[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71372-71375]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25353]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96329; File No. SR-Phlx-2022-46]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 5

November 16, 2022.
    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 November 1, 2022, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Pricing Schedule at
Options 7, Section 5.D.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the pricing for its singly-listed
U.S. dollar-settled foreign currency options (``FX options'' or
``FCOs'') \3\ in Options 7, Section 5.D. Today, the Exchange assesses
fees and rebates for executions that add or remove liquidity in simple
and complex FX options orders. For simple FX options, Part A of Section
5.D outlines the following rebates for adding liquidity and fees for
removing liquidity:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange will add the term ``FCOs'' in the Options 7,
Section 5.D header. FCOs include XDB, XDE, XDN, XDS, XDA, XDZ and
XDC, and trade pursuant to Options 4C.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Lead
                                   Customer      market       Market        Firm       Broker-     Professional
                                                 maker        maker                     dealer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebate for Adding Liquidity....        $0.00        $0.20        $0.20        $0.00        $0.00           $0.00
Fee for Removing Liquidity.....         0.40         0.40         0.40         0.40         0.40            0.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For complex FX options, Part B of Section 5.D outlines the
following fees for removing liquidity:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Lead
                                   Customer      market       Market        Firm       Broker-     Professional
                                                 maker        maker                     dealer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fee for Adding Liquidity.......        $0.40        $0.40        $0.40        $0.40        $0.40           $0.40

Fee for Removing Liquidity.....         0.40         0.40         0.40         0.40         0.40            0.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Simple FX options orders that are executed against the individual
components of complex FX options orders are assessed the fees and paid
the rebates in Part A. However, the individual components of complex FX
options orders are assessed the fees in Part B. Transactions in FX
options originating on the Exchange floor are subject to the fees for
removing liquidity described above. However, if one side of the
transaction originates on the Exchange floor and any other side of the
trade was the result of an electronically submitted order or a quote,
then the fees for removing liquidity apply to the transactions which
originated on the Exchange floor, and the contracts that are executed
electronically are subject to the rebates and fees, as applicable, for
simple and complex orders.
    The fees for FX options executions in all electronic auctions
including, but not limited to, the Quote Exhaust auction,\4\ the
opening process and complex electronic auction, including the Complex
Order Live Auction (``COLA''),\5\ are $0.40 per contract for
Customer,\6\ Professional,\7\ Firm,\8\ Broker-Dealer,\9\ Lead Market
Maker \10\ and Market Maker.\11\ Furthermore, PIXL \12\ executions in
FX options are charged as follows: $0.20 per contract for Initiating
Orders,\13\ and $0.40 per contract for all other participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A Quote Exhaust occurs when the Exchange's disseminated
market at a particular price level includes a quote, and such market
is exhausted by an inbound contra-side quote or order (``initiating
quote or order''), and following such exhaustion, contracts remain
to be executed from the initiating quote or order through the
initial execution price. See Options 3, Section 6(a)(2)(B)(2).
    \5\ Complex orders on the complex order book may be subject to
an automated auction process pursuant to Options 3, Section 14(e).
    \6\ The term ``Customer'' applies to any transaction that is
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the
Customer range at The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') which
is not for the account of a broker or dealer or for the account of a
``Professional'' (as that term is defined in Options 1, Section
1(b)(45)).
    \7\ The term ``Professional'' applies to transactions for the
accounts of Professionals, as defined in Options 1, Section 1(b)(45)
means any person or entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in
securities, and (ii) places more than 390 orders in listed options
per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial
account(s).
    \8\ The term ``Firm'' applies to any transaction that is
identified by a member or member organization for clearing in the
Firm range at OCC.
    \9\ The term ``Broker-Dealer'' applies to any transaction which
is not subject to any of the other transaction fees applicable
within a particular category.
    \10\ The term ``Lead Market Maker'' applies to transactions for
the account of a Lead Market Maker (as defined in Options 2, Section
12(a)). A Lead Market Maker is an Exchange member who is registered
as an options Lead Market Maker pursuant to Options 2, Section
12(a). An options Lead Market Maker includes a Remote Lead Market
Maker which is defined as an options Lead Market Maker in one or
more classes that does not have a physical presence on an Exchange
floor and is approved by the Exchange pursuant to Options 2, Section
11.
    \11\ The term ``Market Maker'' is defined in Options 1, Section
1(b)(28) as a member of the Exchange who is registered as an options
Market Maker pursuant to Options 2, Section 12(a). A Market Maker
includes SQTs and RSQTs as well as Floor Market Makers.
    \12\ PIXL is the Exchange's electronic price improvement
auction. See Options 3, Section 13.
    \13\ A member may electronically submit for execution an order
it represents as agent on behalf of a Public Customer, broker-
dealer, or any other entity (``PIXL Order'') against principal
interest or against any other order (except as provided in sub-
paragraph (a)(6) of Options 3, Section 13) it represents as agent
(an ``Initiating Order'') provided it submits the PIXL Order for
electronic execution into the PIXL Auction (``Auction'') pursuant to
Options 3, Section 13. See Options 3, Section 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to replace the pricing described above
for simple and complex FCOs with a streamlined pricing schedule that
would remove the maker/taker model as well as the current auction,
floor/electronic, and simple/complex segmentations. As proposed, all
Non-Customers \14\ will be assessed a uniform Options Transaction
Charge of $0.50 per contract for all transactions in FCOs while
Customers will not be assessed any Options Transaction Charges. To
effectuate the foregoing changes, the Exchange proposes to delete Parts
A and B of Section 5.D in their entirety and replace them with the
following fee schedule:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The term ``Non-Customer'' applies to transactions for the
accounts of Lead Market Makers, Market Makers, Firms, Professionals,
Broker-Dealers and JBOs. The term ``Joint Back Office'' or ``JBO''
applies to any transaction that is identified by a member or member
organization for clearing in the Firm range at OCC and is identified
with an origin code as a JBO. A JBO will be priced the same as a
Broker-Dealer.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Lead market
                                                                         Customer       Professional      maker and     Broker-  dealer        Firm
                                                                                market maker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Options Transaction Charge.........................................           $0.00            $0.50            $0.50            $0.50            $0.50
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to assess all market participants a
surcharge of $0.25 per contract for all complex orders traded in FCOs.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\15\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes in Options 7,
Section 5.D in connection with the standard options transaction fees
and complex surcharges for singly-listed FCOs are reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory because the proposed changes
will streamline FCO pricing for all market participants, and will
incentivize market participants to transact in more FCOs on Phlx.
Specifically, the Exchange will simplify pricing by removing the maker/
taker model as well as the current auction, floor/electronic, and
simple/complex segmentations. The Exchange believes that it is
reasonable to eliminate the $0.20 per contract rebate currently offered
to Lead Market Makers and Market Makers for adding liquidity in simple
FCOs because this incentive has not been effective at encouraging these
market participants to add increased liquidity in simple FCOs. The
Exchange further believes that eliminating the differentiated pricing
between maker/taker, auction, floor/electronic, and

simple/complex FCO transactions is reasonable as it will simplify the
fee structure in a manner that may make the fee schedule more
comprehensible and administrable and thus, more appealing to, market
participants.
    As proposed, all Non-Customers will instead be assessed a uniform
Options Transaction Charge of $0.50 per contract for all transactions
in FCOs while Customers will not be assessed any Options Transaction
Charges. While Non-Customers will be charged higher Options Transaction
Fees under the proposed pricing program,\17\ the Exchange believes that
the proposal is reasonable and would continue to incentivize these
market participants to transact in singly-listed FCOs because the
proposed fees generally remain lower than the fees currently charged
for the Exchange's other singly-listed options.\18\ In addition,
Customers would no longer be assessed any standard transaction charges
for FCOs whereas today, they would be assessed a $0.40 per contract fee
for removing liquidity. As a result, the Exchange believes that the
proposed pricing is structured in a way that continues to encourage
market participants, including Customers in particular, to transact in
singly-listed FCOs on Phlx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ As discussed above, Non-Customers are currently charged a
$0.40 per contract fee for removing liquidity in simple and complex
FCOs. For simple FCOs, Firms, Broker-Dealers, and Professionals have
the opportunity to receive free executions for adding liquidity in
FCOs, while Lead Market Makers and Market Makers may receive a $0.20
per contract rebate for adding liquidity. See Options 7, Section
5.D.
    \18\ As set forth in Options 7, Section 5.C, the Exchange
currently charges Firms, Broker-Dealers, and Professionals an
Options Transaction Charge of $0.75 per contract in singly-listed
options. Lead Market Makers and Market Makers are currently charged
$0.40 per contract. Lastly, Customers are charged $0.40 per contract
for transactions in singly-listed options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed standard Options
Transaction Charges are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because they will apply uniformly to all similarly situated market
participants. With respect to the proposal to assess no Options
Transaction Charges to Customers, the Exchange notes that there is a
history in the options markets of providing preferential treatment to
customers, and customer order flow attracts additional liquidity to the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that additional Customer order flow in
FCOs will provide all market participants with more trading
opportunities and encourage an increase in Lead Market Maker and Market
Maker activity, which facilitates tighter spreads. This may cause an
additional corresponding increase in order flow from other market
participants, contributing overall towards a robust and well-balance
market ecosystem, particularly in FCOs.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed complex surcharge is
reasonable as the surcharge is designed to update fees for Phlx's
services to reflect their current value--rather than their value when
the FCO pricing was adopted in its present form eight years ago \19\--
based on Phlx's ability to deliver value to its customers by offering
singly-listed products on its market like FCOs. Even with the complex
surcharge, all market participants except Lead Market Makers and Market
Makers would be assessed consistent or lower fees for their singly-
listed FCO orders compared to the fees currently assessed to other
singly-listed options orders.\20\ Customer FCO transactions, in
particular, will continue to get the benefit of lower pricing even with
the complex surcharge. Customer orders bring valuable liquidity to the
market, which liquidity benefits other market participants through more
trading opportunities. This, in turn, attracts Lead Market Maker and
Market Maker activity, which facilitates tighter spreads, which may
cause an additional corresponding increase in order flow from other
market participants. Further, the Exchange believes that applying the
complex surcharge consistently across all market participants, in
conjunction with the uniform pricing described above, will streamline
the fee structure in a manner that may make the fee schedule may be
more comprehensible and administrable to the benefit of all market
participants. Lastly, the Exchange believes that the proposed complex
surcharge is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as the surcharge
will apply uniformly to all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The Exchange has not amended pricing for FCOs since 2014.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72806 (August 11, 2014), 79
FR 48269 (August 15, 2014) (SR-Phlx-2014-51).
    \20\ Aggregating the proposed complex surcharge and options
transaction charges, all Non-Customers would be assessed $0.75 per
contract for complex trades in singly-listed FCOs while Customers
would be assessed $0.25 per contract. In contrast, under the singly-
listed options pricing schedule in Options 7, Section 5.C, Firms,
Broker-Dealers, and Professionals would be assessed $0.75 per
contract, and Lead Market Makers, Market Makers, and Customers would
be charged $0.40 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. In terms of intra-market
competition, the proposed pricing for singly-listed FCOs will apply
uniformly to all similarly situated market participants. Specifically,
all Non-Priority Customers will be assessed a uniform Options
Transaction Charge while Customers will not be assessed any Options
Transaction Charges. In addition, all market participants will be
assessed a uniform surcharge on their complex FCO transactions. Even
with the complex surcharge, Customers will continue to be charged lower
fees for FCO trades. Accordingly, the proposed FCO pricing is designed
to incentivize Customer order flow in particular, which the Exchange
believes will benefit all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities, which attracts other market participants, thus
facilitating tighter spreads and increased order flow.
    In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it
operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants
can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been exempted
from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges.
Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and
because market participants may readily adjust their order routing
practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes
in this market may impose any burden on competition is extremely
limited. In sum, if the changes proposed herein are unattractive to
market participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market
share as a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the
proposed changes will impair the ability of members or competing order
execution venues to maintain their competitive standing in the
financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2022-46 on the
subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2022-46. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2022-46 and
should be submitted on or before December 13, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25353 Filed 11-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 192 (Friday, October 3, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59636-59639]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23139]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0058; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-116-AD;
Amendment 39-17977; AD 2014-20-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 94-12-03 for
certain Airbus Model A320 series airplanes. AD 94-12-03 required
modification of the belly fairing structure. This new AD requires
repetitive inspections for cracking of the four titanium angles between
the belly fairing and the keel beam side panel, an inspection for
cracking of the open holes if any cracking is found in the titanium
angles, and repair or replacement if necessary; this new AD also
expands the applicability of AD 94-12-03. This AD was prompted by
reports of cracks at the lower riveting of the four titanium angles
that connect the belly fairing to the keel beam side panels on both
sides of the fuselage. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
cracking of the titanium angles that connect the belly fairing to the
keel beam side panels on both sides of the fuselage, which could affect
the structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective November 7, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 7,
2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of January
10, 1994 (59 FR 64875, December 10, 1993).

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0058; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus,
Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44
51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 94-12-03, Amendment 39-8930 (59 FR 28763, June
3, 1994). AD 94-12-03 applied to Model A320 series airplanes having
serial numbers (S/Ns) 003 through 092 inclusive. These serial numbers
apply to Model A320-111, -211, and -231 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2014 (79 FR 10707).
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0122, dated June 5, 2013 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    During the fatigue test campaign of the A320 family type design,
cracks have been found at the lower riveting of the four titanium
angles which connect the belly fairing to the keel beam side panels
between frames FR40 and FR42, on both sides of the fuselage.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    In 1992, [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile]
DGAC France issued AD 92-201-030 (http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/19922010tb_superseded.pdf/AD_F-1992-201-030_1) (which corresponds to
FAA AD 94-12-03, Amendment 39-8930 (59 FR 28763, June 3, 1994)) to
require reinforcement of the belly fairing structure, which
addressed part of the unsafe condition.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of DGAC France AD 92-201-030, which is superseded, and
requires repetitive detailed inspections [for cracking] of the
affected titanium angles and, depending on findings, repair or
replacement of parts.

    As an option to extend the repetitive inspection interval, after
the first detailed inspection is accomplished and on condition of no
crack findings, this AD allows operators to remove the four titanium
angles, perform a rototest for cracking on the open holes and, provided
no cracks are found on the open holes, install new titanium angles,
followed by post-modification detailed inspections of the new titanium
angles.
    For any titanium angle crack findings, this AD requires removing
any cracked angle, performing a rototest for cracking on the open holes
and, provided no cracks are found, installing a new titanium angle,
followed by detailed inspections of the new titanium angles.
    For any open hole cracking found during any rototest required by
this AD, this AD requires repairing any cracking using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    This AD expands the applicability of AD 94-12-03, Amendment 39-8930
(59 FR 28763, June 3, 1994), to include all Airbus Model A318, A319,
A320, and A321 series airplanes.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0058-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79
FR 10707, February 26, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Extend Proposed Compliance Time for Inspection of Titanium
Angles

    Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that we extend the compliance time
for the inspection of the titanium angles specified in paragraph (h)(3)
of the proposed AD (79 FR 10707, February 26, 2014). DAL stated that
extending this compliance time from 3,000 flight cycles or 6,000 flight
hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, to
5,000 flight cycles or 10,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first,
would match the repetitive interval for the detailed inspection on
those airplanes that have not had the modification accomplished, and it
would give DAL and other operators the opportunity to schedule these
inspections in a hangar environment.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request to extend the
compliance time specified in paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. DAL has not
provided data to

substantiate that extending this compliance time would provide an
acceptable level of safety. This compliance time was developed after
analyzing risk to the fleet, availability of in-service information and
feasibility of performing inspection. We consider the overall risk to
the fleet, including the severity of the failure and the likelihood of
the failure's occurrence, to calculate appropriate compliance times.
However, under the provisions of paragraph (o)(1) of this AD, we will
consider requests for approval of an extension of the compliance time
if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the extension
would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed this
final rule in this regard.

Request To Allow Special Flight Permit When Cracking Is Found

    DAL requested that we add a provision in the NPRM (79 FR 10707,
February 26, 2014) to allow operators to ferry airplanes with cracking
found during the inspection specified in paragraph (h) of this AD. DAL
stated that a ferry flight would allow an airplane to be moved to a
more suitable location for maintenance in the event damage is found.
DAL also stated that the ferry flight is necessary due to the extensive
level of access and disassembly.
    We agree with the intent behind the commenter's request, but find
it unnecessary to include a special flight provision in this AD.
Special flight permits are currently allowed under Section 39.23 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.23), unless specifically
prohibited or limited by an AD. No change is necessary to this final
rule in this regard.

``Contacting the Manufacturer'' Paragraph in This AD

    Since late 2006, we have included a standard paragraph titled
``Airworthy Product'' in all MCAI ADs in which the FAA develops an AD
based on a foreign authority's AD.
    The MCAI or referenced service information in an FAA AD often
directs the owner/operator to contact the manufacturer for corrective
actions, such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy Product paragraph
allowed owners/operators to use corrective actions provided by the
manufacturer if those actions were FAA-approved. In addition, the
paragraph stated that any actions approved by the State of Design
Authority (or its delegated agent) are considered to be FAA-approved.
    In the NPRM (79 FR 10707, February 26, 2014), we proposed to
prevent the use of repairs that were not specifically developed to
correct the unsafe condition, by requiring that the repair approval
provided by the State of Design Authority or its delegated agent
specifically refer to this FAA AD. This change was intended to clarify
the method of compliance and to provide operators with better
visibility of repairs that are specifically developed and approved to
correct the unsafe condition. In addition, we proposed to change the
phrase ``its delegated agent'' to include a design approval holder
(DAH) with State of Design Authority design organization approval
(DOA), as applicable, to refer to a DAH authorized to approve required
repairs for the proposed AD.
    No comments were provided to the NPRM (79 FR 10707, February 26,
2014) about these proposed changes. However, a comment was provided for
an NPRM having Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-101-AD (78 FR 78285,
December 26, 2013). The commenter stated the following: ``The proposed
wording, being specific to repairs, eliminates the interpretation that
Airbus messages are acceptable for approving minor deviations
(corrective actions) needed during accomplishment of an AD mandated
Airbus service bulletin.''
    This comment has made the FAA aware that some operators have
misunderstood or misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to
allow the owner/operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer
as approval of deviations during the accomplishment of an AD-mandated
action. The Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or
other information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the
requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product
paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer
for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not
cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-
required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request
the approval for an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required
actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the
Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed the paragraph and retitled
it ``Contacting the Manufacturer.'' This paragraph now clarifies that
for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a
manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a method approved
by the FAA, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or Airbus's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information
contained in the document are EASA-approved, which is also FAA-
approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer
that do not contain the DOA-authorized signature approval are not EASA-
approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer's message or
other information.
    This clarification does not remove flexibility previously afforded
by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA
policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This
is also consistent with the recommendation of the Airworthiness
Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase
flexibility in complying with ADs by identifying those actions in
manufacturers' service instructions that are ``Required for
Compliance'' with ADs. We continue to work with manufacturers to
implement this recommendation. But once we determine that an action is
required, any deviation from the requirement must be approved as an
alternative method of compliance.
    Other commenters to the NPRM having Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-
101-AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013) pointed out that in many cases
the foreign manufacturer's service bulletin and the foreign authority's
MCAI might have been issued some time before the FAA AD. Therefore, the
DOA might have provided U.S. operators with an approved repair,
developed with full awareness of the unsafe condition, before the FAA
AD is issued. Under these circumstances, to comply with the FAA AD, the
operator would be required to go back to the manufacturer's DOA and
obtain a new approval document, adding time and expense to the
compliance process with no safety benefit.
    Based on these comments, we removed the requirement that the DAH-
provided repair specifically refer to this AD. Before adopting such a
requirement, the FAA will coordinate with affected DAHs and verify they
are prepared to implement means to ensure that their repair approvals
consider the unsafe condition addressed in this AD. Any such
requirements will be adopted through the normal AD rulemaking process,
including notice-and-comment procedures, when appropriate.

    We also have decided not to include a generic reference to either
the ``delegated agent'' or ``DAH with State of Design Authority design
organization approval,'' but instead we have provided the specific
delegation approval granted by the State of Design Authority for the
DAH throughout this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this final rule with the changes described previously and minor
editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (79 FR 10707, February 26, 2014) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 10707, February 26, 2014).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 851 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The actions that were required by AD 94-12-03, Amendment 39-8930
(59 FR 28763, June 3, 1994), and retained in this AD take about 288
work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour.
Required parts cost about $1,045 per product. Based on these figures,
the estimated cost of the actions that were required by AD 94-12-03 is
$25,525 per product.
    We also estimate that it will take about 7 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic new requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost
of this AD on U.S. operators to be $506,345, or $595 per product.
    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition and optional actions specified in
this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0058; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
94-12-03, Amendment 39-8930 (59 FR 28763, June 3, 1994), and adding the
following new AD:

2014-20-04 Airbus: Amendment 39-17977. Docket No. FAA-2014-0058;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-116-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective November 7, 2014

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 94-12-03, Amendment 39-8930 (59 FR 28763,
June 3, 1994).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes specified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(4) of this AD, certificated in any category, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132,
and -133 airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A320-111, -211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -
233 airplanes.
    (4) Airbus Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231,
and -232 airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks at the lower riveting
of the four titanium angles that connect the belly fairing to the
keel beam side panels on both sides of the fuselage. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct cracking of the titanium angles that
connect the belly fairing to the keel beam side panels on both sides
of the fuselage, which could affect the structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Modification

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD
94-12-03, Amendment 39-8930 (59 FR 28763, June 3, 1994), with new
service information. For Model A320-111, -211, and -231 series
airplanes, manufacturer serial numbers 003 through 092 inclusive:
Prior to the accumulation of 12,000 total landings on the airplane,
or within 300 days after January 10, 1994 (the effective date of AD
93-24-11, Amendment 39-8760 (58 FR 64875, December 10, 1993)),
whichever occurs later, modify the belly fairing structure, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of an Airbus service
bulletin specified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this
AD. As of the effective date of this AD, use only the Airbus service
bulletin specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A320-53-1014, dated June
25, 1992.

    (2) Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A320-53-1014, Revision 1,
dated May 26, 1993.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1014, Revision 2, dated
September 1, 1994.

(h) New Requirement of This AD: Repetitive Inspection

    At the latest of the compliance times specified in paragraphs
(h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection for
cracking of the four titanium angles between the belly fairing and
the keel beam side panel, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1259, dated November
6, 2012.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 30,000 total flight cycles or
60,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first after first flight
of the airplane.
    (2) Within 30,000 flight cycles or 60,000 flight hours,
whichever occurs first after modification of the airplane as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, or after installation of new
titanium angles, provided that, prior to installation, a rototest
for cracking on the open holes has been accomplished with no crack
findings, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1259, dated November 6, 2012.
    (3) Within 3,000 flight cycles or 6,000 flight hours, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.

(i) New Requirement of This AD: Post-Inspection Actions for No Crack
Findings

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
there is no crack finding: Accomplish the actions specified in
either paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD
at intervals not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles or 10,000 flight
hours, whichever occurs first
    (2) Before further flight after the inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, remove all inspected titanium angles,
accomplish a rototest for cracking on the open holes and, provided
no cracks are found, install new titanium angles, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-
1259, dated November 6, 2012.

(j) New Requirement of This AD: Post-Inspection Actions for Any Crack
Findings

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
there is any crack finding: Before further flight, remove the
affected titanium angle(s), accomplish a rototest for cracking on
the open holes, and, provided no cracks are found, install new
titanium angles, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1259, dated November 6, 2012.

(k) New Requirement of This AD: Post-Installation Repetitive
Inspections

    For airplanes on which new titanium angles were installed as
specified in paragraph (i)(2) or (j) of this AD: Within 30,000
flight cycles or 60,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first after
the installation, accomplish a detailed inspection for cracking of
the four titanium angles between the belly fairing and the keel beam
side panel, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1259, dated November 6, 2012. Repeat
the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,000 flight
cycles or 10,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

(l) New Requirement of This AD: Post Inspection Actions for Any Crack
Findings During Post-Installation Inspections

    If, during any inspection as required by paragraph (k) of this
AD, there is any crack finding: Before further flight, remove the
affected titanium angles, accomplish a rototest for cracking on the
open holes, and, provided no cracks are found, install new titanium
angles, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-53-1259, dated November 6, 2012.

(m) New Requirement of This AD: Corrective Action for Rototest Crack
Finding

    If, during any rototest as required by paragraph (i), (j), or
(l) of this AD, any crack is found: Before further flight, repair
using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA).

(n) New Provision of This AD: No Termination Action for Repetitive
Inspections

    Repair or replacement of parts as specified in this AD does not
terminate the repetitive inspections required by this AD.

(o) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay
Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.

(p) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
European Aviation Safety Agency, Airworthiness Directive 2013-0122,
dated June 5, 2013, for related information. You may examine the
MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0058-0002.

(q) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
November 7, 2014.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1014, Revision 2, dated
September 1, 1994, including supplementary page 7A. Pages 1-3, 15,
19, 20, and 25 of this document are identified as Revision 2, dated
September 1, 1994; pages 4-8, 10, 12, 16-18, and 21-24 are
identified as Revision 1, dated May 26, 1993; and pages 9, 11, 13,
14, and 26 are identified as the original, dated June 25, 1992.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1259, dated November 6,
2012.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
January 10, 1994 (59 FR 64875, December 10, 1993).
    (i) Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A320-53-1014, dated June
25, 1992.
    (ii) Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A320-53-1014, Revision 1,
dated May 26, 1993.
    (5) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (7) 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, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 19, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-23139 Filed 10-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 12839]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05972]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent of Waiver With Respect to Land; Detroit
Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, Detroit, MI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is considering a proposal to change 5.61 acres of
airport land from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use and to
authorize the sale of airport property located at Detroit Metropolitan
Wayne County Airport, Detroit, MI. The aforementioned land is not
needed for aeronautical use.
    The property is located across a public road and to the northwest
of the Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport. It is currently
vacant unimproved land that was acquired to support the Vining road
relocation necessary for the construction of Runway 4L/22R at the
airport. The property proposed for release was acquired by the Wayne
County Airport Authority under FAA Grant Numbers 3-26-0026-1991, 3-26-
0026-2292, 3-26-0026-3695, 3-26-0026-4197, and 3-26-0026-4398. There is
now a buyer for the entire 5.61 acre parcel. The land is no longer
needed for aeronautical purposes. The proposed non-aeronautical land
use would be for compatible commercial/industrial development. The
property has been appraised and the airport will receive Fair Market
Value for the land to be sold.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review by appointment at the FAA
Detroit Airports District Office, Alex Erskine, Program Manager, 11677
South Wayne Road, Suite 107, Romulus, MI 48174. Telephone: (734) 229-
2927/Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> and Wayne County Airport Authority
Administrative Offices, 11050 Rogell Dr. #602, Detroit, MI, Attn. Ms.
Wendy Sutton. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Written comments on the Sponsor's request must be delivered or
mailed to: Alex Erskine, Program Manager, Federal Aviation
Administration, Airports Detroit District Office, 11677 South Wayne
Road, Suite 107, Romulus, MI 48174, Telephone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>/
FAX Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex Erskine, Program Manager, Federal
Aviation Administration, Airports Detroit District Office, 11677 South
Wayne Road, Suite 107, Romulus, MI 48174, Telephone Number: (734) 229-
2927/FAX Number:(734) 229-2950.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section 47107(h) of Title
49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the
Federal Register 30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that
requires the property to be used for an aeronautical purpose.
    The property is currently vacant, unimproved land maintained for
compatible land use surrounding the airfield. The proposed non-
aeronautical land use would be for compatible commercial/industrial
development, allowing the airport to become more self-sustaining. The
property has a proposed developer identified and it has been appraised.
The airport will receive Fair Market Value for the land to be sold.
    The disposition of proceeds from the sale of the airport property
will be in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the
Use of Airport Revenue, published in the Federal Register on February
16, 1999 (64 FR 7696).
    This notice announces that the FAA is considering the release of
the subject airport property at the Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County
Airport, Detroit, MI, from its obligations to be maintained for
aeronautical purposes. Approval does not constitute a commitment by the
FAA to financially assist in the change in use of the subject airport
property nor a determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid funding
from the FAA.

Property Description

    PART OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 3 OF ``GRANT ACRES SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE
S.E. \1/4\ OF THE N.W. \1/4\ OF SEC. 21, T. 3 S., R. 9 E.'' AS RECORDED
IN LIBER 69 OF PLATS ON PAGE 23, WAYNE COUNTY RECORDS AND PART OF THE
NORTHWEST \1/4\ OF SECTION 21, T. 3 S., R. 9 E., ALL BEING LOCATED IN
THE CITY OF ROMULUS, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER CORNER OF SECTION 21, T.
3 S., R. 9 E., CITY OF ROMULUS, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN AND RUNNING
THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 47 MINUTES 04 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE EAST--
WEST \1/4\ LINE OF SAID SECTION 21, SAID LINE BEING ALSO THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID ``GRANT ACRE SUBDIVISION'' (L69, PLATS, P. 23, W.C.R.), A
DISTANCE OF 1290.61 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION;
THENCE NORTH 01 DEGREE 43 MINUTES 29 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID SUBDIVISION, SAID LINE BEING ALSO THE WEST LINE OF THE
SOUTHEAST \1/4\ OF THE NORTHWEST \1/4\ OF SAID SECTION 21, A DISTANCE
OF 90.43 FEET TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH THE
WESTERLY LINE OF RELOCATED VINING ROAD (120 FEET WIDE), SAID POINT
BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN BEING
DESCRIBED; PROCEEDING THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING NORTH 01
DEGREE 43 MINUTES 29 SECONDS WEST. ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID
SUBDIVISION, SAID LINE BEING ALSO PART OF THE WEST LINE OF THE
SOUTHEAST \1/4\ OF THE NORTHWEST \1/4\ OF SAID SECTION 21, A DISTANCE
OF 920.34 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 07 MINUTES 15
SECONDS EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN LIBER
26432 OF DEEDS ON PAGE 520, WAYNE COUNTY RECORDS, A DISTANCE OF 531.24
FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID RELOCATED VINING ROAD;
THENCE SOUTH 28 DEGREES 28 MINUTES 47 SECONDS WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY
LINE OF SAID RELOCATED VINING ROAD. A DISTANCE OF 1055.85 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 5.611 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, OF LAND IN
AREA

    Issued in Romulus, Michigan on March 6, 2018.
Stephanie R. Swann,
Acting Manager, Detroit Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes
Region.
[FR Doc. 2018-05972 Filed 3-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


airy Medium 3 Midwest Option 3 Dairy Large 1 Midwest Option 3 Dairy Large 2 Midwest Option 3 Dairy Medium 1 Pacific Option 3 Dairy Medium 2 Pacific Option 3 Dairy Medium 3 Pacific Option 3 Dairy Large 1 Pacific Option 3 Dairy Large 2 Pacific Option 3 Dairy Medium 1 South Option 3 Dairy Medium 2 South Option 3 Dairy Medium 3 South Option 3 Dairy Large 1 South Option 3 Dairy Large 2 South Option 3 Heifer Medium 1 Central Option 3 Heifer Medium 2 Central Option 3 Heifer Medium 3 Central Option 3 Heifer Large 1 Central Option 3 Heifer Large 2 Central Option 3 Heifer Medium 1 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Heifer Medium 2 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Heifer Medium 3 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Heifer Large 1 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Heifer Large 2 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Heifer Medium 1 Midwest Option 3 Heifer Medium 2 Midwest Option 3 Heifer Medium 3 Midwest Option 3 Heifer Large 1 Midwest Option 3 Heifer Large 2 Midwest Option 3 Heifer Medium 1 Pacific Option 3 Heifer Medium 2 Pacific Option 3 Heifer Medium 3 Pacific Option 3 Heifer Large 1 Pacific Option 3 Heifer Large 2 Pacific Option 3 Heifer Medium 1 South Option 3 Heifer Medium 2 South Option 3 Heifer Medium 3 South Option 3 Heifer Large 1 South Option 3 Heifer Large 2 South Option 3 Veal Medium 1 Central Option 3 Veal Medium 2 Central Option 3 Veal Medium 3 Central Option 3 Veal Large 1 Central Option 3 Veal Large 2 Central Option 3 Veal Medium 1 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Veal Medium 2 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Veal Medium 3 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Veal Large 1 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Veal Large 2 Mid AtlantiOption 3 Veal Medium 1 Midwest Option 3 Veal Medium 2 Midwest Option 3 Veal Medium 3 Midwest Option 3 Veal Large 1 Midwest Option 3 Veal Large 2 Midwest Option 3 Veal Medium 1 Pacific Option 3 Veal Medium 2 Pacific Option 3 Veal Medium 3 Pacific Option 3 Veal Large 1 Pacific Option 3 Veal Large 2 Pacific Option 3 Veal Medium 1 South Option 3 Veal Medium 2 South Option 3 Veal Medium 3 South Option 3 Veal Large 1 South Option 3 Veal Large 2 South Option 3 BR M1 CE Opt 5 BR M2 CE Opt 5 BR M3 CE Opt 5 BR L1 CE Opt 5 BR L2 CE Opt 5 BR M1 MA Opt 5 BR M2 MA Opt 5 BR M3 MA Opt 5 BR L1 MA Opt 5 BR L2 MA Opt 5 BR M1 MW Opt 5 BR M2 MW Opt 5 BR M3 MW Opt 5 BR L1 MW Opt 5 BR L2 MW Opt 5 BR M1 PA Opt 5 BR M2 PA Opt 5 BR M3 PA Opt 5 BR L1 PA Opt 5 BR L2 PA Opt 5 BR M1 SO Opt 5 BR M2 SO Opt 5 BR M3 SO Opt 5 BR L1 SO Opt 5 BR L2 SO Opt 5 LW M1 CE Opt 5 LW M2 CE Opt 5 LW M3 CE Opt 5 LW L1 CE Opt 5 LW L2 CE Opt 5 LW M1 MA Opt 5 LW M2 MA Opt 5 LW M3 MA Opt 5 LW L1 MA Opt 5 LW L2 MA Opt 5 LW M1 MW Opt 5 LW M2 MW Opt 5 LW M3 MW Opt 5 LW L1 MW Opt 5 LW L2 MW Opt 5 LW M1 PA Opt 5 LW M2 PA Opt 5 LW M3 PA Opt 5 LW L1 PA Opt 5 LW L2 PA Opt 5 LW M1 SO Opt 5 LW M2 SO Opt 5 LW M3 SO Opt 5 LW L1 SO Opt 5 LW L2 SO Opt 5 LA M1 CE Opt 5 LA M2 CE Opt 5 LA M3 CE Opt 5 LA L1 CE Opt 5 LA L2 CE Opt 5 LA M1 MA Opt 5 LA M2 MA Opt 5 LA M3 MA Opt 5 LA L1 MA Opt 5 LA L2 MA Opt 5 LA M1 MW Opt 5 LA M2 MW Opt 5 LA M3 MW Opt 5 LA L1 MW Opt 5 LA L2 MW Opt 5 LA M1 PA Opt 5 LA M2 PA Opt 5 LA M3 PA Opt 5 LA L1 PA Opt 5 LA L2 PA Opt 5 LA M1 SO Opt 5 LA M2 SO Opt 5 LA M3 SO Opt 5 LA L1 SO Opt 5 LA L2 SO Opt 5 GF M1 MA Opt 5 GF M2 MA Opt 5 GF M3 MA Opt 5 GF L1 MA Opt 5 GF L2 MA Opt 5 GF M1 MW Opt 5 GF M2 MW Opt 5 GF M3 MW Opt 5 GF L1 MW Opt 5 GF L2 MW Opt 5 GF M1 CE Opt 5 GF M2 CE Opt 5 GF M3 CE Opt 5 GF L1 CE Opt 5 GF L2 CE Opt 5 GF M1 PA Opt 5 GF M2 PA Opt 5 GF M3 PA Opt 5 GF L1 PA Opt 5 GF L2 PA Opt 5 GF M1 SO Opt 5 GF M2 SO Opt 5 GF M3 SO Opt 5 GF L1 SO Opt 5 GF L2 SO Opt 5 FF M1 MA Opt 5 FF M2 MA Opt 5 FF M3 MA Opt 5 FF L1 MA Opt 5 FF L2 MA Opt 5 FF M1 MW Opt 5 FF M2 MW Opt 5 FF M3 MW Opt 5 FF L1 MW Opt 5 FF L2 MW Opt 5 FF M1 CE Opt 5 FF M2 CE Opt 5 FF M3 CE Opt 5 FF L1 CE Opt 5 FF L2 CE Opt 5 FF M1 PA Opt 5 FF M2 PA Opt 5 FF M3 PA Opt 5 FF L1 PA Opt 5 FF L2 PA Opt 5 FF M1 SO Opt 5 FF M2 SO Opt 5 FF M3 SO Opt 5 FF L1 SO Opt 5 FF L2 SO Opt 5 SL M1 CE Opt 5 SL M2 CE Opt 5 SL M3 CE Opt 5 SL L1 CE Opt 5 SL L2 CE Opt 5 SL M1 MA Opt 5 SL M2 MA Opt 5 SL M3 MA Opt 5 SL L1 MA Opt 5 SL L2 MA Opt 5 SL M1 MW Opt 5 SL M2 MW Opt 5 SL M3 MW Opt 5 SL L1 MW Opt 5 SL L2 MW Opt 5 SL M1 PA Opt 5 SL M2 PA Opt 5 SL M3 PA Opt 5 SL L1 PA Opt 5 SL L2 PA Opt 5 SL M1 SO Opt 5 SL M2 SO Opt 5 SL M3 SO Opt 5 SL L1 SO Opt 5 SL L2 SO Opt 5 BF M1 CE Opt 5 BF M2 CE Opt 5 BF M3 CE Opt 5 BF L1 CE Opt 5 BF L2 CE Opt 5 BF M1 MA Opt 5 BF M2 MA Opt 5 BF M3 MA Opt 5 BF L1 MA Opt 5 BF L2 MA Opt 5 BF M1 MW Opt 5 BF M2 MW Opt 5 BF M3 MW Opt 5 BF L1 MW Opt 5 BF L2 MW Opt 5 BF M1 PA Opt 5 BF M2 PA Opt 5 BF M3 PA Opt 5 BF L1 PA Opt 5 BF L2 PA Opt 5 BF M1 SO Opt 5 BF M2 SO Opt 5 BF M3 SO Opt 5 BF L1 SO Opt 5 BF L2 SO Opt 5 DY M1 CE Opt 5 DY M2 CE Opt 5 DY M3 CE Opt 5 DY L1 CE Opt 5 DY L2 CE Opt 5 DY M1 MA Opt 5 DY M2 MA Opt 5 DY M3 MA Opt 5 DY L1 MA Opt 5 DY L2 MA Opt 5 DY M1 MW Opt 5 DY M2 MW Opt 5 DY M3 MW Opt 5 DY L1 MW Opt 5 DY L2 MW Opt 5 DY M1 PA Opt 5 DY M2 PA Opt 5 DY M3 PA Opt 5 DY L1 PA Opt 5 DY L2 PA Opt 5 DY M1 SO Opt 5 DY M2 SO Opt 5 DY M3 SO Opt 5 DY L1 SO Opt 5 DY L2 SO Opt 5 HF M1 CE Opt 5 HF M2 CE Opt 5 HF M3 CE Opt 5 HF L1 CE Opt 5 HF L2 CE Opt 5 HF M1 MA Opt 5 HF M2 MA Opt 5 HF M3 MA Opt 5 HF L1 MA Opt 5 HF L2 MA Opt 5 HF M1 MW Opt 5 HF M2 MW Opt 5 HF M3 MW Opt 5 HF L1 MW Opt 5 HF L2 MW Opt 5 HF M1 PA Opt 5 HF M2 PA Opt 5 HF M3 PA Opt 5 HF L1 PA Opt 5 HF L2 PA Opt 5 HF M1 SO Opt 5 HF M2 SO Opt 5 HF M3 SO Opt 5 HF L1 SO Opt 5 HF L2 SO Opt 5 VL M1 CE Opt 5 VL M2 CE Opt 5 VL M3 CE Opt 5 VL L1 CE Opt 5 VL L2 CE Opt 5 VL M1 MA Opt 5 VL M2 MA Opt 5 VL M3 MA Opt 5 VL L1 MA Opt 5 VL L2 MA Opt 5 VL M1 MW Opt 5 VL M2 MW Opt 5 VL M3 MW Opt 5 VL L1 MW Opt 5 VL L2 MW Opt 5 VL M1 PA Opt 5 VL M2 PA Opt 5 VL M3 PA Opt 5 VL L1 PA Opt 5 VL L2 PA Opt 5 VL M1 SO Opt 5 VL M2 SO Opt 5 VL M3 SO Opt 5 VL L1 SO Opt 5 VL L2 SO Opt 5 BOD Fecal ColiforFecal Strep Zn Cu Cd Ni Pb As lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs lbs rea Sector Region coc BaseMed Baselar Bmed Blar Beef Central BeefCentral 0.10 1.00 0.10 1.00 Beef Mid AtlantiBeefMid Atlantic 0.04 1.00 0.04 1.00 Beef Midwest BeefMidwest 0.06 1.00 0.06 1.00 Beef Pacific BeefPacific 0.10 1.00 0.10 1.00 Beef South BeefSouth 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.00 Broiler Central BroilCentral 0.05 0.10 0.05 1.00 Broiler Mid AtlantiBroilMid Atlantic 0.05 0.10 0.05 1.00 Broiler Midwest BroilMidwest 0.05 0.10 0.05 1.00 Broiler Pacific BroilPacific 0.05 0.10 0.05 1.00 Broiler South BroilSouth 0.05 0.10 0.05 1.00 Dairy Central DairyCentral 0.20 1.00 0.20 1.00 Dairy Mid AtlantiDairyMid Atlantic 0.55 1.00 0.55 1.00 Dairy Midwest DairyMidwest 0.45 1.00 0.45 1.00 Dairy Pacific DairyPacific 0.10 1.00 0.10 1.00 Dairy South DairySouth 0.35 1.00 0.35 1.00 Heifer Central HeifeCentral 0.00 0.00 0.20 1.00 Heifer Mid AtlantiHeifeMid Atlantic 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Heifer Midwest HeifeMidwest 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.00 Heifer Pacific HeifePacific 0.00 0.00 0.10 1.00 Heifer South HeifeSouth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Layer ( wet) Central LayerCentral 0.03 1.00 0.03 1.00 Layer Central LayerCentral 0.02 0.00 0.02 1.00 Layer ( wet) Mid AtlantiLayerMid Atlantic 0.03 1.00 0.03 1.00 Layer Mid AtlantiLayerMid Atlantic 0.02 0.00 0.02 1.00 Layer ( wet) Midwest LayerMidwest 0.03 1.00 0.03 1.00 Layer Midwest LayerMidwest 0.02 0.00 0.02 1.00 Layer ( wet) Pacific LayerPacific 0.03 1.00 0.03 1.00 Layer Pacific LayerPacific 0.05 0.00 0.05 1.00 Layer ( wet) South LayerSouth 0.03 1.00 0.03 1.00 Layer South LayerSouth 0.02 0.00 0.02 1.00 Swine Central SwineCentral 0.15 1.00 0.15 1.00 Swine Mid AtlantiSwineMid Atlantic 0.15 1.00 0.15 1.00 Swine Midwest SwineMidwest 0.15 1.00 0.15 1.00 Swine Pacific SwinePacific 0.15 1.00 0.15 1.00 Swine South SwineSouth 0.15 1.00 0.15 1.00 Turkey Central TurkeCentral 0.02 0.10 0.02 1.00 Turkey Mid AtlantiTurkeMid Atlantic 0.02 0.10 0.02 1.00 Turkey Midwest TurkeMidwest 0.02 0.10 0.02 1.00 Turkey Pacific TurkePacific 0.02 0.10 0.02 1.00 Turkey South TurkeSouth 0.05 0.10 0.05 1.00 Veal Central VealCentral 0.00 0.00 0.08 1.00 Veal Mid AtlantiVealMid Atlantic 0.00 0.00 0.12 1.00 Veal Midwest VealMidwest 0.00 0.00 0.12 1.00 Veal Pacific VealPacific 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Veal South VealSouth 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY                 NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY                              2000 TRAVERWOOD ROAD                            ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									          	OFFICE OF 										AIR AND RADIATION

December 2, 2010

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Meeting with Volvo

FROM:	Angela Cullen, Mechanical Engineer

TO:		Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum documents a meeting held on Thursday, December 2, 2010 between Volvo, EPA, and DOT and included the following individuals:

      Volvo: Tony Greszler, Susan Alt, Marc Miller, Jeff Schaeffer, Dave Smith, Bob Fasnacht, and Peter Prout              EPA: Byron Bunker, Cle Jackson, Rich Zhang, Chien Sze, Chuck Moulis, and Angela Cullen              DOT: Kevin Green, Ryan Harrington

The discussion focused primarily on innovative credits, alternative engine standards, ABT, small volume and business exemptions, and on/off-road vehicle exemptions.


[Federal Register: July 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 132)]
[Notices]
[Page 37749]
[DOCID:fr11jy07-64]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-512-000]

El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice of Pathing and Segmentation
Report

July 3, 2007.
    Take notice that on June 29, 2007, El Paso Natural Gas Company
(EPNG) tendered for filing its one year report of pathing and
segmentation activity.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-13446 Filed 7-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 106 (Friday, June 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30070-30071]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11550]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2021-0001]

National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health
(NACOSH): Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice of NACOSH meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and
Health (NACOSH) will meet June 22, 2021, by teleconference and WebEx.

DATES: NACOSH will meet from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., ET, Tuesday, June
22, 2021.

ADDRESSES:
    Submission of comments and requests to speak: Submit comments and
requests to speak at the NACOSH meeting by June 14, 2021, identified by
the docket number for this Federal Register notice (Docket No. OSHA-
2021-0001), using the following method:
    Electronically: Comments and request to speak, including
attachments, must be submitted electronically at: http://www.regulations.gov, the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
    Requests for special accommodations: Submit requests for special
accommodations for this NACOSH meeting by Monday, June 14, 2021, to Ms.
Carla Marcellus, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S.
Department of Labor; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and the
OSHA docket number for this Federal Register notice (Docket No. OSHA-
2021-0001). OSHA will place comments and requests to speak, including
personal information, in the public docket, which may be available
online. Therefore, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting
personal information such as Social Security numbers and birthdates.
    Docket: To read or download documents in the public docket for this
NACOSH meeting, go to http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the
public docket are listed in the index; however, some documents (e.g.,
copyrighted material) are not publicly available to read or download
through http://www.regulations.gov. All submissions are available for
inspection and, when permitted, copying through the OSHA Docket Office
at the above address. For information on using http://www.regulations.gov to make submissions or to access the docket, click
on the ``Help'' tab at the top of the homepage. Contact the OSHA Docket
Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> for information about materials not available
through that website and for assistance in using the internet to locate
submissions and other documents in the docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For press inquiries: Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of
Communications, U.S. Department of Labor; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information about NACOSH: Ms. Amy Wangdahl, Director,
Office of Maritime and Agriculture, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Telecommunication requirements: For additional information about
the telecommunication requirements for the meeting, please contact Ms.
Carla Marcellus, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S.
Department of Labor; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For copies of this Federal Register Notice: Electronic copies of
this Federal Register notice are available at http://www.regulations.gov. This notice, as well as news releases and other
relevant information, are also available at OSHA's web page at
www.osha.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    NACOSH was established by Section 7(a) of the Occupational Safety
and

Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651, 656) to advise, consult
with, and make recommendations to the Secretary of Labor and the
Secretary of Health and Human Services on matters relating to the
administration of the OSH Act. NACOSH is a continuing advisory
committee of indefinite duration.
    NACOSH operates in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App. 2), its implementing regulations (41 CFR part
102-3), and OSHA's regulations on NACOSH (29 CFR part 1912a).

II. Meeting Information

    Attendance at this NACOSH meeting will be by teleconference and
WebEx only. The teleconference dial-in number and passcode are as
follows: Dial-in number: 1-800-369-1663; Passcode: 2863848 and the
WebEx link is: https://usdolee.webex.com/usdolee/onstage/g.php?MTID=e96527c00b5fc5d6f8a680295ece34214 and the meeting password
is: Welcome!24. The tentative agenda will include an update from OSHA's
Acting Assistant Secretary, remarks from the Director of the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a discussion of
occupational safety and health issues, and a discussion of NACOSH's
previous work.

Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this
notice under the authority granted by 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(1) and 656(b), 5
U.S.C. App. 2, Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393,
September 18, 2020) and 29 CFR part 1912 and 1912a.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on May 13, 2021.
James S. Frederick,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2021-11550 Filed 6-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register: September 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 182)]
[Notices]
[Page 55430-55431]
[DOCID:fr21se05-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC
20549.

Extension:
    Rule 17a-10; SEC File No. 270-154; OMB Control No. 3235-0122.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a
request for extension of the previously approved collection of
information discussed below. The Code of Federal Regulations citation
to this collection of information is the following rule: 17 CFR
240.17a-10.
    Rule 17a-10 requires broker-dealers that are exempted from the
filing requirements of paragraph (a) of Rule 17a-5 (17 CFR section
240.17a-5) to file with the Commission an annual statement of income
(loss) and balance sheet. It is anticipated that approximately 500
broker-dealers will spend 12 hours per year complying with Rule 17a-10.
The total burden is estimated to be approximately 6,000 hours. Each
broker-dealer will spend approximately $880 per response \1\ for a

total annual expense for all broker-dealers of $440,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ According to the Securities Industry Association's guide on
management and professional earnings, the median salary for a
financial reporting manager is $97,500. Assuming that a financial
reporting manager works 1800 hours per year, he or she earns $54.17
per hour. Adding in overhead costs of 35%, the hourly rate equals
$73.13 per hour, or $877.56 per 12-hour response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 control number.
    Written comments regarding the above information should be directed
to the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) R. Corey Booth, Director, Chief

Information Officer, Office of Information Technology, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Comments
must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: September 13, 2005.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-18764 Filed 9-20-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


1, ch. de la Voie-Creuse, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneva 20,
Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11, http://www.iso.org/iso/home.htm),
Standards Australia (AS Level 10, The Exchange Centre, 20 Bridge
Street, Sydney, GPO Box 476, Sydney NSW 2001, +61 2 9237 6171 http://www.standards.org.au), British Standards Institution (BSI, 389 Chiswick
High Road, London, W4 4AL, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20 8996 9001, http://www.bsigroup.com), Canadian Standards Association (CSA, 5060 Spectrum
Way, Suite 100, Mississauga, Ontario L4W 5N6, Canada,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
http://www.csa.ca), European Committee for Standardization (CEN CENELEC
Management Centre Avenue Marnix 17 B-1000 Brussels, Belgium +32 2 550
08 11, http://www.cen.eu/cen), and German Engineering Standards (VDI
Guidelines Department, P.O. Box 10 11 39 40002, Duesseldorf, Germany,
+49 211 6214-230, http://www.vdi.eu). The types of standards that are
not considered VCS are standards developed by: the United States, e.g.,
California Air Resources Board (CARB) and Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ); industry groups, such as American
Petroleum Institute (API), Gas Processors Association (GPA), and Gas
Research Institute (GRI); and other branches of the U.S. Government,
e.g., Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Transportation
(DOT). This does not preclude EPA from using standards developed by
groups that are not VCS bodies within their rule. When this occurs, EPA
has done searches and reviews for VCS equivalent to these non-EPA
methods.
* * * * *

0
12. Table 1 to Subpart JJJJJJ of Part 63 is amended by revising the
entry 6 to read as follows:
* * * * *

          Table 1 to Subpart JJJJJJ of Part 63--Emission Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   You must achieve less
                                                    than or equal to the
                                For the following    following emission
   If your boiler is in this     pollutants . . .  limits, except during
       subcategory . . .                             periods of startup
                                                     and shutdown . . .

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

                              * * * * * * *
6. Existing coal-fired boilers  a. Mercury.......  2.2E-05 lb per MMBtu
 with heat input capacity of    b. CO............   of heat input.
 10 MMBtu/hr or greater that                       420 ppm by volume on
 do not meet the definition of                      a dry basis
 limited-use boiler.                                corrected to 3
                                                    percent oxygen (3-
                                                    run average or 10-
                                                    day rolling
                                                    average).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
13. Table 2 to Subpart JJJJJJ of Part 63 is amended by revising the
entry 16 to read as follows:

 Table 2 to Subpart JJJJJJ of Part 63--Work Practice Standards, Emission
              Reduction Measures, and Management Practices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  If your boiler is in this
      subcategory . . .            You must meet the following . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
16. Existing coal-fired,       Must have a one-time energy assessment
 biomass-fired, or oil-fired    performed by a qualified energy
 boilers (units with heat       assessor. An energy assessment completed
 input capacity of 10 MMBtu/    on or after January 1, 2008, that meets
 hr and greater), not           or is amended to meet the energy
 including limited-use          assessment requirements in this table
 boilers.                       satisfies the energy assessment
                                requirement. Energy assessor approval
                                and qualification requirements are
                                waived in instances where past or
                                amended energy assessments are used to
                                meet the energy assessment requirements.
                                A facility that operated under an energy
                                management program developed according
                                to the ENERGY STAR guidelines for energy
                                management or compatible with ISO 50001
                                for at least 1 year between January 1,
                                2008, and the compliance date specified
                                in Sec.   63.11196 that includes the
                                affected units also satisfies the energy
                                assessment requirement. The energy
                                assessment must include the following
                                with extent of the evaluation for items
                                (1) to (4) appropriate for the on-site
                                technical hours listed in Sec.
                                63.11237:
                                 (1) A visual inspection of the boiler
                               system,
                                 (2) An evaluation of operating
                               characteristics of the affected boiler
                               systems, specifications of energy use
                               systems, operating and maintenance
                               procedures, and unusual operating
                               constraints,
                                 (3) An inventory of major energy use
                               systems consuming energy from affected
                               boiler(s) and which are under control of
                               the boiler owner or operator,
                                 (4) A review of available architectural
                               and engineering plans, facility operation
                               and maintenance procedures and logs, and
                               fuel usage,
                                 (5) A list of major energy conservation
                               measures that are within the facility's
                               control,
                                 (6) A list of the energy savings
                               potential of the energy conservation
                               measures identified, and
                                 (7) A comprehensive report detailing
                               the ways to improve efficiency, the cost
                               of specific improvements, benefits, and
                               the time frame for recouping those
                               investments.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
14. Table 6 to Subpart JJJJJJ of Part 63 is amended by revising the
entry 2 to read as follows:
* * * * *

                                           Table 6 to Subpart JJJJJJ of Part 63--Establishing Operating Limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 If you have an applicable emission    And your operating limits                                                              According to the following
           limit for . . .                 are based on . . .             You must . . .                Using . . .                  requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
2. Mercury..........................  Dry sorbent or activated     Establish a site-specific    Data from the sorbent or     (a) You must collect
                                       carbon injection rate        minimum sorbent or           activated carbon injection   sorbent or activated
                                       operating parameters.        activated carbon injection   rate monitors and the        carbon injection rate data
                                                                    rate operating limit         mercury performance stack    every 15 minutes during
                                                                    according to Sec.            tests.                       the entire period of the
                                                                    63.11211(b).                                              performance stack tests;

                                                                                (b) Determine the average
                                                                                sorbent or activated
                                                                                carbon injection rate for
                                                                                each individual test run
                                                                                in the three-run
                                                                                performance stack test by
                                                                                computing the average of
                                                                                all the 15-minute readings
                                                                                taken during each test
                                                                                run.
                                                                                (c) When your unit operates
                                                                                at lower loads, multiply
                                                                                your sorbent or activated
                                                                                carbon injection rate by
                                                                                the load fraction, as
                                                                                defined in Sec.
                                                                                63.11237, to determine the
                                                                                required injection rate.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-21334 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P