018-010, or SR-NSCC-2018-009. This file number should be included on
the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and
review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The
Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website
(http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all
subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the
proposed rule changes that are filed with the Commission, and all
written communications relating to the proposed rule changes between
the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld
from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will
be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's
Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on
official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying
at the principal office of DTC and on DTCC's website (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Numbers SR-
DTC-2018-009, SR-FICC-2018-010, or SR-NSCC-2018-009 and should be
submitted on or before November 15, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-23280 Filed 10-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 235 (Thursday, December 6, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72776-72778]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29460]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1223; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-154-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Embraer S.A. 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 Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 190 airplanes. This proposed
AD was prompted by reports of the cockpit door falling off the hinges
when it is being open or closed. This proposed AD would require
replacing the striker and quick-release pin of the passive lock of the
cockpit door, and replacing the upper and lower hinges of the cockpit
door. We are proposing this AD to prevent the cockpit door from falling
off the hinges, which could cause injury to airplane occupants.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 22,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Embraer S.A., Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro
Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos-SP-
BRASIL; telephone +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12
3927-7546; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.flyembraer.com. You may review copies of the 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>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-1223;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-154-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 based on 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

    The Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC),
which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian
Airworthiness Directives 2012-08-02 and 2012-08-03, both effective
September 5, 2012 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct
an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    This [ANAC] AD was prompted by reports of cockpit door falling
off the hinges when it is being opened or closed. If not corrected,
this condition may cause injury to the occupants.
* * * * *

Required actions include replacement of the passive lock striker,
quick-release pin, and upper and lower hinges of the cockpit door. You
may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Embraer has issued the following service bulletins to correct the
unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. The actions described in the
following service information are intended to correct the unsafe
condition identified in the MCAI.
     EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-52-0055, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011 (for Model ERJ 170 airplanes).
     EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-52-0038, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011 (for Model ERJ 190 airplanes except for Model ERJ 190-
100 ECJ airplanes).
     EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-52-0020, dated August 1,
2011 (for Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ airplanes).

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 253 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 6 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Where the
service information lists required parts costs that are covered under
warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these parts.
As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some
parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $129,030, or $510 per product.

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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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

    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]

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

Embraer S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2012-1223; Directorate Identifier 2012-
NM-154-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 22, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1)
and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE., and -
100 SU airplanes; and Model ERJ 170-200 LR, -200 SU, and -200 STD
airplanes; certificated in any category; as identified in EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 170-52-0055, Revision 01, dated August 1, 2011.
    (2) Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -
100 IGW airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW
airplanes; certificated in any category; as identified in EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 190-52-0038, Revision 01, dated August 1, 2011; and
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-52-0020, dated August 1, 2011.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of the cockpit door falling off
the hinges when it is being open or closed. We are proposing this AD
to prevent the cockpit door from falling off the hinges, which could
cause injury to airplane occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions and Compliance Time

    Within 1,500 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Replace the striker and quick-release pin of the passive
lock of the cockpit door, in accordance with Part I of the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin
specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), or (g)(1)(iii) of this
AD.
    (i) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-52-0055, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011 (for Model ERJ 170 airplanes).
    (ii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-52-0038, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011 (for Model ERJ 190 airplanes except for Model ERJ
190-100 ECJ airplanes).
    (iii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-52-0020, dated August 1,
2011 (for Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ airplanes).
    (2) Replace the cockpit door upper and lower hinges in
accordance with Part III of the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i),
(g)(2)(ii), or (g)(2)(iii) of this AD.
    (i) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-52-0055, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011 (for Model ERJ 170 airplanes).
    (ii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-52-0038, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011 (for Model ERJ 190 airplanes except for Model ERJ
190-100 ECJ airplanes).
    (iii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-52-0020, dated August 1,
2011 (for Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ airplanes).

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-52-
0055, dated February 10, 2011 (for Model ERJ 170 airplanes); or
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-52-0038, dated February 10, 2011 (for
Model ERJ 190 airplanes except for Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ airplanes);
which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, 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 International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-
2768; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directives 2012-08-02
and 2012-08-03, both effective September 5, 2012, and the service
bulletins identified in paragraphs (j)(1)(i), (j)(1)(ii), and
(j)(1)(iii) of this AD, for related information.

    (i) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-52-0055, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011.
    (ii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-52-0038, Revision 01, dated
August 1, 2011.
    (iii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-52-0020, dated August 1,
2011.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Embraer S.A., Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av.
Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos
Campos--SP--BRASIL; telephone +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732;
fax +55 12 3927-7546; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.flyembraer.com. You may review copies of the 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 November 29, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-29460 Filed 12-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P