[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 178 (Friday, September 17, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51788-51792]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20035]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0263; Project Identifier AD-2020-01702-T;
Amendment 39-21710; AD 2021-18-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
report that an operator found solid rivets with missing heads at the
left buttock line 25 on the sloping pressure deck web. This AD requires
doing a detailed inspection of the left- and right-side sloping
pressure deck at certain stations for any damaged solid rivets, and
applicable on-condition actions. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 22, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 22,
2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-0263.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0263; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The address for Docket
Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Cortez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 777 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
April 9, 2021 (86 FR 18479). The NPRM was

prompted by a report that an operator found solid rivets with missing
heads at the left buttock line 25 on the sloping pressure deck web. In
the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require doing a detailed inspection of
the left- and right-side sloping pressure deck at certain stations for
any damaged solid rivets, and applicable on-condition actions. The FAA
is issuing this AD to address damaged or missing solid rivet heads on
the sloping pressure deck web, which could result in loss of sloping
pressure deck panels, causing decompression and pressure loss, and loss
of the hydraulic systems in the area for wheel brakes (both normal and
alternate) and steering, and potentially leading to runway departure
and adversely affecting the structural integrity of the airplane.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from four commenters, including Boeing,
American Airlines (AA), FedEx, and United Airlines (UAL). The following
presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to
each comment.

Request To Revise the On-Condition Actions Statement

    Boeing requested a revision to the on-condition actions statement
in the third sentence of the ``Related Service Information Under 1 CFR
part 51'' paragraph of the NPRM. Boeing stated that the repetitive
detailed inspections cover ``two rows of fasteners common to the
affected stiffener,'' instead of ``two rows of blind fasteners and
solid rivets common to the affected stiffener.'' Boeing commented that
the blind fastener repair option is allowed only under Condition 2 of
Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB, dated November 24,
2020, which is limited to findings of a maximum of nine damaged rivets
within the same stiffener. Boeing commented that the damage rivets must
be within the same fastener row, and therefore, the compliance action
does not allow for blind fasteners to be installed in both fastener
rows of an affected stiffener. Boeing commented that the revised
language improves clarity of the on-condition actions because it does
not imply that blind fasteners can be installed in both fastener rows
of an affected stiffener.
    The FAA agrees to revise the on-condition actions statement in the
``Related Service Information Under 1 CFR part 51'' paragraph of this
final rule for the reasons provided above; the FAA has revised this
final rule accordingly.

Request To Revise Cost of Compliance Paragraph

    Boeing requested a revision to the on-condition work-hours for
replacing a blind fastener. Boeing stated that the blind fastener
replacement does not require internal access, and therefore, the 328
work-hours can be reduced to 11 work-hours as noted in Boeing
Information Notice 777-53A0093 IN 01, dated January 27, 2021.
    The FAA agrees to revise the on-condition work-hours for replacing
a blind fastener for the reason provided above; this final rule has
been revised accordingly.

Request To Clarify the Applicability

    AA asked if the rivet problems specified in the NPRM affect any
airplanes in the AA livery, particularly N-numbers (nose numbers) so it
can keep better track on preflights.
    For clarification, this AD does affect AA airplanes because its
fleet includes Model 777-200 and -300ER airplanes. This AD applies to
all Model 777-200, -200LR, -300, -300ER, and 777F airplanes, as
specified in paragraph (c) of this AD. Since all Model 777 airplanes
are affected, it is not necessary to identify airplanes by N-numbers.
The FAA has not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Revise the Compliance Time

    FedEx Express (FedEx) agreed with the intent of the proposed AD,
but found the 16-month compliance time for the initial inspection does
not align with its heavy maintenance visits and requested an extension.
FedEx stated that its current heavy maintenance visits would be the
suitable time to accomplish the actions in the proposed AD, and that
accomplishing the initial inspection in the proposed AD may require
performing special maintenance visits. FedEx commented that it
currently has 26 Model 777F airplanes that have accumulated more than
32,000 flight hours, and therefore, will be required to accomplish the
initial inspection within the 16-month initial compliance time.
    FedEx also commented that since Boeing found the missing rivet
heads from a retired Model 777-200 airplane, the current in-service
Model 777 airplanes can operate with missing rivets without
experiencing adverse structural complications since the issue was not
discovered until after that airplane retired from service.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request to extend the
initial compliance time. The FAA cannot assume that Model 777 airplanes
can operate with missing rivet heads without experiencing adverse
structural complications. The FAA determined that the compliance time,
as proposed, represents the maximum interval of time allowable for the
affected airplanes to continue to safely operate before the initial and
repetitive inspections and on-condition actions are done. If the
inspection interval were based on maintenance schedules, which vary
among operators, there would be no assurance that the airplane would be
inspected and repaired during that maximum interval. In addition, in
developing an appropriate compliance time, the FAA coordinated with the
manufacturer to provide a compliance time with an acceptable level of
safety. However, under the provisions of paragraph (i) of this AD, the
FAA will consider requests for approval of an extension of the
compliance time, if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that
the change would provide an acceptable level of safety. The FAA has not
changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Clarify Required Service Information

    FedEx requested that the FAA revise note 1 to paragraph (g) in the
proposed AD to clarify that the proposed AD requires accomplishment of
the actions only specified in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-
53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020. FedEx stated that note 1 does not
clearly distinguish the required actions from the guidance service
information for accomplishing the actions in the proposed AD.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request to change the note.
For clarification, paragraph (g) of this AD states the required actions
for applicable airplanes, and only specifies to do all applicable
actions identified in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB,
dated November 24, 2020. The FAA clearly states that note 1 to
paragraph (g) of this AD is guidance and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777-53A0093, dated November 24, 2020, is only referred to in that note.
The FAA has not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Clarify Repair Instructions

    UAL indicated support for the NPRM, but requested clarification as
to what to do if a Condition 4 is found in one stiffener and a
Condition 3 is found in

another stiffener as referenced in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
53A0093, dated November 24, 2020. UAL stated that Condition 4 requires
operators to contact Boeing and request repair instructions and to do
the repair if any damaged rivet is found on both fastener rows within
the same stiffener.
    In addition, UAL requested the following clarifications.
     When contacting Boeing, should operators provide all
details of affected stiffeners regardless of the condition identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0093, dated November 24, 2020?
UAL commented that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0093, dated
November 24, 2020, appears to request details associated with a
specific stiffener only.
     Where a Condition 4 discrepancy is present, is it
acceptable to continue with the repair of an adjacent Condition 3
stiffener discrepancy or is further manufacturer approval required?
    UAL stated that it assumes that the conservative approach would be
for the operator to provide all details of affected stiffeners to the
manufacturer and then the manufacturer will provide approval to repair
both Conditions 3 and 4, as referenced in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777-53A0093, dated November 24, 2020. UAL asserted that clarification
will help operators determine which information is required by the
manufacturer to make a repair assessment, and it will also provide
clarification as to what to do in the event of a parallel process
involving both Condition 3 and Condition 4 repair.
    The FAA provides the following clarification for the commenter.
This AD requires operators to use Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
777-53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020, to perform the actions
required in this AD. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0093, dated
November 24, 2020, is for guidance only. Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020, does not specify any
limitations on a Condition 3 repair based on any conditions found on
another stiffener. When a Condition 3 is found, the FAA finds no issues
with continuing with the Condition 3 repair of replacing all solid
rivets even in the event a Condition 4 is found in an adjacent
stiffener. Regarding the question on the details to provide to Boeing
for a repair, as specified in Note 4. of 5.A., ``General Information,''
of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB, dated November
24, 2020, operators can refer to Boeing Service Letter 777-SL-51-013,
Damage Reporting and Repair Plan/Design Guidelines, which describes
what information must be provided to Boeing before a structural repair
can be provided. The structural repair must be approved by the FAA or
the Boeing Company Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) as
specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. The FAA has not revised this
AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered any comments
received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as
proposed. Except for minor editorial changes, and any other changes
described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None
of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB,
dated November 24, 2020. This service information specifies procedures
for doing a detailed inspection of the left- and right-side sloping
pressure deck from station (STA) 1245 to STA 1287 for any damaged
(i.e., missing solid rivet heads, cracking or deformation of the solid
rivet, or gaps between the solid rivet head and the sloping pressure
deck surface) solid rivets, and applicable on-condition actions. On-
condition actions include repeating the detailed inspection of the
left-and right-side sloping pressure deck from STA 1245 to STA 1287 for
any damaged solid rivet; repetitive detailed inspections of two rows of
fasteners common to the affected stiffener for any damaged solid rivet
or damaged blind fastener; replacing solid rivets or blind fasteners;
and repair. This service information is reasonably available because
the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 224 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed inspections.............  Up to 384 work-                  $0  Up to $32,640......  Up to $7,311,360.
                                    hours x $85 per
                                    hour = Up to
                                    $32,640.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary
replacements or inspections that would be required based on the results
of the inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these replacements or inspections:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                        Labor cost               Parts cost            Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement (solid fastener).........  338 work-hours x $85     Up to $3,200...........  Up to $31,930.
                                        per hour = $28,730.
Replacement (blind fastener).........  11 work-hour x $85 per   Up to $450.............  Up to $1,385.
                                        hour = $935.
Repetitive inspections of fastener     326 work-hours x $85     $0 per inspection cycle  $27,710 per inspection
 rows.                                  per hour = $27,710 per                            cycle.
                                        inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost
estimates for the on-condition repairs 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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-18-09 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-21710; Docket No. FAA-
2021-0263; Project Identifier AD-2020-01702-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective October 22, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR,
-300, -300ER, and 777F airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that an operator found solid
rivets with missing heads at the left buttock line 25 on the sloping
pressure deck web. The FAA is issuing this AD to address damaged or
missing solid rivet heads on the sloping pressure deck web, which
could result in loss of sloping pressure deck panels, causing
decompression and pressure loss, and loss of the hydraulic systems
in the area for wheel brakes (both normal and alternate) and
steering, and potentially leading to runway departure and adversely
affecting the structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020,
do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
777-53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777-53A0093, dated November 24, 2020, which is referred to in Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB,
dated November 24, 2020, uses the phrase ``the original issue date
of 777-53A0093 RB'' or ``the original issue date of Requirements
Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB,'' this AD requires using ``the effective
date of this AD,'' except where Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-
53A0093 RB, dated November 24, 2020, uses the phrase ``the original
issue date of Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB'' in a note or
flag note.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB,
dated November 24, 2020, specifies contacting Boeing for repair
instructions: This AD requires doing the repair using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO 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 responsible Flight Standards Office,
as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of
the certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in Related Information. 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 responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Luis Cortez,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: (206) 231-
3958; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (4) of this AD.

(k) 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 the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 777-53A0093 RB, dated
November 24, 2020.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th

St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on August 25, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-20035 Filed 9-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 114 (Thursday, June 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 35659]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14092]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2012-0093]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated November 30, 2012, the Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) has
petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a waiver of
compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety
regulations contained at 49 CFR Part 219, Subpart G, Random Alcohol and
Drug Testing Programs. FRA assigned the petition Docket Number FRA-
2012-0093.
    UP is requesting FRA's approval to periodically and intermittently
adjust UP's random drug and alcohol testing rates at specific locations
based on objective, performance-based criteria or, alternately,
approval for a pilot program in which UP can increase random testing of
its employees at specific locations based on objective, performance-
based criteria.
    A copy of the petition (included at the end of this notice), as
well as any written communications concerning the petition, is
available for review online at www.regulations.gov and in person at the
U.S. Department of Transportation's Docket Operations Facility, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket
Operations Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by July 29, 2013 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
See http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy notice
of regulations.gov or interested parties may review DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 10, 2013.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013-14092 Filed 6-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register: March 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 57)]
[Notices]
[Page 15511-15512]
[DOCID:fr24mr08-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2101-084; Project No. 2155-024]

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (California); Pacific Gas &
Electric Company (California); Notice of Availability of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement for the Upper American River Project and
the Chili Bar Project

March 14, 2008.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office
of Energy Projects has reviewed the applications for relicense for the
Upper American River Project (FERC No. 2101) and the Chili Bar Project
(FERC No. 2155), located on the South Fork of the American River near
Placerville,

California, and has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement
(final EIS) for the projects.
    The existing 688-megawatt (MW) Upper American River Project
occupies 6,375 acres of federal land administered by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Forest Service), in Eldorado
National Forest and 42.3 acres of federal land administered by the U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The Forest
Service is reviewing an application for a special use permit for
constructing the Iowa Hill development on National Forest System lands.
The Forest Service is also a cooperating agency in preparing this final
EIS for the Upper American River Project.
    Pacific Gas & Electric Company's 7-MW Chili Bar Project is located
on the South Fork of the American River immediately downstream of the
Upper American River Project. The project occupies 47.81 acres of
federal land administered by the BLM.
    In the final EIS, staff evaluates the applicant's proposals and
alternatives for relicensing the projects. The final EIS documents the
views of governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations,
affected Indian tribes, the public, the license applicant, and
Commission staff.
    Copies of the final EIS are available for review in the
Commission's Public Reference Branch, Room 2A, located at 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The final EIS also may be viewed on
the Internet at http://www.ferc.gov under the eLibrary link. Enter the
docket number (either P-2101 or P-2155) to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    CD versions of the final EIS have been mailed to everyone on the
mailing list for the projects. Copies of the CD, as well as a limited
number of paper copies, are available from the Public Reference Room
identified above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to these or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    For further information, contact James Fargo at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-5831 Filed 3-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Kentucky Portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton, OH KY IN CMSA Boone Pendleton Campbell Kenton Grant Gallatin The Cincinnati Hamilton CMSA was listed in 2001 as being the 24rd largest MSA within the United States. This MSA encompasses three states and thirteen counties. It includes Dearborn and Ohio Counties in Indiana, Butler, Brown, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren Counties in Ohio, and Boone, Campbell, Gallatin, Grant, Kenton, and Pendleton Counties in Kentucky.

This is the northern most geographic region of Kentucky and the apex of an industrial triangle anchored by Louisville on the southwest and Lexington on the southeast. Within the triangle is more than a third of the state's population and nearly one half of its manufacturing jobs. The interstate highway system places these three metropolitan areas within less than two hours driving from each other. Butler Cnty, OH Dearborn Cnty, IN Ohio Cnty, IN Warren Cnty, OH Hamilton Cnty, OH Clermont Cnty, OH Brown Cnty, OH 2 BOONE COUNTY, KENTUCKY Boone County is part of the Cincinnati Hamilton Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) and is located to the west of Kenton County, Kentucky, to the north of Grant County, Kentucky, and to the southwest of Cincinnati, Ohio.

Geography/ Topography Boone County has a land area of 246 square miles and is located on the banks of the Ohio River in the tri state area of Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana.

Meteorological Information Wind speed/ wind direction information shows that the majority of the time for the period 1988   1992, the wind in the Boone County area came from the southwest and typically from 7 10 knots. ( See figure 1 A) The mean high temperature for July for the area from 1961 through 1990 was 86 ° F, the mean low was 65 ° F. The mean precipitation for the same period was 4.2 inches.

Planning The authority for air quality planning in the Boone County area resides with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. Transportation planning for Boone County is performed by the Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana Regional Council of Governments ( OKI).

Air Monitoring For the 2000   2002 monitoring period, the ozone monitor ( 21 015 0003) in Boone County, shows an 8 hour design value of .086 which would be classified as a county in violation of the standard. ( See table 1 A)

Population Based on projections to 2001 from the 2000 census data, there are 90,489 persons living in Boone County. That represents approximately 368 persons per square mile. The population of Boone County is approximately 25% rural with 3 the remaining 75% living in incorporated areas. The largest cities in Boone County are Florence and Burlington. ( See table 1 C)

Boone County's population from 1990 through 2000 increased by approximately 49% ( 57,589 to 85,991). The population is further expected to increase by an additional 47% between 2000 and 2010. ( See table 1 B)

For the entire Cincinnati Hamilton MSA, Boone County represents approximately 5% of the total population in the MSA and 23% of the Kentucky portion of the MSA. ( See table 1 C)

Air Emissions The graph below shows point source VOC emissions from Boone County were estimated at 2.61 tons per summer day ( tpsd) in 2001 which represents approximately 59% of the total 4.46 tpsd of overall VOC point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Point source NOx emissions from Boone County were estimated at 21.57 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 82% of the total 26.29 tpsd of overall NOx point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Boone County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Point Source Emissions Point sources located within Boone County are subject to PSD requirements, CTG RACT requirements, Maximum Achievable Control Technology ( MACT) requirements for sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants, and New Source VOC Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 10%

Grant 4%

Pendleton 6% Kenton 13%

Boone 59% Campbell 8%

NOx Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 1% Grant 0%

Pendleton 16% Kenton 0%

Boone 82% Campbell 1% 4 Performance Standards ( NSPS). Any controls imposed as a result of previous nonattainment designations are required to remain in Boone County.

It should be noted that three emission control strategies relating to onroad mobile sources are in place in Boone County: a vehicle inspection and maintenance program, Stage II Vapor Recovery at gasoline pumps, and reformulated gasoline. Stage I controls at gasoline stations are also in place in Boone County.

Onroad mobile source VOC emissions from Boone County were estimated at 4.71 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 29% of the total 16.44 tpsd of overall VOC onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Onroad mobile source NOx emissions from Boone County were estimated at 11.58 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 30% of the total 38.12 tpsd of overall NOx onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Boone County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Onroad Mobile Source Emissions Commuting traffic from other counties into Boone County is significant, and the commuting traffic from Boone County into other counties is high.

Commuting Classifications Not Significant 0 10% Minimal 11 30% High 31 50% Significant 51% or more VOC Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 29% Gallatin 7% Grant 15% Pendleton 4%

Boone 29%

Campbell 16%

NOx Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 32% Gallatin 6% Grant 13% Pendleton 2%

Boone 30%

Campbell 17% 5 2001 VOC Contribution ( tons per summer day)

2001 NOx Contribution ( tons per summer day) 2.61 4.71 0.37 2.59 0.43 1.14 0.18 2.51 0.59 4.77 0.28 0.72 0 2 4 6 8 10 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 21.57 11.58 0.15 6.37 0.30 2.39 0.00 5.13 0.03 11.71 4.24 0.94 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 6 Conclusion and Recommendation The monitoring and emissions data and other documentation presented indicate that Boone County, Kentucky, does contribute a significant amount of ozone forming emissions in the Kentucky portion of the area. While overall VOC emission reductions have occurred since 1990 in the area with a required 15% VOC emission reduction plan under the 1 hour ozone standard, the county has recorded a violation of the 8 hour ozone standard based on the 2000   2002 monitoring data. Therefore, Boone County should be designated nonattainment for the 8 hour ozone standard. 7 CAMPBELL COUNTY, KENTUCKY Campbell County is part of the Cincinnati Hamilton Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) and is located to the east of Kenton County, Kentucky, to the north of Pendleton County, Kentucky, and to the southeast of Cincinnati, Ohio.

Geography/ Topography Campbell County has a land area of 151 square miles and is located on the banks of the Ohio River in the tri state area of Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana.

Meteorological Information Wind speed/ wind direction information shows that the majority of the time for the period 1988   1992, the wind in the Campbell County area came from the southwest and typically from 7 10 knots. ( See figure 1 A) The mean high temperature for July for the area from 1961 through 1990 was 86 ° F, the mean low was 65 ° F. The mean precipitation for the same period was 4.2 inches.

Planning The authority for air quality planning in the Campbell County area resides with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. Transportation planning for Campbell County is performed by the Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana Regional Council of Governments ( OKI).

Air Monitoring For the 2000   2002 monitoring period, the ozone monitor ( 21 037 1001) in Campbell County, shows an 8 hour design value of .094 which would be classified as a county in violation of the standard. ( See table 1 A)

Population Based on projections to 2001 from the 2000 census data, there are 88,362 persons living in Campbell County. That represents approximately 585 persons per square mile. The population of Campbell County is approximately 16% rural with the remaining 84% living in incorporated areas. The largest cities in Campbell County are Newport and Ft. Thomas. ( See table 1 C) 8 Campbell County's population from 1990 through 2000 increased by approximately 6% ( 83,866 to 88,616). The population is further expected to increase by an additional 4% between 2000 and 2010. ( See table 1 B)

For the entire Cincinnati Hamilton MSA, Campbell County represents approximately 4% of the total population in the MSA and 24% of the Kentucky portion of the MSA. ( See table 1 C)

Air Emissions Point source VOC emissions from Campbell County were estimated at 0.37 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 8% of the total 4.46 tpsd of overall VOC point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Point source NOx emissions from Campbell County were estimated at 0.15 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 1% of the total 26.29 tpsd of overall NOx point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Campbell County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Point Source Emissions Point sources located within Campbell County are subject to PSD requirements, CTG RACT requirements, Maximum Achievable Control Technology ( MACT) requirements for sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants, and New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS). Any controls imposed as a result of previous nonattainment designations are required to remain in Campbell County. NOx Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 1% Grant 0%

Pendleton 16% Kenton 0%

Boone 82% Campbell 1%

VOC Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 10%

Grant 4%

Pendleton 6% Kenton 13%

Boone 59% Campbell 8% 9 It should be noted that three emission control strategies relating to onroad mobile sources are in place in Campbell County: a vehicle inspection and maintenance program, Stage II Vapor Recovery, and reformulated gasoline. Stage I controls at gasoline stations are also in place in Campbell County.

Onroad mobile source VOC emissions from Campbell County were estimated at 2.59 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 16% of the total 16.44 tpsd of overall VOC onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Onroad mobile source NOx emissions from Campbell County were estimated at 6.37 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 17% of the total 38.12 tpsd of overall NOx onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Campbell County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Onroad Mobile Source Emissions Commuting traffic from other counties into Campbell County is high, and the commuting traffic from Campbell County into other counties is significant.

Commuting Classifications Not Significant 0 10% Minimal 11 30% High 31 50% Significant 51% or more VOC Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 29% Gallatin 7% Grant 15% Pendleton 4%

Boone 29%

Campbell 16%

NOx Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 32% Gallatin 6% Grant 13% Pendleton 2%

Boone 30%

Campbell 17% 10 2001 VOC Contribution ( tons per summer day)

2001 NOx Contribution ( tons per summer day) 2.61 4.71 0.37 2.59 0.43 1.14 0.18 2.51 0.59 4.77 0.28 0.72 0 2 4 6 8 10 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 21.57 11.58 0.15 6.37 0.30 2.39 0.00 5.13 0.03 11.71 4.24 0.94 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 11 Conclusion and Recommendation The monitoring and emissions data and other documentation presented indicate that Campbell County, Kentucky, does contribute ozone forming emissions in the area. While overall VOC emission reductions have occurred since 1990 in the area with a required 15% VOC emission reduction plan under the 1 hour ozone standard, the county has recorded a violation of the 8 hour ozone standard based on the 2000   2002 monitoring data. Therefore, Campbell County should be designated nonattainment for the 8 hour ozone standard. 12 KENTON COUNTY, KENTUCKY Kenton County is part of the Cincinnati Hamilton Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) and is located to the west of Campbell County, Kentucky, to the east of Boone County, Kentucky, and to the south of Cincinnati, Ohio.

Geography/ Topography Kenton County has a land area of 162 square miles and is located on the banks of the Ohio River in the tri state area of Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana.

Meteorological Information Wind speed/ wind direction information shows that the majority of the time for the period 1988   1992, the wind in the Kenton County area came from the southwest and typically from 7 10 knots. ( See figure 1 A) The mean high temperature for July for the area from 1961 through 1990 was 86 ° F, the mean low was 65 ° F. The mean precipitation for the same period was 4.2 inches.

Planning The authority for air quality planning in the Kenton County area resides with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. Transportation planning for Kenton County is performed by the Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana Regional Council of Governments ( OKI).

Air Monitoring For the 2000   2002 monitoring period, the ozone monitor ( 21 117 0007) in Kenton County, shows an 8 hour design value of .088 which would be classified as a county in violation of the standard. ( See table 1 A)

Population Based on projections to 2001 from the 2000 census data, there are 151,366 persons living in Kenton County. That represents approximately 934 persons per square mile. The population of Kenton County is approximately 7% rural with the remaining 93% living in incorporated areas. The largest cities in Kenton County are Covington and Erlanger. ( See table 1 C) 13 Kenton County's population from 1990 through 2000 increased by approximately 7% ( 142,031 to 151,464). The population is further expected to increase by an additional 6% between 2000 and 2010. ( See table 1 B)

For the entire Cincinnati Hamilton MSA, Kenton County represents approximately 8% of the total population in the MSA and 40% of the Kentucky portion of the MSA. ( See table 1 C)

Air Emissions Point source VOC emissions from Kenton County were estimated at 0.59 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 13% of the total 4.46 tpsd of overall VOC point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Point source NOx emissions from Kenton County were estimated at 0.03 tpsd in 2001 which represents less than 1% of the total 26.29 tpsd of overall NOx point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Kenton County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Point Source Emissions Point sources located within Kenton County are subject to PSD requirements, CTG RACT requirements, Maximum Achievable Control Technology ( MACT) requirements for sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants, and New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS). Any controls imposed as a result of previous nonattainment designations are required to remain in Kenton County. NOx Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 1% Grant 0%

Pendleton 16% Kenton 0%

Boone 82% Campbell 1%

VOC Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 10%

Grant 4%

Pendleton 6% Kenton 13%

Boone 59% Campbell 8% 14 It should be noted that three emission control strategies relating to onroad mobile sources are in place in Kenton County: a vehicle inspection and maintenance program, Stage II Vapor Recovery, and reformulated gasoline. Stage I controls at gasoline stations are also in place in Kenton County.

Onroad mobile source VOC emissions from Kenton County were estimated at 4.77 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 29% of the total 16.44 tpsd of overall VOC onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Onroad mobile source NOx emissions from Kenton County were estimated at 11.71 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 32% of the total 38.12 tpsd of overall NOx onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Kenton County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Onroad Mobile Source Emissions Commuting traffic from other counties into Kenton County is high, and the commuting traffic from Kenton County into other counties is significant.

Commuting Classifications Not Significant 0 10% Minimal 11 30% High 31 50% Significant 51% or more VOC Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 29% Gallatin 7% Grant 15% Pendleton 4%

Boone 29%

Campbell 16%

NOx Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 32% Gallatin 6% Grant 13% Pendleton 2%

Boone 30%

Campbell 17% 15 2001 VOC Contribution ( tons per summer day)

2001 NOx Contribution ( tons per summer day) 2.61 4.71 0.37 2.59 0.43 1.14 0.18 2.51 0.59 4.77 0.28 0.72 0 2 4 6 8 10 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 21.57 11.58 0.15 6.37 0.30 2.39 0.00 5.13 0.03 11.71 4.24 0.94 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 16 Conclusion and Recommendation The monitoring and emissions data and other documentation presented indicate that Kenton County, Kentucky, does contribute ozone forming emissions in the area. While overall VOC emission reductions have occurred since 1990 in the area with a required 15% VOC emission reduction plan under the 1 hour ozone standard, the county has recorded a violation of the 8 hour ozone standard based on the 2000   2002 monitoring data. Therefore, Kenton County should be designated nonattainment for the 8 hour ozone standard. 17 GALLATIN COUNTY, KENTUCKY Gallatin County is part of the Cincinnati Hamilton Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) and is located to the southwest of Boone County, Kentucky, and to the northwest of Owen and Grant Counties, Kentucky.

Geography/ Topography Gallatin County has a land area of 98 square miles and is located on the banks of the Ohio River in the tri state area of Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana.

Meteorological Information Wind speed/ wind direction information shows that the majority of the time for the period 1988   1992, the wind in the Gallatin County area came from the southwest and typically from 7 10 knots. ( See figure 1 A) The mean high temperature for July for the area from 1961 through 1990 was 86 ° F, the mean low was 65 ° F. The mean precipitation for the same period was 4.2 inches.

Planning The authority for air quality planning in the Gallatin County area resides with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. Transportation planning for Gallatin County is performed by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet.

Air Monitoring For the 2000   2002 monitoring period, there were no ozone monitors located in Gallatin County. However, the Boone, Kenton, and Campbell County monitors to the north and northeast all show 8 hour design values in exceedance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS). ( See table 1 A)

Population Based on projections to 2001 from the 2000 census data, there are 7,961 persons living in Gallatin County. That represents approximately 81 persons per square mile. The population of Gallatin County is approximately 100% rural 18 with few people living in incorporated areas. The largest cities in Gallatin County are Warsaw and Glencoe. ( See table 1 C)

Gallatin County's population from 1990 through 2000 increased by approximately 46% ( 5,393 to 7,870). The population is further expected to increase by an additional 48% between 2000 and 2010. ( See table 1 B)

For the entire Cincinnati Hamilton MSA, Gallatin County represents less than 1% of the total population in the MSA and 2% of the Kentucky portion of the MSA. ( See table 1 C)

Air Emissions Point source VOC emissions from Gallatin County were estimated at 0.43 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 10% of the total 4.46 tpsd of overall VOC point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Point source NOx emissions from Gallatin County were estimated at 0.30 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 1% of the total 26.29 tpsd of overall NOx point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Gallatin County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Point Source Emissions Point sources located within Gallatin County are subject to PSD requirements, CTG RACT requirements, Maximum Achievable Control Technology ( MACT) requirements for sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants, and New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS). NOx Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 1% Grant 0%

Pendleton 16% Kenton 0%

Boone 82% Campbell 1%

VOC Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 10%

Grant 4%

Pendleton 6% Kenton 13%

Boone 59% Campbell 8% 19 Onroad mobile source VOC emissions from Gallatin County were estimated at 1.14 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 7% of the total 16.44 tpsd of overall VOC onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Onroad mobile source NOx emissions from Gallatin County were estimated at 2.39 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 6% of the total 38.12 tpsd of overall NOx onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Gallatin County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Onroad Mobile Source Emissions Commuting traffic from other counties into Gallatin County is high, and the commuting traffic from Gallatin County into other counties is significant.

Commuting Classifications Not Significant 0 10% Minimal 11 30% High 31 50% Significant 51% or more VOC Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 29% Gallatin 7% Grant 15% Pendleton 4%

Boone 29%

Campbell 16%

NOx Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 32% Gallatin 6% Grant 13% Pendleton 2%

Boone 30%

Campbell 17% 20 2001 VOC Contribution ( tons per summer day)

2001 NOx Contribution ( tons per summer day) 2.61 4.71 0.37 2.59 0.43 1.14 0.18 2.51 0.59 4.77 0.28 0.72 0 2 4 6 8 10 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 21.57 11.58 0.15 6.37 0.30 2.39 0.00 5.13 0.03 11.71 4.24 0.94 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 21 Conclusion and Recommendation The emissions data and other documentation presented indicate that Gallatin County, Kentucky, does not contribute significantly to the monitored violations in the region and therefore should be designated attainment for the 8 hour ozone standard. 22 GRANT COUNTY, KENTUCKY Grant County is part of the Cincinnati Hamilton Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) and is located to the southeast of Gallatin County, Kentucky, to the west of Pendleton County, Kentucky, and directly north of Scott County, Kentucky.

Geography/ Topography Grant County has a land area of 259 square miles and is located in the tri state area of Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana.

Meteorological Information Wind speed/ wind direction information shows that the majority of the time for the period 1988   1992, the wind in the Grant County area came from the southwest and typically from 7 10 knots. ( See figure 1 A) The mean high temperature for July for the area from 1961 through 1990 was 86 ° F, the mean low was 65 ° F. The mean precipitation for the same period was 4.2 inches.

Planning The authority for air quality planning in the Grant County area resides with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. Transportation planning for Grant County is performed by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet.

Air Monitoring For the 2000   2002 monitoring period, there were no ozone monitors located in Grant County. However, the Boone, Kenton, and Campbell County monitors to the northwest, north, and northeast all show 8 hour design values in exceedance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS). ( See table 1 A)

Population Based on projections to 2001 from the 2000 census data, there are 23,237 persons living in Grant County. That represents approximately 90 persons per square mile. The population of Grant County is approximately 78% rural with 23 the remaining 22% living in incorporated areas. The largest cities in Grant County are Williamstown and Dry Ridge. ( See table 1 C)

Grant County's population from 1990 through 2000 increased by approximately 42% ( 15,737 to 22,384). The population is further expected to increase by an additional 45% between 2000 and 2010. ( See table 1 B)

For the entire Cincinnati Hamilton MSA, Grant County represents approximately 1% of the total population in the MSA and 6% of the Kentucky portion of the MSA. ( See table 1 C)

Air Emissions Point source VOC emissions from Grant County were estimated at 0.18 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 4% of the total 4.46 tpsd of overall VOC point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Point source NOx emissions from Grant County were estimated at 0.00 tpsd in 2001 which represents 0% of the total 26.29 tpsd of overall NOx point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Grant County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Point Source Emissions Point sources located within Grant County are subject to PSD requirements, CTG RACT requirements, Maximum Achievable Control Technology ( MACT) requirements for sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants, and New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS). NOx Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 1% Grant 0%

Pendleton 16% Kenton 0%

Boone 82% Campbell 1%

VOC Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 10%

Grant 4%

Pendleton 6% Kenton 13%

Boone 59% Campbell 8% 24 Onroad mobile source VOC emissions from Grant County were estimated at 2.51 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 15% of the total 16.44 tpsd of overall VOC onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Onroad mobile source NOx emissions from Grant County were estimated at 5.13 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 13% of the total 38.12 tpsd of overall NOx onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Grant County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Onroad Mobile Source Emissions Commuting traffic from other counties into Grant County is minimal, and the commuting traffic from Grant County into other counties is significant.

Commuting Classifications Not Significant 0 10% Minimal 11 30% High 31 50% Significant 51% or more VOC Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 29% Gallatin 7% Grant 15% Pendleton 4%

Boone 29%

Campbell 16%

NOx Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 32% Gallatin 6% Grant 13% Pendleton 2%

Boone 30%

Campbell 17% 25 2001 VOC Contribution ( tons per summer day)

2001 NOx Contribution ( tons per summer day) 2.61 4.71 0.37 2.59 0.43 1.14 0.18 2.51 0.59 4.77 0.28 0.72 0 2 4 6 8 10 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 21.57 11.58 0.15 6.37 0.30 2.39 0.00 5.13 0.03 11.71 4.24 0.94 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 26 Conclusion and Recommendation The emissions data and other documentation presented indicate that Grant County, Kentucky, does not contribute significantly to the monitored violations in the region and therefore should be designated attainment for the 8 hour ozone standard. 27 PENDLETON COUNTY, KENTUCKY Pendleton County is part of the Cincinnati Hamilton Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) and is located directly south of Kenton and Campbell Counties, Kentucky, and to the east of Grant County, Kentucky.

Geography/ Topography Pendleton County has a land area of 280 square miles and is located on the banks of the Ohio River in the tri state area of Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana.

Meteorological Information Wind speed/ wind direction information shows that the majority of the time for the period 1988   1992, the wind in the Pendleton County area came from the southwest and typically from 7 10 knots. ( See figure 1 A) The mean high temperature for July for the area from 1961 through 1990 was 86 ° F, the mean low was 65 ° F. The mean precipitation for the same period was 4.2 inches.

Planning The authority for air quality planning in the Pendleton County area resides with the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. Transportation planning for Pendleton County is performed by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet.

Air Monitoring For the 2000   2002 monitoring period, there were no ozone monitors located in Pendleton County. However, the Boone, Kenton, and Campbell County monitors to the north and northwest all show 8 hour design values in exceedance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS). ( See table 1 A)

Population Based on projections to 2001 from the 2000 census data, there are 14,611 persons living in Pendleton County. That represents approximately 52 persons per square mile. The population of Pendleton County is approximately 100% 28 rural with few people living in incorporated areas. The largest cities in Pendleton County are Falmouth and Butler. ( See table 1 C)

Pendleton County's population from 1990 through 2000 increased by approximately 20% ( 12,036 to 14,390). The population is further expected to increase by an additional 23% between 2000 and 2010. ( See table 1 B)

For the entire Cincinnati Hamilton MSA, Pendleton County represents approximately 1% of the total population in the MSA and 4% of the Kentucky portion of the MSA. ( See table 1 C)

Air Emissions Point source VOC emissions from Pendleton County were estimated at 0.28 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 6% of the total 4.46 tpsd of overall VOC point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Point source NOx emissions from Pendleton County were estimated at 4.24 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 16% of the total 26.29 tpsd of overall NOx point source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Pendleton County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Point Source Emissions Point sources located within Pendleton County are subject to PSD requirements, CTG RACT requirements, Maximum Achievable Control NOx Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 1% Grant 0%

Pendleton 16% Kenton 0%

Boone 82% Campbell 1%

VOC Emissions tons per summer day Gallatin 10%

Grant 4%

Pendleton 6% Kenton 13%

Boone 59% Campbell 8% 29 Technology ( MACT) requirements for sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants, and New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS).

Onroad mobile source VOC emissions from Pendleton County were estimated at 0.72 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 4% of the total 16.44 tpsd of overall VOC onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. Onroad mobile source NOx emissions from Pendleton County were estimated at 0.94 tpsd in 2001 which represents approximately 2% of the total 38.12 tpsd of overall NOx onroad mobile source emissions from the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA. ( See table 1 D)

A comparison across the entire Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana MSA was performed using the federal 1999 National Emission Inventory data. Figures 1 C through 1 F provide a comparison of Pendleton County's emissions to the entire region.

2001 Onroad Mobile Source Emissions Commuting traffic from other counties into Pendleton County is minimal, and the commuting traffic from Pendleton County into other counties is significant.

Commuting Classifications Not Significant 0 10% Minimal 11 30% High 31 50% Significant 51% or more VOC Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 29% Gallatin 7% Grant 15% Pendleton 4%

Boone 29%

Campbell 16%

NOx Emissions tons per summer day Kenton 32% Gallatin 6% Grant 13% Pendleton 2%

Boone 30%

Campbell 17% 30 2001 VOC Contribution ( tons per summer day)

2001 NOx Contribution ( tons per summer day) 2.61 4.71 0.37 2.59 0.43 1.14 0.18 2.51 0.59 4.77 0.28 0.72 0 2 4 6 8 10 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 21.57 11.58 0.15 6.37 0.30 2.39 0.00 5.13 0.03 11.71 4.24 0.94 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton Mobile Point 31 Conclusion and Recommendation The emissions data and other documentation presented indicate that Pendleton County, Kentucky, does not contribute significantly to the monitored violations in the region and therefore should be designated attainment for the 8 hour ozone standard. 32 Cincinnati Hamiltion MSA Figure 1 A Wind Rose Patterns Figure 1 B 2001 VOC and NOx Emissions Kentucky Portion of the Cincinnati Hamilton MSA ( tons per summer day)

7.32 33.15 2.96 6.52 1.57 2.69 2.69 5.13 5.36 11.74 1.00 5.18 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Boone Campbell Gallatin Grant Kenton Pendleton VOC NOx 33 Table 1 A Ozone Design Values ( parts per million)

Monitor 2000 2001 2002 3 year Average Boone .083 .083 .094 .086 Campbell .093 .088 .102 .094 Kenton .087 .082 .096 .088 Table 1 B Northern Kentucky Area Population Growth Data County 1990 2000 % Growth 1990   2000 2010 % Growth 2000  2010 Boone 57,589 85,991 49.3% 126,036 46.6% Campbell 83,866 88,616 5.7% 92,385 4.3% Gallatin 5,393 7,870 45.9% 11,638 47.9% Grant 15,737 22,384 42.2% 32,341 44.5% Kenton 142,031 151,464 6.6% 159,730 5.5% Pendleton 12,036 14,390 19.6% 17,690 22.9%

Table 1 C 2001 Estimated Cincinnati Hamilton MSA Population Kentucky Estimated Population Boone County 90,489 Campbell County 88,362 Gallatin County 7,961 Grant County 23,237 Kenton County 151,366 Pendleton County 14,611 Ohio Brown County 42,890 Clermont County 181,673 Hamilton County 835,362 Butler 337,013 Warren County 169,025 Indiana Dearborn County 46,806 Ohio County 5,726 Total Estimated Population 1,994,521 34 Table 1 D 2001 VOC and NOx Emissions ( tons per summer day)

VOC NOx County Point Mobile Total Point Mobile Total Boone 2.61 4.71 7.32 21.57 11.58 33.15 Campbell 0.37 2.59 2.96 0.15 6.37 6.52 Gallatin 0.43 1.14 1.57 0.30 2.39 2.69 Grant 0.18 2.51 2.69 0.00 5.13 5.13 Kenton 0.59 4.77 5.36 0.03 11.71 11.74 Pendleton 0.28 0.72 1.00 4.24 0.94 5.18 Total 4.46 16.44 20.90 26.29 38.12 64.41 Figure 1 C 1999 NEI Point Source VOC Emissions for Cincinnati Hamilton Area tons per year Grant 1% Gallatin 2% Ohio 0% Brown 1% Clermont 4%

Dearborn 14% Butler 23% Warren 4% Hamilton 28%

Pendleton 2% Kenton 5% Boone 13%

Campbell 3% 35 Figure 1 D 1999 NEI Point Source NOx Emissions for Cincinnati Hamilton Area tons per year Grant 0% Gallatin 0% Ohio 0%

Brown 0% Clermont 33%

Dearborn 27% Butler 7% Warren 1% Hamilton 23%

Pendleton 1% Kenton 0% Boone 8%

Campbell 0%

Figure 1 E 1999 NEI Onroad Mobile Source VOC Emissions for Cincinnati Hamilton Area tons per year Campbell 5% Boone 4%

Kenton 9% Pendleton 1% Hamilton 44% Warren 7%

Butler 14%

Dearborn 3% Clermont 8%

Brown 2%

Ohio 0% Gallatin 1% Grant 2% 36 Figure 1 F 1999 NEI Onroad Mobile Source NOx Emissions for Cincinnati Hamilton Area tons per year Campbell 6% Boone 5%

Kenton 9%

Pendleton 1% Hamilton 38% Warren 7%

Butler 13%

Dearborn 4% Clermont 9%

Brown 3%

Ohio 0% Gallatin 2% Grant 3%


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39939-39940]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14512]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2016-0499]

National Maritime Security Advisory Committee; Teleconference

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of teleconference meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Maritime Security Advisory Committee will meet on
July 5, 2016, via teleconference to discuss various issues relating to
national maritime security. This meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: The Committee will meet by teleconference on Tuesday, July 5,
2016 from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. This meeting may
close early if all business is finished. To join the teleconference,
contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to obtain the needed information no later than 3 p.m. on July
1, 2016. The number of teleconference lines is limited and will be
available on a first-come, first-served basis. Written comments for
distribution to Committee members before the meeting must be submitted
no later than June 27, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted to the docket for this
notice, USCG-2016-0499, using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. To facilitate public participation, we are
inviting public comment on the issues to be considered by the Committee
as listed in the ``Agenda'' section below. If you encounter technical
difficulties, contact the individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the words ``Department
of Homeland Security'' and the docket number for this action. Comments
received will be posted without alteration at http://regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided. You may review a Privacy
Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management system in the March
24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).
    Docket Search: For access to the docket to read documents or
comments related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG-2016-0499 in the Search box, press Enter, and then click on the
item you wish to view.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ryan Owens, Alternate Designated
Federal Official of the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee,
2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593, Stop
7581, Washington, DC 20593-7581; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting via teleconference is
in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5, United
States Code, Appendix).
    The National Maritime Security Advisory Committee operates under
the authority of 46 U.S.C. 70112. The National Maritime Security
Advisory Committee provides advice, consults with, and makes
recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security, via the
Commandant of the Coast Guard, on matters relating to national maritime
security.

Agenda of Meeting

    The agenda for the July 5, 2016 teleconference is as follows:
    (1) Coast Guard Cyber Security Tasking. At their last public
meeting, the Committee was asked to provide recommendations concerning
a Cyber Security Information Sharing and Analysis Center. A copy of the
tasking can be found at http://homeport.uscg.mil/nmsac. The National
Maritime Security Advisory Committee will meet via teleconference to
receive the report of the working group and provide recommendations.
The public will be provided an opportunity to comment prior to any
voting on this issue.
    (2) Transportation Worker Identification Credential; Next
Generation Specifications. At the last public meeting The Committee was
tasked with providing recommendations on what the next generation of
Transportation Worker Credentials and readers should incorporate. A
copy of the tasking can be found at http://homeport.uscg.mil/nmsac. The
National Maritime Security Advisory Committee will meet via
teleconference to receive the report of the working group and provide
recommendations. The public will be provided an opportunity to comment
prior to any voting on this issue.
    (3) Extremely Hazardous Cargo Strategy. The Committee will receive
a tasking to work with the Chemical Transportation Advisory Committee
in developing an implementation strategy for the Strategy.
    During the July 5, 2016 meeting via teleconference, a public
comment will be held from approximately 4:45 p.m. to 5 p.m. Speakers
are requested to limit their comments to three minutes. Please note
that this public comment period may start before 4:45 p.m. if all other
agenda items have been covered and may end before 5 p.m. if all those
wishing to comment have done so.

    Dated: June 15, 2016.
K.P. McAvoy,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Director of Inspections and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-14512 Filed 6-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 14 (Tuesday, January 24, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8249-8252]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01461]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79806; File No. SR-NSX-2017-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend Exchange Rule 11.26 Regarding the Data Collection Requirements
of the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program
January 17, 2017

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on January 6, 2017, National Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') a proposed rule change, as described in
Items I, and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as a non-
controversial proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of
the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \4\ thereunder, which renders it
effective upon filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NSX Rule 11.26(b) and Rule 11.26,
Interpretations and Policies .08 to modify certain data collection
requirements of the Regulation NMS Plan to Implement a Tick Size Pilot
Program (the ``Plan''). The proposed rule change is the same as
proposed rule changes recently approved or published by the Commission
for Bats BZX Exchange f/k/a BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') to amend BZX
Rule 11.27 which also sets forth amendments to the requirements for the
Web site data publication requirements pursuant to Appendices B and C
of the Plan.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79533 (December 13,
2016), 81 FR 91990 (December 19, 2016) (SR-BatsBZX-2016-82).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.nsx.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and statutory 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 parts of
such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    On August 25, 2014, NYSE Group, Inc., on behalf of BZX, Bats BYX
Exchange, Inc., f/k/a BATS-Y Exchange,

Inc., Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc., Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock
Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA''), NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, the Nasdaq Stock
Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), NYSE MKT LLC, and
NYSE Arca, Inc. (collectively ``Participants''), filed with the
Commission, pursuant to Section 11A of the Act \6\ and Rule 608 of
Regulation NMS thereunder,\7\ the Plan to Implement a Tick Size Pilot
Program (``Pilot'').\8\ The Participants filed the Plan to comply with
an order issued by the Commission on June 24, 2014.\9\ The Plan \10\
was published for comment in the Federal Register on November 7, 2014
and was thereafter approved by the Commission, as modified, on May 6,
2015.\11\ On November 6, 2015, the Commission granted the Participants
an exemption from implementing the Plan until October 3, 2016.\12\ On
March 3, 2016, the Commission published an amendment to the Plan adding
NSX as a Participant.\13\ On September 13, 2016, the Commission
exempted the Plan Participants from the requirement to fully implement
the Pilot on October 3, 2016, to permit the Plan Participants to
implement the pilot on a phased-in basis, as described in the Plan
Participants' exemptive request.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \7\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \8\ See Letter from Brendon J. Weiss, Vice President,
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., to Secretary, Commission, dated
August 25, 2014.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72460 (June 24,
2014), 79 FR 36840 (June 30, 2014).
    \10\ Unless otherwise specified, capitalized terms used in this
rule filing are based on the defined terms of the Plan.
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74892 (May 6,
2015), 80 FR 27513 (May 13, 2015) (File No. 4-657) (``Approval
Order'').
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76382 (November 6,
2015), 80 FR 70284 (November 13, 2015) (File No. 4-657) (Order
Granting Exemption From Compliance With the National Market System
Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot Program).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77277 (March 3,
2016), 81 FR 12162 (March 8, 2016).
    \14\ See Letter from David S. Shillman, Associate Director,
Division of Trading and Markets, Commission, to Eric Swanson, EVP,
General Counsel and Secretary, Bats Global Markets, Inc., dated
September 13, 2016; see also Letter from Eric Swanson, EVP, General
Counsel and Secretary, Bats Global Markets, Inc., to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated September 9, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan is designed to allow the Commission, market participants,
and the public to study and assess the impact of increment conventions
on the liquidity and trading of the common stocks of small-
capitalization companies. Each Participant is required to comply, and
to enforce compliance by its member organizations, as applicable, with
the provisions of the Plan.
    The Exchange adopted rule amendments to implement the requirements
of the Plan, including relating to the Plan's data collection
requirements and requirements relating to Web site data
publication.\15\ Specifically, with respect to the Web site data
publication requirements pursuant to Section VII and Appendices B and C
to the Plan, Exchange Rule 11.26(b)(2)(B) provides, among other things,
that the Exchange shall make the data required by Items I and II of
Appendix B to the Plan, and collected pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) of
Rule 11.26, publicly available on the Exchange's Web site on a monthly
basis at no charge and shall not identify the Trading Center that
generated the data. Exchange Rule 11.26(b)(3)(C), provides, among other
things, that the Exchange shall make the data required by Item IV of
Appendix B to the Plan, and collected pursuant to paragraph (b)(3)(A)
of Rule 11.26, publicly available on the Exchange Web site on a monthly
basis at no charge and shall not identify the Trading Center [sic] that
generated the data. Exchange Rule 11.26(b)(5) provides, among other
things, that the Exchange shall collect and transmit to the Commission
data described in Item III of Appendix B of the Plan relating to daily
Market Maker registration statistics, but does not currently include a
provision requiring the Exchange to publish such data to its Web site.
Rule 11.26, Interpretation and Policy .08 provides, among other things,
that the requirement that the Exchange or the Designated Examining
Authority (``DEA'') make certain data publicly available on the
Exchange's or the DEA's Web site pursuant to Appendix B and C to the
Plan shall commence at the beginning of the Pilot Period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77483 (March 31,
2016), 81 FR 20040 (April 6, 2016) (File No. SR-NSX-2016-01); see
also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78960 (September 28, 2016),
81 FR 68476 (October 4, 2016) (File No. SR-NSX-2016-12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing amendments to Rule 11.26(b)(2)(B)
(regarding Appendix B.I and B.II data) and Rule 11.26(b)(3)(C)
(regarding Appendix B.IV data) to provide that data required to be made
available on the Exchange's Web site be published within 120 calendar
days following month end. The Exchange also proposes to add a provision
to Rule 11.26(b)(5) to state that the Exchange shall make data
collected under Appendix B.III publicly available on the Exchange's Web
site within 120 calendar days following month end at no charge.\16\ In
addition, the proposed amendments to Rule 11.26, Interpretations and
Policies .08 would provide that, notwithstanding the provisions of
paragraphs (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(C), and (b)(5), the Exchange or the DEA
shall make data for the Pre-Pilot period publicly available on the
Exchange's or the DEA's Web site pursuant to Appendix B and C to the
Plan by February 28, 2017.\17\ The purpose of delaying the publication
of the Web site data is to address confidentiality concerns by
providing for the passage of additional time between the market
information reflected in the data and the public availability of such
information.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Exchange notes that it does not currently have any
Market Makers and, therefore, does not currently collect Market
Maker registration statistics.
    \17\ With respect to data for the Pilot Period, the requirement
that the Exchange or the DEA make data publicly available on the
Exchange's or the DEA's Web site pursuant to Appendix B and C to the
Plan shall continue to commence at the beginning of the Pilot
Period. Thus, the first Web site publication date for Pilot Period
data (covering October 2016) would be published on the Exchange's or
the DEA's Web site by February 28, 2017, which is 120 days following
the end of October 2016.
    \18\ On November 30, 2016, the Commission granted each
Participant a limited exemption from the requirement to publish
certain Pilot data on a monthly basis. For each Participants that is
the DEA of a Market Maker, the Commission granted a limited
exemption to allow FINRA to aggregate and publish certain data on
the FINRA Web site, rather than each Participant that is a DEA of a
Market Maker publishing such data on its respective Web site. The
exemptions were granted to the Participants so long as each
Participant submits proposed rule changes to reflect the exemptions.
See Letter dated November 30, 2016 from David S. Shillman, Associate
Directors, Division of Trading and Markets to Ms. Marcia E. Asquith,
Senior Vice President and Corporate Secretary, FINRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \19\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \20\ in particular, 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 mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that this proposal is consistent with the Act
because it is designed to assist the Participants in meeting their
regulatory obligations pursuant to the Plan and is

in furtherance of the objectives of the Plan, as identified by the SEC.
The Exchange further believes that the instant proposal is consistent
with the Act in that it is designed to address confidentiality concerns
by permitting the Exchange to delay Web site publication to provide for
passage of additional time between the market information reflected in
the data and the public availability of such information.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
notes that the proposed rule change implements the provisions of the
Plan, and is designed to assist the Participants in meeting their
regulatory obligations pursuant to the Plan.
    The proposal is intended to address confidentiality concerns that
may adversely impact competition by permitting the Exchange to delay
Web site publication to provide for passage of additional time between
the market information reflected in the data and the public
availability of such information. The proposal also does not alter the
information required to be submitted to the Commission.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \21\ of the Exchange Act and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78(s)(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 58092 (July 3, 2008), 73 FR 40144 (July 11, 2008) (``Commission
Guidance and Amendment to the Rule Relating to Organization and
Program Management Concerning Proposed Rule Changes by Self-
Regulatory Organizations'') (the ``Streamlining Release''). As set
forth in the Streamlining Release, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) permits a
proposed rule change to become immediately effective to the extent
such proposal is a proposed rule change to implement provisions of
an approved national market system plan or a Commission rule. Id. at
40148.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4
\23\ normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date
of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\24\ the
Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness and has
requested that the Commission waive the requirement that the proposed
rule change not become operative for 30 days after the date of the
filing so that it may become operative immediately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change implements the
provisions of the Plan, and is designed to assist the Participants in
meeting their regulatory obligations pursuant to the Plan. The proposal
is intended to address confidentiality concerns by permitting the
Exchange to delay Web site publication to provide for passage of
additional time between the market information reflected in the data
and the public availability of such information. The proposal does not
alter the information required to be submitted to the SEC.
    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because it will allow the Exchange to implement proposed changes that
are intended to address confidentiality concerns. Therefore, the
Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the
proposed rule change to be operative as of 6 January, 2017.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ For purposes of only waiving the operative delay for this
rule proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
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,
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\26\ If the
Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved
or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NSX-2017-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NSX-2017-01. This file
number should be included in the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the
Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3
p.m. Copies of the filing will also 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-NSX-2017-01
and should be submitted on or before February 14, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-01461 Filed 1-23-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P