[Federal Register: September 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 54028]
[DOCID:fr21se07-78]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No: 6461-025]

City of Port Angeles, Washington; Notice of Application for
Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions to Intervene, and
Protests

September 14, 2007.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Request for Amendment of License.
    b. Project No: 6461-025.
    c. Date Filed: August 13, 2007.
    d. Applicant: City of Port Angeles, Washington.
    e. Name of Project: Morse Creek Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on Morse Creek in Clallam
County, Washington.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Scott McLain, City of Port Angeles, 321 East
Fifth Street, P.O. Box 1150, Port Angeles, WA 98362-0217, (360) 417-
4703.
    i. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed
to Mr. Erich Gaedeke at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. Deadline for filing comments and or motions: October 15, 2007.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenors files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy
of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative
of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
    k. Description of Request: The Applicant is proposing to stipulate
minimum flows in all months of the year for the protection of Chinook
salmon and bull trout, both listed as threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act, whereas the current FERC license stipulates
minimum flows for only 5 months of the year. The proposed amendment
would maintain higher stream flows in Morse Creek during all months of
the year in order to provide a greater assurance that flow-related
habitat is protected for the listed species as well as other salmonids
and steelhead that inhabit Morse Creek.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter

the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov.docs-filing/esubscription.asp
 to be notified via e-mail of

new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects.
For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is

also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS'',
``PROTEST'', OR ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Project
Number of the particular application to which the filing refers.
    p. Agency Comments--Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
    q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov

under the ``e-Filing link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-18667 Filed 9-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 162 (Monday, August 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52371-52373]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21321]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65142; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-112]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Relating
to Clarifying Amendments to the Rule Book

August 16, 2011.
    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 August 8, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rules 625, 3228 and Options
Procedure Floor Advice (``OFPA'') F-10 to eliminate unnecessary text
and correct cross-references in Rule text. The Exchange also proposes
to eliminate an unnecessary title in the Rule Book.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the
principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and on the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to eliminate unnecessary
text and correct cross-references in the Rule Book. The various
amendments relate to cross-references and text in several Rules that
were not deleted in connection with other rule filings. The Exchange
proposes four amendments.
    First, the Exchange proposes to amend language in Exchange Rule
625, entitled ``Training'' to remove a reference to a ``PAU.'' This
reference relates to a term that was used in connection with XLE, the
Exchange's former equity trading system, which is no longer utilized.
The Exchange recently eliminated all references to XLE, including the
definition of a Participant Authorized User of ``PAU.'' \3\ The
Exchange proposes to eliminate the reference to a PAU in Exchange Rule
625 as the term is no longer necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64338 (April 25,
2011), 76 FR 24069 (April 29, 2011) (SR-Phlx-2011-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Exchange proposes to amend a reference in Exchange Rule
3228, entitled ``Compliance with Rules and Registration Requirements.''
The Exchange recently amended Exchange Rule 3211 to move certain text
in paragraphs (a) through (c) to a new Exchange Rule 911, entitled
``Member and Member Organization Participation.'' \4\ The Exchange
proposes to replace the reference to Exchange Rule 3211 with Exchange
Rule 911 within Exchange Rule 3228 to reflect the current location of
the referenced text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65010 (August 2,
2011), 76 FR 48195 (August 8, 2011) (SR-Phlx-2011-100).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, the Exchange also proposes to delete text in OFPA F-10,
entitled ``Unusual Market Conditions.'' The Exchange previously filed a
proposed rule change to delete Exchange Rule 1015, entitled ``Execution
Guarantee'' and OFPA A-11, entitled ``Responsibility To Fill Customer
Orders.'' \5\ The Exchange deleted both Rule 1015 and OFPA A-11 because
those rules were outdated due to the combination of the adoption of
firm quote obligations in options and increased automation. The text of
OFPA F-10 references both Exchange Rule 1015 and OFPA A-11 in the
second paragraph. The Exchange is proposing to delete this paragraph as
the text is no longer necessary and outdated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63064 (October 7,
2010), 75 FR 63231 (October 14, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-136).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, the Exchange is proposing a technical amendment to delete a
reference to ``ITS Rules'' in the Rule Book. The Exchange previously
removed references to the Intermarket Trading System (``ITS'') Plan and
deleted Exchange Rules 2000-2002.\6\ The Exchange proposes to delete
this reference as it is unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55569 (April 2,
2007), 72 FR 17978 (April 10, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While changes pursuant to this proposal are immediately effective,
the Exchange designates the amendment to Exchange Rule 3228 become
operative on August 26, 2011.
 2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest,
by amending the text of the Exchange Rules and OFPA to update cross-
references and remove outdated and unnecessary text. The Exchange
believes that these amendments will clarify the Exchange's Rules to the
benefit of the membership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \9\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(1)
\10\ thereunder, the Exchange has designated this proposal as one that
constitutes a stated policy, practice or interpretation with respect to
the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the
SRO, and therefore has become effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2011-112 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2011-112. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the

Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
Phlx-2011-112 and should be submitted on or before September 12, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-21321 Filed 8-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 3820]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01414]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82559; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2017-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule
Change To List and Trade the Common Shares of Beneficial Interest of
the PowerShares Income Builder Portfolio, a Series of PowerShares
Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II

January 22, 2018.
    On December 1, 2017, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to list and
trade under Exchange Rule 14.11(c)(3) the common shares of beneficial
interest of the PowerShares Income Builder Portfolio, a series of
PowerShares Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on December 20, 2017.\3\
The Commission has received no comment letters on the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82328 (December 14,
2017), 82 FR 60443.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is February 3, 2018. The Commission is extending this 45-day time
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change.
Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\5\ designates March 20, 2018 as the date by which the Commission
shall either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number
SR-CboeBZX-2017-011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

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

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-01414 Filed 1-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


 	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

	40 CFR Part 52

	[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-1068; FRL-        ]

	Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Section 110(a)(1) 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the White
Top Mountain, Smyth County, Virginia 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Final rule.

SUMMARY:  EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia.  This revision pertains to a
10-year maintenance plan for the White Top Mountain 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area located in Smyth County, Virginia.  This action is
being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

EFFECTIVE DATE:  This final rule is effective on [insert date 30 days
from date of publication].

ADDRESSES:  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID Number EPA- R03-OAR-2007-1068.  All documents in the docket are
listed in the www.regulations.gov website.   Although listed in the
electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
confidential business information (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 electronically through www.regulations.gov or in
hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State
submittal are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Irene Shandruk,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at   HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I.  Background

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires that states submit to EPA plans to
maintain the NAAQS promulgated by EPA.  EPA interprets this provision to
require that areas that were maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS, but attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, submit a plan to
demonstrate the continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance that applies to areas that are
designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  The
purpose of this guidance is to address the maintenance requirements in
section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, and to assist the states in the
development of a SIP.  The components from EPA’s guidance include:
(1) An attainment emissions inventory, which is based on actual
“typical summer day” emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and nitrogen oxides (NOx) for the 10-year maintenance period, from a
base-year chosen by the state; (2) a maintenance demonstration, which
demonstrates how the area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour
ozone standard for a period of 10 years following the effective date of
designation unclassifiable/attainment (June 15, 2004); (3) an ambient
air monitoring network, which will be in continuous operation in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 58 to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
standard; (4) a contingency plan, that will ensure that in the event of
a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, measures will be implemented as
promptly as possible; (5) a verification of continued attainment,
indicating how the state intends on tracking the progress of the
maintenance plan.

On February 26, 2008 (73 FR 10201), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia.  The NPR proposed
approval of a 10-year maintenance plan for the White Top Mountain 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area located in Smyth County, Virginia.  The formal
SIP revision was submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia on August 6,
2007.

Other specific requirements of the 10-year maintenance plan under
section 110(a)(1) for the White Top Mountain 1-hour ozone nonattainment
area located in Smyth County, Virginia and the rationale for EPA's
proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here.
No public comments were received on the NPR.

II.  Summary of SIP Revision

Virginia has requested approval of a revision consisting of a 10-year
maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) for the White Top Mountain
1-hour ozone nonattainment area located in Smyth County, Virginia.  The
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan addresses the five components of EPA’s May 20, 2005
Guidance, which pertains to the maintenance requirements in section
110(a)(1) of the CAA.

III.  General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia

In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to certain
conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit) “privilege” for
voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a regulated entity.  The
legislation further addresses the relative burden of proof for parties
either asserting the privilege or seeking disclosure of documents for
which the privilege is claimed.  Virginia's legislation also provides,
subject to certain conditions, for a penalty waiver for violations of
environmental laws when a regulated entity discovers such violations
pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation and voluntarily discloses
such violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate
measures to remedy the violations.  Virginia's Voluntary Environmental
Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, provides a privilege
that protects from disclosure documents and information about the
content of those documents that are the product of a voluntary
environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to documents
or information (1) that are generated or developed before the
commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) that are
prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) that demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) that are required by law.

On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the Attorney
General provided a legal opinion that states that the Privilege law, Va.
Code Sec. 10.1-1198,  precludes granting a privilege to documents and
information (required by law,( including documents and information
(required by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization
or approval,( since Virginia must (enforce Federally authorized
environmental programs in a manner that is no less stringent than their
Federal counterparts. . . .(   The opinion concludes that ([r]egarding (
10.1-1198, therefore, documents or other information needed for civil or
criminal enforcement under one of these programs could not be privileged
because such documents and information are essential to pursuing
enforcement in a manner required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval.(

Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that ([t]o
the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal law,(  any
person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a state agency
regarding a violation of an environmental statute, regulation, permit,
or administrative order is granted immunity from administrative or civil
penalty.  The Attorney General's January 12, 1998 opinion states that
the quoted language renders this statute inapplicable to enforcement of
any Federally authorized programs, since (no immunity could be afforded
from administrative, civil, or criminal penalties because granting such
immunity would not be consistent with Federal law, which is one of the
criteria for immunity.(

Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and Immunity
statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its program
consistent with the Federal requirements.  In any event, because EPA has
also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law can affect
only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal enforcement
authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the CAA,
including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce
the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan, independently of any
state enforcement effort.  In addition, citizen enforcement under
section 304 of the Clean Air Act is likewise unaffected by this, or any,
state audit privilege or immunity law.

IV.  Final Action

EPA's review of this revision indicates that the Commonwealth of
Virginia has addressed the components of a maintenance plan pursuant to
EPA’s May 20, 2005 guidance, and meets the requirements of section
110(a)(1) of the CAA.  EPA is approving the Virginia SIP revision for
White Top Mountain, Smyth County, Virginia, which was submitted on
August 6, 2007.

V.   Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A.   General Requirements

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations.  42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).  Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.  Accordingly,
this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements
and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
state law.  For that reason, this action:

is not a "significant regulatory action” subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993);

does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);

is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);

does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);

does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997);

is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211
(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the
Clean Air Act; and

does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects,
using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA
notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.

B.   Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the
rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States.  EPA will submit a report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.  A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register.
 This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C.  Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial
review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [Insert date 60 days from date of
publication of this document in the Federal Register].  Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action.

This action approving Virginia’s SIP revision request consisting of a
10-year maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) for the White Top
Mountain 1-hour ozone nonattainment area located in Smyth County,
Virginia may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements.  (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

______April 15, 2008_____________
____________/s/_________________

Dated:                                                      		William T.
Wisniewski, Acting

Regional Administrator,

Region III.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52 - [AMENDED]

1.  The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart XX - Virginia

2.  In Section 52.2420, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
an entry for the 8-hour Ozone Maintenance plan for the White Top
Mountain, Smyth County, VA 1-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area at the end of
the table to read as follows:

( 52.2520  		Identification of plan.

*		*		*		*		*

(e)* * *

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision

Applicable geographic area

State submittal date

EPA approval date

Additional

explanation

*                    *                      *                   *
           *                 *                    *

Ozone Maintenance Plan

White Top Mountain, Smyth County, VA 1-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area

8/6/07

[Insert Federal Register page number where the document begins and date]

 PAGE  6

 PAGE  10


[Federal Register: May 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 100)]
[Notices]
[Page 29145-29146]
[DOCID:fr24my07-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-758-000]

Inland Empire Energy Center, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

May 18, 2007.
    Inland Empire Energy Center, LLC (Inland Empire) filed an
application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate
tariff. The proposed market-based rate tariff provides for the sale of
energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. Inland
Empire also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In
particular, Inland Empire requested that the Commission grant blanket
approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities and
assumptions of liability by Inland Empire.
    On May 17, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under part 34 (Director's Order). The Director's
Order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice
in the Federal Register establishing a period of time for the filing of
protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard concerning the
blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of
liability by Inland Empire should file a protest with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, in

accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is
June 18, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket
approvals by the deadline above, Inland Empire is authorized to issue
securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor,
indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another
person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful
object within the corporate purposes of Inland Empire, compatible with
the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for
such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Inland Empire's issuance of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-9979 Filed 5-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44978-44979]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18943]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 2011-0786]

Notice of FAA Intent To Carry Over Airport Improvement Program
(AIP) Entitlement Funds

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: By 12 p.m. prevailing local time on Friday, August 12, 2011,
airport sponsors eligible to receive entitlement funds under the
Airport Improvement Program (AIP) must notify, in writing, the
designated representative in the appropriate FAA Regional or Airports
District Office if they intend to submit a final grant application in
support of eligible projects with their fiscal year 2011 and/or prior-
year entitlement funds. This notice must address all entitlement funds
apportioned for fiscal year 2011, regardless of whether the FAA has
authority to obligate those funds. After that deadline, the FAA will
carry over all remaining entitlement funds, and the funds will not be
available again until at least the beginning of fiscal year 2012. This
notification requirement does not apply to non-primary airports covered
by the block-grant program.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Frank J. San Martin, Manager,
Airports Financial Assistance Division, APP-500, on<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of this policy and all other
documents in this docket using the Internet by:
    (1) Searching the Federal eRulemaking portal (http://www.regulations.gov/search);
    (2) Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or
    (3) Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/index.html.
    You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Airports Financial Assistance Division, Office
of Airport Planning and Programming, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Make sure to
identify the docket number, notice number, or amendment number of this
proceeding.
    Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 471, allows the FAA to
grant apportioned or entitlement funds to eligible airport sponsors in
support of eligible projects. Chapter 471 also allows the FAA to defer
or carry over such grants to the following year. In such cases, the FAA
converts the current-year funds to AIP discretionary funds, and then
protects an equal amount of funding to be available to the sponsor in
the following year, subject to legislative action to give the FAA both
legal authority to issue grants and an appropriation of funds.
    Over the five fiscal years from 2003 through 2007, the FAA
converted entitlements averaging just over $450 million annually,
representing approximately 13 percent of the overall amount
appropriated for AIP. Beginning in fiscal year 2008, that percentage
increased sharply, to an annual average closer to $600 million,
representing approximately 18 percent of the amount appropriated for
AIP.
    Chapter 471 requires the FAA to establish a deadline for sponsors
to notify the FAA of their intention to request a grant using their
available entitlement funds. The FAA has historically established May 1
as the deadline for sponsor notification. By the end of July in each of
the fiscal years from 2006 through 2010, the FAA has historically been
able to convert at least $400 million in entitlement funds based on
sponsor requests.
    On February 3, 2011, the FAA published a notice in the Federal
Register (23 FR 6178), establishing May 1, 2011 as the notification
deadline. However, as of July 20, 2011 (with about 10 weeks remaining
in the fiscal year), the FAA has been able to convert only about $120
million in carryover based on sponsor notifications. This represents a
significantly slower rate of carryover conversion.

    As the end of the fiscal year approaches, it will quickly become
difficult to convert further carryover funds to discretionary in
sufficient time to obligate the funds. The FAA recognizes the unique
circumstances that many sponsors face due to the series of short-term
extensions of the FAA's authorizing legislation, which has prevented
the FAA from making apportioned AIP funds fully available during FY
2011. The FAA also recognizes that in many cases, sponsors have been
awaiting access to the full amount of entitlement funds. In other
cases, sponsors have been waiting in the hope of securing AIP
discretionary or state apportionment funds.
    Therefore, the FAA is hereby notifying sponsors about steps
required to ensure that the FAA has sufficient time to carryover and
convert remaining entitlement funds, due to processes required under
federal and local laws. The FAA is hereby notifying all sponsors that
by 12 p.m. prevailing local time on Friday, August 12, 2011, they must
submit written notice to the appropriate FAA office if they intend to
submit a final grant application in support of eligible projects with
its fiscal year 2011 or prior-year entitlement funds. This notice must
address all apportioned for fiscal year 2011, regardless of whether the
FAA has authority to obligate those funds. After that deadline, the FAA
will carry over all remaining entitlement funds, and the funds will not
be available again until at least the beginning of fiscal year 2012.
This notification requirement does not apply to non-primary airports
covered by the block-grant program.
    In addition, the FAA is also reminding sponsors that the February
3, 2011 Federal Register notice established August 1, 2011 as the
deadline to submit a grant application. In light of the protracted
uncertainty about the program, the FAA is hereby revising that deadline
to Friday, August 12, 2011. The FAA urges sponsors who cannot meet this
deadline for grant applications to contact the designated
representative in the appropriate Airports Regional or District Office.
    The FAA is also notifying sponsors who have requested but not
received AIP discretionary funding in fiscal year 2011 that they must
contact the designated representative in the appropriate Airports
District Office or Regional Office. The FAA will advise such sponsors
if it is unlikely that the FAA can fulfill those funding requests in
fiscal year 2011, enabling such sponsors to make timely decisions about
their fiscal year 2011 entitlement funds.
    In the absence of either a final grant application or written
notification from the sponsor stating their intent to use fiscal year
2011 entitlement funds, the FAA will carry over all remaining
entitlement funds, and the funds will not be available again until at
least the beginning of fiscal year 2012.

    Issued in Washington, DC on July 22, 2011.
Frank J. San Martin,
Manager, Airports Financial Assistance Division, Office of Airport
Planning and Programming.
[FR Doc. 2011-18943 Filed 7-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 183 (Friday, September 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53125-53128]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20659]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93070; File No. SR-NSCC-2021-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of Partial Amendment No. 1 and Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Partial Amendment No. 1 To Remove ID Net Transactions From the Required
Fund Deposit Calculations and Make Other Changes to the Rules

September 20, 2021.

I. Introduction

    On July 27, 2021, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\
proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2021-011. On August 6, 2021, NSCC filed
Amendment No.1 to the proposed rule change, to make clarifications and
corrections to the proposed rule change.\3\ The proposed rule change
was published for public comment in the Federal Register on August 11,
2021,\4\ and the Commission has received comments on the changes
proposed therein.\5\ For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is
approving the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Partial Amendment No. 1 made clarification corrections to
the description of the proposed rule change, namely the insertion of
a legend noting the changes to the Rules have been approved but not
yet implemented.
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92566 (August 5, 2021),
86 FR 44100 (August 11, 2021) (``Notice'').
    \5\ See Letter from NSCC, dated August 6, 2021, to Vanessa
Countryman, Secretary, Commission, available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nscc-2021-011/srnscc2021011-9122299-247146.pdf
(providing notice of Amendment No. 1). Two other comments letters
were received that do not raise issues related to this proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    NSCC is proposing to revise the margin methodology set forth in its
Rules & Procedures (``Rules'') \6\ to remove institutional delivery
(``ID'') transactions that are processed through the ID Net Service
from the calculation of its members' required margin. The ID Net
Service is a joint service of NSCC and Depository Trust Company
(``DTC'') that allows subscribers to the service,

which are generally executing brokers, to net, on the one side,
affirmed eligible ID transactions that are processed through ITP
Matching (US) LLC (``ITP'') and then held at DTC with, on the other
side, broker-dealer transactions have been processed through NSCC's
continuous net settlement (``CNS'') system.\7\ The ID Net Service was
designed to provide Members with the operational benefit of efficiency
by allowing them to net their affirmed ID transactions with their CNS
transactions.\8\ Although ID transactions processed through the ID Net
Service (``ID Net Transactions'') are netted with transactions that
have been processed through NSCC's CNS system, these transactions are
not subject to NSCC's trade guarantee, meaning in the event of a
default, ID Net Transactions will not be completed by NSCC.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the
Rules, available at http://dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/
rules/nscc_rules.pdf.
    \7\ DTC is a clearing agency and affiliate of NSCC that serves
as a central securities depository providing settlement services for
NSCC. ITP is a DTC affiliate that offers buy-side, sell-side and
custodian firms an end-to-end straight-through-processing solution
for trading activity, which is then settled at DTC.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57573 (March 27,
2008), 73 FR 18019, 18019 (April 2, 2008).
    \9\ See Procedure XVI (ID Net Service), supra note 6. As
explained in the Notice, transactions processed through the ID Net
Service have never been subject to NSCC's trade guarantee. See
Notice, 86 FR at 44101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC is also proposing to amend the Rules to provide greater
transparency regarding the status of the ID Net Service as a non-
guaranteed service and how ID Net Transactions are handled following a
member default. Finally, NSCC is proposing to make other changes to the
Rules to implement these proposed changes.

A. Required Fund Deposit and Risk Management of ID Net Transactions

    As part of its market risk management strategy, NSCC manages its
credit exposure to Members by determining the appropriate Required Fund
Deposits to the Clearing Fund and monitoring its sufficiency.\10\ The
Required Fund Deposit serves as each Member's margin. The objective of
a Member's margin is to mitigate potential losses to NSCC associated
with liquidating a Member's portfolio in the event NSCC ceases to act
for that Member (hereinafter referred to as a ``default'').\11\ The
aggregate of all Members' Required Fund Deposits constitutes the
Clearing Fund of NSCC. NSCC would access its Clearing Fund should a
defaulting Member's own margin be insufficient to satisfy losses to
NSCC caused by the liquidation of that Member's portfolio.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See generally Rule 4 (Clearing Fund) and Procedure XV
(Clearing Fund Formula and Other Matters). NSCC states that its
market risk management strategy is designed to comply with Rule
17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Act, where these risks are referred to as
``credit risks.'' 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4). See Notice, 86 FR at
44102.
    \11\ The Rules identify when NSCC may cease to act for a Member
and the types of actions NSCC may take. For example, NSCC may
suspend a firm's membership with NSCC or prohibit or limit a
Member's access to NSCC's services in the event that Member defaults
on a financial or other obligation to NSCC. See Rule 46
(Restrictions on Access to Services), supra note 6.
    \12\ See Rule 4, section 4, supra note 6. See also Notice, 86 FR
at 44101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the Rules, each Member's Required Fund Deposit amount
consists of a number of applicable components, each of which is
calculated to address specific risks faced by NSCC, and are described
in Procedure XV of the Rules. Because ID Net Transactions are netted
with CNS transactions, these transactions are currently included in the
netted positions that are used to calculate certain components of
Members' Required Fund Deposits. These components include (i) the
volatility component, (ii) the mark-to-market component, which includes
both (a) a Regular Mark-to-Market charge and (b) an ID Net Mark-to-
Market charge, (iii) the Margin Requirement Differential component, and
(iv) a margin liquidity adjustment charge (``MLA charge''). Each
component is calculated by a different methodology as identified by
NSCC in the Rules.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See generally Procedure XV, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Proposed Enhancement to NSCC's Margining Methodology

    NSCC proposes to revise its margining methodology to remove ID Net
Transactions from the calculation of Members' Required Fund Deposits.
As noted above, NSCC does not guarantee the completion of these ID Net
Transactions, and, in the event of a Member default, these transactions
are excluded from NSCC's operations to be settled away from NSCC.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See note 9 supra and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Including ID Net Transactions in the margin calculations presents
the risk that NSCC is either under-margining or over-margining the
positions of Members that use the ID Net Service.\15\ NSCC states that
it could more accurately measure the risks it faces following a Member
default by removing these non-guaranteed positions from its margining
methodology.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice, 86 FR at 44102. For example, if the inclusion
of ID Net Transactions in a Member's Net Unsettled Positions results
in a lower margin charge (as compared to the margin charge that
would have been calculated for that Member if those ID Net
Transactions were excluded from its Net Unsettled Positions), NSCC
could be under-margining on that Net Unsettled Position.
    \16\ See Notice, 86 FR at 44102. NSCC states it does not expect
the proposed change to have a material impact on the size of its
Clearing Fund. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To implement this proposed rule change, NSCC proposes to remove ID
Net Transactions from Members' Net Unsettled Positions for purposes of
calculating the volatility charge and the MLA charge. NSCC also
proposes to (1) eliminate the ID Net Mark-to-Market charge from the
Required Fund Deposit, and (2) amend the Rules to make clear that ID
Net Transactions are not included in the calculation of the Regular
Mark-to-Market charge. NSCC does not propose any other changes to the
calculation of margin charges and is not proposing any changes to the
operation of the ID Net Service.

C. Proposed Changes To Clarify the Non-Guaranteed Status of ID Net
Service

    NSCC also proposes to amend the Rules to provide greater
transparency and clarity into how ID Net Transactions are processed in
the event of a Member default. Currently, the Rules describe the
circumstances in which NSCC may remove a Member's status as an ID Net
Subscriber, which include the circumstances that provide NSCC with the
right to suspend, prohibit or limit a Member's access to NSCC's
services.\17\ Additionally, the Rules describe NSCC's ability to exit
ID Net Transactions from its operations.\18\ NSCC has stated that
because the ID Net Service is not a guaranteed service, NSCC would rely
on these Rules to exit ID Net Transactions from its operations in the
event of a Member default.\19\ Specifically, if NSCC ceased to act for
a Member that is an ID Net Subscriber, that firm would no longer be
eligible to use the service, NSCC would exit its ID Net Transactions
from its operations, and those transactions would be settled on a
trade-for-trade basis outside the ID Net Service.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Rule 65, Section 5, supra note 6.
    \18\ See Procedure XVI (ID Net Service), supra note 6.
    \19\ See id.
    \20\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC proposes to amend the Rules to expressly identify ID Net as a
non-guaranteed service and to provide further clarity on how ID Net
Transactions will be processed in the event of a Member default.

D. Other Proposed Changes to the NSCC Rules To Implement the Proposed
Rule Change

    NSCC proposes additional changes to the Rules in order to implement
the

proposed changes described above. These changes generally are minor
modifications relating to relevant definitions and renumbering margin
components.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \21\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and rules and regulations thereunder applicable
to such organization. After carefully considered the proposed rule
change, the Commission finds that the proposed changes are consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to NSCC. In particular, the Commission finds the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act,\22\ and Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and (e)(6)(i), each promulgated
under the Act,\23\ for the reasons described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See id. at 44103.
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i), (e)(6)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F)

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \24\ requires that the rules of
NSCC be designed to, among other things, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in Section II.B above, the proposed rule change would
revise NSCC's margining methodology to remove ID Net Transactions from
the calculation of Members' Required Fund Deposits. The Commission
believes that this increased change in the determination of Members'
Required Fund Deposits should allow both NSCC and Members to more
effectively manage and understand the risks related to ID Net
Transactions. Therefore, the Commission believes that the proposed rule
change is designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of ID Net Transactions and assure the safeguarding of
securities and funds which are in the custody or control of NSCC,
consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as described in Sections II.C and D above, the
proposed rule change would amend the Rules to improve the transparency
in describing ID Net Transactions as non-guaranteed and to provide
clarity on how these transactions will be processed in the event of a
Member default. The proposed rule would also make technical changes to
implement the proposed changes described above. The Commission believes
that by clearly stating the nature of ID Net Transactions, further
clarifying the default procedure involving ID Net Transactions, and
making technical changes to implement the changes, the proposed rule
change should help ensure that the Rules are accurate and clear to
Members, thus promoting prompt and accurate clearance and settlement.

B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) under the Act \26\ requires, in part, that
NSCC establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to effectively identify, measure,
monitor, and manage its credit exposures to participants and those
arising from its payment, clearing, and settlement processes, including
by maintaining sufficient financial resources to cover its credit
exposure to each participant fully with a high degree of confidence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, NSCC proposes to remove ID Net Transactions
from the calculation of Required Fund Deposits of Members that are ID
Net Subscribers because ID Net Transactions are not guaranteed
transactions and NSCC would not incur losses from ID Net Transactions.
The proposed rule change would enable NSCC to more accurately and
effectively measure the risks presented by Members by calculating
margin only on the positions that NSCC may be required to complete in
the event of a Member default. Therefore, the Commission believes the
proposed rule change would enhance NSCC's ability to effectively
identify, measure, monitor and, through the collection of Required Fund
Deposits, manage its credit exposures to Members by maintaining
sufficient financial resources to cover its credit exposure fully with
a high degree of confidence. As such, the Commission believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) under the
Act.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) under the Act \28\ requires, in part, that
NSCC establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to cover its credit exposures to its
participants by establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a
minimum, considers, and produces margin levels commensurate with, the
risks and particular attributes of each relevant product, portfolio,
and market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 24017Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A Member's margin (in the form of its Required Fund Deposit) is
made up of risk-based components that are calculated and assessed daily
to limit NSCC's credit exposures to its members. The Commission
believes the proposed rule change, which would remove ID Net
Transactions from the calculation of Members' margin, should enable
NSCC to more effectively measure the risks presented by its Members'
guaranteed positions and, therefore, determine a more precise level of
margin commensurate with the risks and particular attributes of
Members' portfolios. As stated above, Required Fund Deposits are
designed to mitigate any potential losses to NSCC associated with
liquidating a defaulting Member's portfolio in the event NSCC ceases to
act for that Member. ID Net Transactions are not subject to NSCC's
trade guarantee. Consequently, in the event of a Member default related
to ID Net Transactions, NSCC is not required to complete such
transactions, would not have any losses, and would not need to use
Required Fund Deposits since there is no losses. As a result, the funds
required to cover Members' transactions would not be impacted by the ID
Net Service. Accordingly, the Commission believes that by removing non-
guaranteed positions from the margin calculation, the proposed rule
change would enable NSCC to collect margin more precisely tailored to
the nature of the risk presented to NSCC.
    As a result, the Commission believes the proposed rule change would
enhance NSCC's ability to cover its credit exposures to its
participants by establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a
minimum, considers, and produces margin levels commensurate with, the
risks and particular attributes of each relevant product, portfolio,
and market. Therefore, the Commission believes the proposed change is
consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) under the Act.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Id.

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Partial Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
Exchange Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following
methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2021-011 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 Number SR-NSCC-2021-011. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of NSCC 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 Number SR-NSCC-2021-011 and should be submitted on
or before October 15, 2021.

V. Accelerated Approval of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Partial Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of
the Exchange Act,\30\ to approve the proposed rule change prior to the
30th day after the date of publication of Partial Amendment No.1 in the
Federal Register. As discussed above, in Partial Amendment No. 1, NSCC
updates its proposed rule text to include a legend to indicate a
delayed implementation date, specifically that the rule change would be
implemented no later than 10 Business Days after Commission approval of
the proposed rule change. Partial Amendment No. 1 improves the
efficiency of the filing process by obviating the need for NSCC to
propose another change to its rules to resolve the omitted legend in
the future, while not changing the purpose of or basis for the Proposed
Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For similar reasons as discussed above, the Commission finds that
Partial Amendment No. 1 is consistent with the requirement that NSCC's
rules be designed, in part, 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 under Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange
Act.\31\ Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause for approving the
Proposed Rule Change, as modified by Partial Amendment No. 1, on an
accelerated basis, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange
Act.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule changes are consistent with the requirements of the Act
and in particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act and
the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\33\ that the proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2021-011 be, and hereby is,
approved.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Id.
    \34\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-20659 Filed 9-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23671-23672]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08153]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0500; FRL-10882-01-OAR; EPA ICR No. 2193.05]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Information Collection Activities Associated With EPA's ENERGY STAR
Program in the Residential Sector

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), ``EPA's ENERGY STAR
Program in the Residential Sector'' (EPA ICR No. 2193.05, OMB Control
No. 2060-0586) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review
and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.). Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on
specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described
below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which was approved
through January 30, 2024. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 20, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2004-0500, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zachary Shadid, Energy Star
Residential Branch, Mail code 6202A, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:
(202) 343-9058; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will

be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The
docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-
1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: EPA first developed energy efficiency guidelines for new
homes in 1995. ENERGY STAR's new construction programs promote cost-
effective, whole house energy efficiency that is independently verified
by third party professionals. Through 2022, there have been more than
2.3 million ENERGY STAR certified new homes built in the U.S.
    Since participation in the ENERGY STAR program is voluntary,
organizations are not required to submit information to EPA.
Information received is not of a confidential nature. EPA has developed
this ICR to obtain authorization to collect information for the
following activities:
    Joining the ENERGY STAR Program and Related Activities: An
organization interested in joining ENERGY STAR as a partner is asked to
submit a partnership agreement establishing its commitment to ENERGY
STAR. Partners agree to undertake efforts such as educating their staff
and the public about their partnership with ENERGY STAR, developing and
implementing a plan to improve energy performance in homes, and
highlighting achievements utilizing the ENERGY STAR label.
    Verification of ENERGY STAR Guidelines: The purpose of the
verification process is to objectively and independently ensure the
quality of home construction and improvements with respect to ENERGY
STAR guidelines. Under ENERGY STAR's Certified Homes program,
verification of a home's energy efficiency occurs when site-built home
builders, multifamily high-rise developers, or plants producing
manufactured and modular homes want to apply the ENERGY STAR label on
homes. The verification process for site-built homes involves the home
builder, the third-party verification organization (Home Energy Rating
Providers and Home Energy Raters), and the Heating, Ventilation, and
Cooling (HVAC) contractor. These organizations complete four checklists
as part of the verification process. The verification process for
multifamily high-rise units involves the developer and a Licensed
Professional (architect or engineer), who submit information both pre-
construction and post-construction to ensure that program prerequisites
and energy conservation measures are properly installed and meet ENERGY
STAR requirements. In addition, plants producing manufactured and
modular homes must undergo a certification process to ensure that they
consistently produce and install homes that meet ENERGY STAR
guidelines. Also, under ENERGY STAR's HVAC Verified Installation
program, local program sponsors promote the installation of HVAC
systems in homes to meet ENERGY STAR guidelines. Sponsors oversee
contractors who perform the installations, perform tests, and report
the results to the sponsors. Sponsors submit periodic reports to EPA on
these activities.
    Evaluation: Partners and other program participants are asked to
periodically submit information to EPA as needed to assist in
evaluating ENERGY STAR's effectiveness in helping organizations promote
energy efficiency in homes, to assess partners' level of interest and
ability in promoting ENERGY STAR in the residential sector, and to
determine the impact that ENERGY STAR has on residential energy use and
the supply and demand for energy-efficient homes and home improvement
products and services.
    Periodic Reporting: Some partners are asked to submit information
to EPA periodically to assist EPA in tracking and measuring progress in
building and promoting ENERGY STAR certified homes and installing and
promoting energy-efficient improvements.
    ENERGY STAR Awards: Each year, partners are eligible for an ENERGY
STAR award, which recognizes organizations demonstrating outstanding
support in promoting ENERGY STAR. An application is submitted to EPA by
interested partners.
    Form Numbers: 5900-06, 5900-08, 5900-17, 5900-33, 5900-172, 5900-
175, 5900-176, 5900-178, 5900-179, 5900-180, 5900-183, 5900-184, 5900-
186, 5900-188, 5900-189, 5900-194, 5900-266, 5900-267, 5900-268, 5900-
269, 5900-270, 5900-271, 5900-272.
    Respondents/affected entities: Home builders, modular and
manufactured home manufacturing plants, developers, verification
organizations, oversight organizations, energy efficiency program
sponsors (e.g., national, regional, state, or local government
entities, utilities), architects, engineers, home plan designers,
retailers, contractors, and homeowners.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 132,000 (total).
    Frequency of response: Once, quarterly, annually, and occasionally.
    Total estimated burden: 177,847 hours (per year). The burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $14,747,008 (per year). This includes an
estimated cost of $14,747,008 for labor and $0 for capital investment,
operation and maintenance.
    Changes in Estimates: The burden estimates presented in this notice
are from the last approval. EPA is currently evaluating and updating
these estimates as part of the ICR renewal process. EPA will discuss
its updated estimates, as well as changes from the last approval, in
the next Federal Register notice to be issued for this renewal.

Jean Lupinacci,
Director, Climate Protection Partnerships Division, Office of
Atmospheric Protection, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2023-08153 Filed 4-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30761-30763]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12044]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1074; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01257-A;
Amendment 39-21574; AD 2021-11-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus) Model PC-24 airplanes. This AD
results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and
correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI identifies
the unsafe condition as the engine attachment hardware not

conforming to the approved design, which could affect the structural
integrity of the airplane. This AD requires inspecting the engine
attachment hardware for missing washers and loose nuts and taking
corrective actions as necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 15, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of July 15,
2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., CH-6371, Stans, Switzerland; phone: +41
exception occurred on : 2021-12044.htm
exception occurred on : 2021-12044.htm
848 24 7 365; email: aircraft.com">[email protected]aircraft.com; website:
https://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It
is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1074.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1074; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The address for Docket
Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Rudolph, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International
Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106; phone:
(816) 329-4059; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain serial-numbered
Pilatus Model PC-24 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on March 26, 2021 (86 FR 16124). The NPRM was prompted by MCAI
originated by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which
is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union.
EASA has issued EASA AD 2020-0194, dated September 8, 2020 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to address an unsafe condition on certain
serial-numbered Pilatus Model PC-24 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During a scheduled maintenance inspection, the engine attachment
hardware of a PC-24 airplane was found not to conform to the
approved design. A washer was missing beneath each of the four
mating bolt heads on the rear engine beam. In addition, some of the
keeper fitting attachment bolts on the LH/RH middle inner nacelle
were found with loose nuts. It was also determined that other
aeroplanes may have the same non-conformities.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could damage the
engine attachment hardware, possibly affecting the structural
integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Pilatus issued the
[service bulletin] SB, providing instructions for inspection and
corrective action.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time inspection for missing washers and loose nuts on the engine
attachment hardware and, depending on findings, the accomplishment
of applicable corrective action(s).

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
1074.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require inspecting the engine
attachment hardware for missing washers and loose nuts and taking
corrective actions as necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on this product.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the costs.

Conclusion

    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 this State of Design Authority, it has
notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant
data and determined that air safety and the public interest require
adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products. This AD is adopted
as proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Pilatus PC-24 Service Bulletin No. 71-001, dated
June 30, 2020. This service information specifies procedures for
inspecting the engine attachment hardware for loose nuts and missing
washers and taking corrective actions depending on findings. This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in ADDRESSES.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 34 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    The FAA estimates that it would take 2.5 work-hours to do the one-
time inspections. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the cost of this AD on
U.S. operators would be $7,225 or $212.50 per airplane.
    The FAA also estimates that, as on-condition costs, installing
missing washers, replacing bolts, and doing an eddy current inspection
of the bolt holes would take 4.5 work-hours and require parts costing
$200 for a cost of $582.50 per airplane. This estimate assumes
replacing all of the rear engine beam attachment bolts and washers and
doing an eddy current inspection of all the attachment bolt holes. If
the bolt holes are found damaged during the eddy current inspection,
the damage will vary considerably from airplane to airplane, and the
FAA has no way of estimating a repair cost. In addition, the FAA has no
way of determining the number of airplanes that might need these
actions.
    The FAA has included all known costs in this cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this AD
may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing

regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-11-12 Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.: Amendment 39-21574; Docket No.
FAA-2020-1074; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01257-A.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 15, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Model PC-24 airplanes,
serial numbers (S/Ns) 101 through 162, S/N 164, S/N 165, S/N 167,
and S/N 168, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7120, Engine Mount
Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe condition as engine
attachment hardware not conforming to the approved design. The FAA
is issuing this AD to detect and address incorrectly installed
attachment hardware in the engine and nacelle area. The unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could result in damage to the engine
attachment hardware, which may affect the structural integrity of
the airplane.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2)
of this AD at the next annual inspection after the effective date of
this AD or within 11 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
    (1) Inspect the left hand (LH) and right hand (RH) middle inner
nacelles for loose nuts and correctly install any loose nut before
further flight by following section 3.B(1) of the Accomplishment
Instructions in Pilatus PC-24 Service Bulletin No. 71-001, dated
June 30, 2020 (Pilatus SB 71-001).
    (2) Inspect the LH and RH front and rear engine beams for
missing washers by following section 3.B(2)(a) through (b) of the
Accomplishment Instructions in Pilatus SB 71-001. If there are any
missing washers, before further flight, do an eddy current
inspection of the bolt holes for damage by following section 3.C of
the Accomplishment Instructions in Pilatus SB 71-001. Where Pilatus
SB 71-001 specifies obtaining repair instructions from Pilatus, the
instructions must be accomplished using a method approved by the
Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or the European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Pilatus's EASA Design Organization
Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include
the DOA-authorized signature.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. If sending information directly to
the manager of the International Validation Branch, send it to the
attention of the person identified in Related Information.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(h) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Doug Rudolph,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301,
Kansas City, MO 64106; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to EASA AD 2020-0194, dated September 8, 2020, for
more information. You may examine the EASA AD at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2020-1074.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Pilatus PC-24 Service Bulletin No. 71-001, dated June 30,
2020.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. service information identified in
this AD, contact CH-6371, Stans, Switzerland; phone: +41 848 24 7
exception occurred on : 2021-12044.htm
exception occurred on : 2021-12044.htm
365; email: aircraft.com">[email protected]aircraft.com; website: https://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas
City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on May 17, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-12044 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise

Chambers Works

Deepwater, NJ  08023

March 31, 2009

Document Control Office

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 6428

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Re: 	EPA – HQ – OPPT – 2003 - 0012

	DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100

	PFOA Data Submittal – Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples

	December 2008 Sample Data

Dear Document Control Office:

As per Part IV, Section G.5.a of the NJPDES permit, we are submitting a summary of PFOA analytical results for the weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A to NJDEP on a monthly basis. Per your request, we are sending you a paper and electronic copy of the report for samples taken during December 2008. We will continue to send you the reports each month.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (856) 540-3015.

Sincerely,

Karen L. Pinder

SET Environmental Coordinator

DuPont Chambers Works

Enclosures

Copies to:

Director, Chemical Control Division

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 4146

1201 Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20004

Ms. Susan Rosenwinkel (cover letter only)

Principal Environmental Engineer

NJDEP Division of Water Quality

Bureau of Point Source Permitting – Region 2

401 E. State Street

P.O. Box 029

Trenton, NJ 08625-0029