[Federal Register: October 23, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 204)]
[Notices]
[Page 60047]
[DOCID:fr23oc07-64]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 0-2, Form ADV-NR, SEC File No. 270-214, OMB Control No.
3235-0240.

    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'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    The titles for the collections of information are ``Rule 0-2'' (17
CFR 275.0-2) and ``Form ADV-NR'' (17 CFR 279.4) under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-1). Rule 0-2 and Form ADV-NR
facilitate service of process to non-resident investment advisers and
their non-resident general partners or non-resident managing agents.
The Form requires these persons to designate the Commission as agent
for service of process. The purpose of this collection of information
is to enable the commencement of legal and or regulatory actions
against investment advisers that are doing business in the United
States, but are not residents.
    The respondents to this information collection would be each non-
resident general partner or non-resident managing agent of an SEC-
registered adviser. The Commission has estimated that compliance with
the requirement to complete Form ADV-NR imposes a total burden of
approximately 1.0 hours for an adviser. Based on our experience with
these filings, we estimate that we will receive 18 Form ADV-NR filings
annually. Based on the 1.0 hours per respondent estimate, the
Commission staff estimates a total annual burden of 18 hours for this
collection of information.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) 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; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O
Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA, 22312; or
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 15, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-20793 Filed 10-22-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 215 (Monday, November 8, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68447-68448]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28003]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2007-1119; FRL-9221-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Albuquerque/
Bernalillo County, NM; Interstate Transport of Pollution

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to the Albuquerque/Bernalillo
County, New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) to address the
``good neighbor'' provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) section
110(a)(2)(D)(i), for the 1997 ozone and the 1997 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) as it applies to Albuquerque/Bernalillo County. The revision
addresses one element of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which pertains to
prohibiting air pollutant emissions from within a state to
significantly contribute to nonattainment of the ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS in any state. The Albuquerque/Bernalillo Air
Quality Control Board (AQCB) is responsible for the portion of the New
Mexico SIP that applies in Bernalillo County, which encompasses the
City of Albuquerque. This rulemaking action is being taken under
section 110 of the CAA.

DATES: This final rule will be effective December 8, 2010.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R06-OAR-2007-1119. All documents in the docket
are listed at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information 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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445
Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made
available by appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) Review Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal holidays. Contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below or Mr.
Bill Deese at<PHONE_NUMBER> to make an appointment. If possible, please
make the appointment at least two working days in advance of your
visit. There will be a 15 cent per page fee for making photocopies of
documents. On the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA Region 6
reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emad Shahin, Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.
    Outline:

I. What action Is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    We are approving a revision to the New Mexico State Implementation
Plan (SIP) to address the ``good neighbor'' provisions of the Clean Air
Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), for the 1997 ozone and the 1997
PM2.5 standards for Albuquerque/Bernalillo County,
demonstrating that one of the required elements of the CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) has been met. The SIP revision demonstrates in part
that air pollutant emissions from sources within Albuquerque/Bernalillo
County do not significantly contribute to nonattainment of the relevant
NAAQS in any other state. Therefore, we have determined that emissions
from sources in Albuquerque/Bernalillo County do not significantly
contribute to nonattainment of the 1997 ozone standards or of the 1997
PM2.5 standards in any other state. In a separate action,
EPA approved this revision for the remainder of the State of New Mexico
(75 FR 33174, June 11, 2010).
    At a later date we will act on addressing the remaining three
elements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) which are: (1) Interference with
the maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state; (2) interference with
measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality
in any other state; and (3) interference with measures required to
protect visibility in any other state.

II. What is the background for this action?

    On July 29, 2010, we published a proposal to approve the portion of
a SIP revision adopted by AQCB that addressed one element of the CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (75 FR 44731). EPA's analyses for approving the
SIP revision are described in detail in that proposal and in the
supporting documentation available in the electronic docket for this
action at www.regulations.gov (Docket Identification No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2007-1119). The comment period on the proposal ended on August 30,
2010, and we did not receive any comments.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);

     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    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.
    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).
    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 January 7, 2011. 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 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: October 27, 2010.
Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart GG--New Mexico

0
2. The second table in Sec.  52.1620(e) entitled ``EPA Approved
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New
Mexico SIP'' is amended by adding an entry to the end to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.1620  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
in the New Mexico SIP

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State
                                        Applicable        submittal/
      Name of SIP provision            geographic or      effective     EPA approval date        Explanation
                                    nonattainment area       date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Interstate transport for the 1997  Bernalillo County...     07/30/07  11/08/10 [insert FR   11/08/10 Approval
 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.                                                page number where     for revisions to
                                                                       the document          prohibit
                                                                       begins].              significant
                                                                                contribution to
                                                                                nonattainment in
                                                                                any other state.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2010-28003 Filed 11-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 179 (Monday, September 20, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52109-52111]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19964]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0783; Project Identifier 2019-SW-009-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited)
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Bell Textron Canada Limited (type certificate previously
held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited) Model 505 helicopters.
This proposed AD was prompted by the determination that reducing the
pressure altitude limitations for certain fuel types is necessary. This
proposed AD would require revising the existing Rotorcraft Flight Manal
(RFM) for your helicopter. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 4,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Bell
Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J
1R4, Canada; telephone 1-450-437-2862 or 1-800-363-8023; fax 1-450-433-
0272; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or at https://www.bellflight.com/support/contact-support. You may view this

service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0783; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the
Transport Canada AD, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rao Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer,
Dynamic Systems Section, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy &
Innovation Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0783; Project Identifier
2019-SW-009-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Rao
Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer, Dynamic Systems Section, Technical
Innovation Policy Branch, Policy & Innovation Division, FAA, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Background

    Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has
issued Canadian AD CF-2019-08, dated March 5, 2019 (Canadian AD CF-
2019-08), to correct an unsafe condition for Bell Helicopter Textron
Canada Limited Model 505 helicopters serial numbers 65011 and
subsequent. Transport Canada advises of the need to reduce the altitude
limitations for Jet B and JP-4 wide-cut fuels following unsatisfactory
performance of the engine at the original higher altitude limitations
with these wide-cut fuels. This condition, if not addressed, could
result in low fuel pressure, engine flame-out, or engine power
interruption (a change in any engine performance parameter--including
but not limited to gas generator speed, power turbine speed, main gas
temperature, or output torque--outside its normal limits for the
prevailing operating conditions).
    Accordingly, Canadian AD CF-2019-08 requires revising the RFM to
reflect the reduced altitude operating limitations for Jet B and JP-4
wide-cut fuels.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Canada and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with Canada, Transport Canada, its
technical representative, has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition
described in its AD. The FAA is proposing this AD after evaluating all
known relevant information and determining that the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters
of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Figure 1-6. Fuel Operating Envelope (Sheet 1 of
1), of Bell 505 Rotorcraft Flight Manual BHT-505-FM-1, Revision 3,
dated July 25, 2018, which specifies limitations, normal and emergency
procedures, performance data, weight and balance information, and
provides a list of approved optional equipment supplements. This
revision of the service information includes an updated figure of the
fuel operating envelope showing the reduced pressure altitude
limitations for Jet B and JP-4 fuels.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require revising the existing RFM for your
helicopter by updating the fuel operating envelope figure to require
reduced pressure altitude limitations for Jet B and JP-4 fuels.
Incorporating the RFM revision may be performed by the owner/operator
(pilot) holding at least a private pilot certificate and must be
entered into the aircraft records showing compliance with this AD in
accordance with 14 CFR 43.9(a)(1) through (4) and 14 CFR
91.417(a)(2)(v). The record must be maintained as required by 14 CFR
91.417, 121.380, or 135.439. This is an exception to our standard
maintenance regulations.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Transport Canada AD

    Canadian AD CF-2019-08 requires updating the RFM to Bell 505 RFM
BHT-505-FM-1 Revision 3 or later revisions approved by Transport
Canada, whereas this proposed AD would require revising the Limitations
Section of the RFM for your helicopter by replacing the existing Figure
1-6. with Figure 1-6. Fuel Operating Envelope (Sheet 1 of 1) of Bell
505 RFM BHT-505-FM-1, Revision 3, dated July 25, 2018.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 73 helicopters of U.S. Registry. Labor rates are estimated at
$85 per work-hour. Based on these numbers, the FAA estimates the
following costs to comply with this proposed AD.
    Revising the existing RFM for your helicopter would take about 0.5
work-hour for an estimated cost of $43 per helicopter or $3,139 for the
U.S. fleet.

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously Held by
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited): Docket No. FAA-2021-0783;
Project Identifier 2019-SW-009-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by November 4, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited (type
certificate previously held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada
Limited) Model 505 helicopters having serial number 65011 and
subsequent, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 7300, Engine fuel
and control.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by the determination that reducing the
pressure altitude limitations for certain fuel types is necessary.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address unsatisfactory flight
performance of the engine above pressure altitude limitations for
Jet B and JP-4 fuels. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could
result in low fuel pressure, engine flame-out, or engine power
interruption.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Within 30 calendar days after the effective date of this AD,
revise the Limitations Section of the existing Rotorcraft Flight
Manual (RFM) for your helicopter by replacing Figure 1-6. with
Figure 1-6. Fuel Operating Envelope (Sheet 1 of 1) of Bell 505
Rotorcraft Flight Manual BHT-505-FM-1, Revision 3, dated July 25,
2018 (BHT-505-FM-1 Revision 3). Using a different document with
information identical to that in Figure 1-6. Fuel Operating Envelope
(Sheet 1 of 1) of BHT-505-FM-1 Revision 3 is acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of this AD. The action required by
this paragraph may be performed by the owner/operator (pilot)
holding at least a private pilot certificate and must be entered
into the aircraft records showing compliance with this AD in
accordance with 14 CFR 43.9(a)(1) through (4) and 14 CFR
91.417(a)(2)(v). The record must be maintained as required by 14 CFR
91.417, 121.380, or 135.439.

(h) 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. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Rao Edupuganti,
Aerospace Engineer, Dynamic Systems Section, Technical Innovation
Policy Branch, Policy & Innovation Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bell
Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J
1R4, Canada; telephone 1-450-437-2862 or 1-800-363-8023; fax 1-450-
433-0272; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or at https://www.bellflight.com/support/contact-support. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada AD
CF-2019-08, dated March 5, 2019. You may view the Transport Canada
AD on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-
2021-0783.

    Issued on September 7, 2021.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-19964 Filed 9-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 116 (Monday, June 19, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27910-27912]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12586]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80914; File No. SR-PEARL-2017-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX
PEARL Fee Schedule

June 13, 2017.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 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 June 7, 2017, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX PEARL''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a 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 is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX PEARL Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'').
    The Exchange initially filed the proposal on May 31, 2017 (SR-
PEARL-2017-27). That filing was withdrawn and replaced with the current
filing (SR-PEARL-2017-30).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, 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 Add/Remove Tiered Rebates/Fees
set forth in Section 1(a) of the Fee Schedule to decrease the ``Taker''
fee in all Tiers assessable to all orders submitted by a Member for the
account of a Priority Customer \3\ in SPY options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that (i) is
not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not place more
than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See Exchange Rule
100, including Interpretations and Policies .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently assesses tiered transaction rebates and fees
to all market participants which are based upon the total monthly
volume executed by the Member \4\ on MIAX PEARL in the relevant,
respective origin type (not including Excluded Contracts) \5\ expressed
as a percentage of TCV.\6\ In addition, the per contract transaction
rebates and fees are applied retroactively to all eligible volume for
that origin type once the respective threshold tier (``Tier'') has been
reached by the Member. The Exchange aggregates the volume of Members
and their Affiliates.\7\ Members that place resting liquidity, i.e.,
orders resting on the book of the MIAX PEARL System,\8\ are paid the
specified ``maker'' rebate (each a ``Maker''), and Members that execute
against resting liquidity are assessed the specified ``taker'' fee
(each a ``Taker''). For opening transactions and ABBO uncrossing
transactions, per contract transaction rebates and fees are waived for
all market participants. Finally, Members are assessed lower
transaction fees and receive lower rebates for order executions in
standard option classes in the Penny Pilot Program \9\ (``Penny
classes'') than for order executions in standard option classes which
are not in the Penny Pilot Program (``Non-Penny classes''), where
Members are assessed higher transaction fees and receive higher
rebates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Member'' means an individual or organization that is
registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of the Exchange
Rules for purposes of trading on the Exchange as an ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are deemed
``members'' under the Exchange Act. See the Definitions Section of
the Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100.
    \5\ ``Excluded Contracts'' means any contracts routed to an away
market for execution. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.
    \6\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
total national volume in those classes listed on MIAX PEARL for the
month for which the fees apply, excluding consolidated volume
executed during the period of time in which the Exchange experiences
an ``Exchange System Disruption'' (solely in the option classes of
the affected Matching Engine (as defined below)). The term Exchange
System Disruption, which is defined in the Definitions section of
the Fee Schedule, means an outage of a Matching Engine or collective
Matching Engines for a period of two consecutive hours or more,
during trading hours. The term Matching Engine, which is also
defined in the Definitions section of the Fee Schedule, is a part of
the MIAX PEARL electronic system that processes options orders and
trades on a symbol-by-symbol basis. Some Matching Engines will
process option classes with multiple root symbols, and other
Matching Engines may be dedicated to one single option root symbol
(for example, options on SPY may be processed by one single Matching
Engine that is dedicated only to SPY). A particular root symbol may
only be assigned to a single designated Matching Engine. A
particular root symbol may not be assigned to multiple Matching
Engines. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and appropriate
to select two consecutive hours as the amount of time necessary to
constitute an Exchange System Disruption, as two hours equates to
approximately 1.4% of available trading time per month. The Exchange
notes that the term ``Exchange System Disruption'' and its meaning
have no applicability outside of the Fee Schedule, as it is used
solely for purposes of calculating volume for the threshold tiers in
the Fee Schedule. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \7\ ``Affiliate'' means (i) an affiliate of a Member of at least
75% common ownership between the firms as reflected on each firm's
Form BD, Schedule A, or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker of an
Appointed EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an Appointed
Market Maker). An ``Appointed Market Maker'' is a MIAX PEARL Market
Maker (who does not otherwise have a corporate affiliation based
upon common ownership with an EEM) that has been appointed by an EEM
and an ``Appointed EEM'' is an EEM (who does not otherwise have a
corporate affiliation based upon common ownership with a MIAX PEARL
Market Maker) that has been appointed by a MIAX PEARL Market Maker,
pursuant to the process described in the Fee Schedule. See the
Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \8\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 79778 (January 12,
2017), 82 FR 6662 (January 19, 2017) (SR-PEARL-2016-01); 80758 (May
24, 2017), 82 FR 25022 (May 31, 2017) (SR-PEARL-2017-24).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Transaction rebates and fees applicable to orders submitted by a
Member for the account of a Priority Customer are assessed according to
the following table as of June 1, 2017:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Per contract rebates/fees for   Per contract rebates/fees for
                                                                                penny classes                 non-penny classes
                  Origin                         Tier              Volume criteria       ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Maker           Taker           Maker           Taker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority Customer.........................               1  0.00%-0.05%.................         ($0.25)           $0.38         ($0.85)           $0.87
                                                         2  Above 0.05%-0.35%...........          (0.40)            0.38          (1.05)            0.86
                                                         3  Above 0.35%-0.50%...........          (0.50)            0.38          (1.05)            0.85
                                                         4  Above 0.50%-0.75%...........          (0.53)            0.38          (1.05)            0.84
                                                         5  Above 0.75%.................          (0.54)            0.38          (1.05)            0.84
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that, on May 26, 2017, the Exchange filed a
proposed rule change to decrease the Taker fees for Priority Customer
orders for options in Penny classes in each Tier to $0.38.\10\ Those
changes, which became operative on June 1, 2017, are reflected in the
above table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See SR-PEARL-2017-25, filed May 26, 2017, and posted on the
MIAX PEARL Web site: http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl.
On June 7, 2017, that filing was withdrawn and replaced with SR-
PEARL-2017-29, filed June 7, 2017, and posted on the MIAX PEARL Web
site: http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to decrease the Taker fee in all Tiers
assessable to orders submitted by a Member for the account of a
Priority Customer \11\ solely in SPY options to $0.35 per contract.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to add a sentence beneath the
Priority Customer table in the Add/Remove Tiered Rebates/Fees (by way
of an asterisk to the Taker fee) to state that the Taker fee in the
table applies ``For all Penny Classes other than SPY. For SPY, the
Priority Customer Taker Fee shall be $0.35 per contract.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that (i) is
not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not place more
than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See Exchange Rule
100, including Interpretations and Policies .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of decreasing the Taker fee for Priority Customer
orders in SPY options is for business and competitive reasons to
attract greater Priority Customer SPY order flow to the Exchange, and
to match a similar pricing change recently announced by Nasdaq ISE with
respect to taker fees for priority customer orders in SPY options on
that exchange.\12\ The Exchange believes that reducing the Taker fee
for Priority Customer orders in SPY options to $0.35 per contract
(regardless of the Tier the Member achieves), will incentivize Members
to send greater Priority Customer SPY option order flow to the Exchange
due to favorable pricing for this liquidity type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See SR-ISE-2017-49 (May 31, 2017) http://ise.cchwallstreet.com/contents/pdf/2017/SR-ISE-2017-49.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \13\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\14\ in that it
is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges among
Exchange members and other persons using its facilities, and 6(b)(5) of
the Act,\15\ in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and (b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Taker fee decrease applicable to orders submitted by a
Member for the account of a Priority Customer in SPY options is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all
Priority Customer SPY option orders are subject to the same Taker fees
and access to the Exchange is offered on terms that are not unfairly
discriminatory. The Exchange initially set its Taker fees at the
various volume levels based upon business determinations and an
analysis of current Taker fees and volume levels at other exchanges.
For competitive and business reasons, the Exchange believes that lower
Taker fees assessable to Priority Customer transactions in SPY options
in all Tiers will encourage Members to execute more volume in SPY
options on behalf of Priority Customers since they will be assessed
reduced fees in all Tiers for Priority Customer orders in SPY options
which remove liquidity. The Exchange believes for these reasons that
offering the reduced Taker fees for Priority Customer transactions in
SPY options in all Tiers is equitable, reasonable and not unfairly
discriminatory, and thus consistent with the Act.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to reduce Taker fees
assessable to transactions solely in SPY options and not to reduce
Taker fees for other option classes is consistent with other options
markets that also assess different transaction fees for SPY options as
compared to other option classes. The Exchange believes that
establishing different pricing for SPY options for Priority Customers
is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory because SPY
options are more liquid than other option classes. Additionally, other
competing options exchanges differentiate pricing in a similar
manner.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra note 12. See also NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Pricing
Schedule, Section I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange believes that it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to assess lower fees to Priority Customer
orders than to non-Priority Customer orders. A Priority Customer is by
definition not a broker or dealer in securities, and does not place
more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). This limitation does
not apply to participants on the Exchange whose behavior is
substantially similar to that of market professionals, including non-
Priority Customers, MIAX PEARL Market Makers, Firms, and Broker-
Dealers, who will generally submit a higher number of orders (many of
which do not result in executions) than Priority Customers.
    Furthermore, the proposed decrease to the Taker fees in SPY options
for Priority Customer transactions in all Tiers promotes just and
equitable principles of trade, fosters cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and
protects investors and the public interest because the proposed
decrease in the fees will encourage Members to send more Priority
Customer orders in SPY options to the Exchange even if it is an order
which takes liquidity since they will be assessed a reduced Taker fee
in each Tier. To the extent that Priority Customer order flow in SPY

options is increased by the proposal, market participants will
increasingly compete for the opportunity to trade on the Exchange,
including sending more orders which will have the potential to be
assessed lower fees and higher rebates. The resulting increased volume
and liquidity will benefit all Exchange participants by providing more
trading opportunities and tighter spreads.

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

    MIAX PEARL does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed Taker fee decrease
is intended to encourage liquidity and should enable the Exchange to
attract and compete for order flow with other exchanges which assess
higher Priority Customer Taker fees for SPY options.
    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. In such an
environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its rebates and fees
to remain competitive with other exchanges and to attract order flow.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it modifies the Exchange's fees in a
manner that encourages market participants to send order flow to the
Exchange.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor 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,\17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \18\ thereunder.
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2017-30 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-PEARL-2017-30. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2017-30 and should be
submitted on or July 10, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-12586 Filed 6-16-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 225 (Monday, November 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72971-72972]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29768]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-0001]

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of the Medical
Devices Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of
the Medical Devices Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.

    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on Friday, February 19,
2016, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
    Location: Hilton Washington, DC/North, Salons A, B, C, and D, 620
Perry Pkwy., Gaithersburg, MD 20877. The hotel telephone number is 301-
977- 8900.
    Contact Person: Sara Anderson, Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, Food and Drug Administration, Bldg. 66, Rm.1643, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993<EMAIL_ADDRESS>301
796-7047, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138
(301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal
Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously
announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly
enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the
Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm
and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or
call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible
modifications before coming to the meeting.
    Agenda: The Committee will discuss the premarket application for
the DIAM Spinal Stabilization System. The DIAM Spinal Stabilization
System is indicated for skeletally mature patients that have low back
pain (with or without radicular pain) with current episode lasting less
than 1 year in duration secondary to moderate lumbar degenerative disc
disease (DDD) at a single level from L2-L5. DDD is confirmed
radiographically with one or more of the following factors: (1)
Patients must have greater than 2 millimeters of decreased disc height
compared to the adjacent level; (2) scarring/thickening of the
ligamentum flavum, annulus fibrosis, or facet joint capsule; or (3)
herniated nucleus pulposus. The DIAM device is implanted via a
minimally invasive posterior approach.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
February 12, 2016. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in
making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and
submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or
arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed
participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to
make their presentation on or before February 4, 2016. Time allotted
for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants
requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated
during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a
lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing
session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding
their request to speak by February 5, 2016.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact AnnMarie Williams at<PHONE_NUMBER> at least 7 days in advance of
the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: November 13, 2015.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2015-29768 Filed 11-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P