[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 150 (Thursday, August 4, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51323-51325]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18172]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-5459; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-148-AD;
Amendment 39-18597; AD 2016-15-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. This AD
was prompted by a design review, which found that the burst pressure of
the flexible hose used to vent oxygen from the high-pressure relief
valve of the oxygen cylinder overboard is lower than the opening
pressure of the high-pressure relief valve. This AD requires
replacement of flexible relief hoses for the crew oxygen bottles with
new metal design relief hoses. We are issuing this AD to prevent the
accumulation of excess oxygen in an enclosed space, which could, if
near a source of ignition, cause an uncontrolled oxygen-fed fire.

DATES: This AD is effective September 8, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of September 8,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
5459.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
5459; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fabio Buttitta, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.
Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on April 12, 2016 (81 FR 21491) (``the NPRM''). The
NPRM was prompted by a design review, which found that the burst
pressure of the flexible hose used to vent oxygen from the high-
pressure relief valve of the oxygen cylinder overboard is lower than
the opening pressure of the high-pressure relief valve. This pressure
difference could cause the flexible hose to burst before it is able to
vent excess oxygen overboard. The NPRM proposed to require replacement
of flexible relief hoses for the crew oxygen bottles with new metal
design relief hoses. We are issuing this AD to prevent the accumulation
of excess oxygen in an enclosed space, which could, if near a source of
ignition, cause an uncontrolled oxygen-fed fire.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2015-25, dated September 10, 2015 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-700-
1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A design review found that the burst pressure of the flexible
hose used to vent oxygen from the high-pressure relief valve of the
oxygen cylinder overboard is lower than the opening pressure of the
high-pressure relief valve. This could cause the flexible hose to
burst before it is able to vent the excess oxygen overboard. If an
ignition source is present, the accumulation of oxygen in an
enclosed space may result in an uncontrolled oxygen-fed fire.
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the replacement of the oxygen
[flexible] hose assembly with a new design oxygen [metal] hose
assembly.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
5459.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public. We reviewed the relevant data and determined
that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as
proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that
these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc. has issued the following service information:
     Service Bulletin 700-35-013, Revision 01, dated July 22,
2015.
     Service Bulletin 700-35-5001, Revision 01, dated July 22,
2015;
     Service Bulletin 700-35-6001, Revision 01, dated July 22,
2015; and
     Service Bulletin 700-1A11-35-012, Revision 01, dated July
22, 2015.
    The service information describes procedures to replace the
flexible oxygen hoses with metal hoses. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 73 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification........................  3 work-hours x $85 per          $14,483          $14,738       $1,075,874
                                       hour = $255.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2016-15-06 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18597; Docket No. FAA-
2016-5459; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-148-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective September 8, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-
700-1A11 airplanes, certificated in any category, having serial
numbers (S/Ns) 9002 through 9704 inclusive, and 9998.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a design review, which found that the
burst pressure of the flexible hose used to vent oxygen from the
high-pressure relief valve of the oxygen cylinder overboard is lower
than the opening pressure of the high-pressure relief valve. This
pressure difference could cause the flexible hose to burst before it
is able to vent excess oxygen overboard. We are issuing this AD to
prevent the accumulation of excess oxygen in an enclosed space,
which could, if near a source of ignition, cause an uncontrolled
oxygen-fed fire.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modification

    Within 2,500 flight hours or 42 months, whichever occurs first,
after the effective date of this AD, incorporate Bombardier Modsum
R700T400542 by replacing the oxygen flexible relief hoses for the
crew oxygen bottles with new metal design hoses, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service
information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this
AD. Airplanes with serial numbers listed in table 1 of paragraph 1,
``Planning information,'' of the service information specified in
paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(4) of this AD have incorporated Modsum
R700T400542 and meet the requirements of this paragraph.
    (1) For Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes having S/Ns 9002 through
9312 inclusive, 9314 through 9380 inclusive, and 9384 through 9429
inclusive: Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-35-013, Revision 01,
dated July 22, 2015.
    (2) For Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes having S/Ns 9313, 9381, and
9432 through 9704 inclusive: Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-35-
6001, Revision 01, dated July 22, 2015.
    (3) For Model BD-700-1A11 airplanes having S/Ns 9127 through
9383 inclusive, 9389 through 9400 inclusive, 9404 through 9431
inclusive, and 9998: Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-35-012,
Revision 01, dated July 22, 2015.
    (4) For Model BD-700-1A11 airplanes having S/Ns 9386, 9401, and
9445 through 9702 inclusive: Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-35-
5001, Revision 01, dated July 22, 2015.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install on
any airplane oxygen hoses in the low-pressure/high-pressure
discharge system with part numbers listed in the ``Used Part No.''
column of Section 3.A, ``Kit,'' of the applicable service
information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this
AD.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using the applicable service information identified
in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(4) of this AD, which are not
incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (1) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-35-013, dated February 20,
2015;
    (2) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-35-5001, dated February 20,
2015;
    (3) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-35-6001, dated February 20,
2015; and
    (4) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-35-012, dated February
20, 2015.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing
Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO,
ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(k) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2015-25, dated September 10,
2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-5459.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier, Inc. Service Bulletin 700-35-013, Revision 01,
dated July 22, 2015.
    (ii) Bombardier, Inc. Service Bulletin 700-35-5001, Revision 01,
dated July 22, 2015.
    (iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-35-6001, Revision 01,
dated July 22, 2015.
    (iv) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-35-012, Revision 01,
dated July 22, 2015.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (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, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 21, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-18172 Filed 8-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 231 (Friday, December 2, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73928-73929]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26165]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0165; Airspace Docket No. 22-AAL-14]
RIN 2120-AA66

Revocation of Colored Federal Airway Green 18 (G-18); Point Lay,
AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action revokes Colored Federal airway Green 18 (G-18) due
to the planned decommissioning of the Point Lay, AK (PIZ), Non-
Directional Beacon (NDB).

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, February 23, 2023. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the route structure as necessary to preserve
the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace
System (NAS).

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for Docket
No. FAA-2022-0165 in the Federal Register (87 FR 12901; March 8, 2022),
revoking Colored Federal airway G-18 due to the planned decommissioning
of the Point Lay, AK, NDB. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting comments on the
proposal. No comments were received.
    Green Federal airways are published in paragraph 6009(a) of FAA
Order JO 7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15,
2022, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Colored
Federal airway listed in this document will be published subsequently
in FAA Order JO 7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September
15, 2022. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by revoking Colored Federal
airway G-18 due to the planned decommissioning of the Point Lay, AK,
NDB in the vicinity of Point Lay, AK. The amendment is described below.
    G-18: G-18 extends between the Hotham, AK, NDB and the Atqasuk, AK,
NDB. The airway is removed in its entirety.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is

certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this airspace action of revoking
Colored Federal airway G-18, due to the planned decommissioning of the
Point Lay, AK, NDB, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with
FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify
classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see
14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas;
Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points), and paragraph 5-
6.5k, which categorically excludes from further environmental review
the publication of existing air traffic control procedures that do not
essentially change existing tracks, create new tracks, change altitude,
or change concentration of aircraft on these tracks. As such, this
action is not expected to result in any potentially significant
environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph
5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this
action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically
excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring
further analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6009(a) Green Federal Airways.

* * * * *

G-18 [Removed]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 28, 2022.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2022-26165 Filed 12-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 6, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63161-63162]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22021]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0095; NHTSA-2019-0134; Notice 1]

Specialty Tires of America, Inc., Receipt of Petitions for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petitions.

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

SUMMARY: Specialty Tires of America, Inc. (STA) has determined that
certain STA light truck tires do not fully comply with Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Motor
Vehicles with a GVWR of More than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) and
Motorcycles, or FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light
Vehicles. STA filed noncompliance reports dated August 27, 2019,
November 15, 2019, and November 18, 2019. STA also petitioned NHTSA on
September 16, 2019, and December 13, 2019, and later amended the former
on March 3, 2020, for a decision that the subject noncompliances are
inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle safety. This document
announces receipt of STA's petitions.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petitions is November 5,
2020.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on these petitions. Comments must refer to the
docket number and notice number cited in the title of this notice and
may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except for Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petitions are granted or denied, notice of the decision
will also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the
authority indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview

    STA has determined that certain STA light truck tires do not fully
comply with paragraph S6.5(f) of FMVSS No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for
Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of More than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds)
and Motorcycles (49 CFR 571.119) or paragraphs S5.5(e) and (f) of FMVSS
No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles (49 CFR
571.139). STA filed noncompliance reports dated August 27, 2019,
November 15, 2019, and November 18, 2019, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. STA also
petitioned NHTSA on September 16, 2019, and December 13, 2019, and
later amended the former on March 3, 2020, for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR
part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
    This notice of receipt, of STA's petitions, is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercises of judgment concerning the merits of the petitions.

II. Tires Involved

    Approximately 5,489 of the following STA light truck tires,
manufactured between January 1, 2009, and October 27, 2019, and
certified to FMVSS No. 119, are potentially involved:
 8-17.5 LT STA Super Traxion
 8-17.5 STA Super Transport
 8-14.5LT G/14 STA Super Transport
 8-14.5LT F 12 STA Super Transport
 7.50-18 STA Super Traxion
 7.50-17 STA Super Transport
 10.00-20 STA Super Transport
    Approximately 2,887 of the following STA light truck tires,
manufactured between February 2, 2014, and September 1, 2019, and
certified to FMVSS No. 139, are potentially involved:
 37x12.50R20LT Interco SSR
 37x12.50R17LT Interco SSR
 35x12.50-16LT Interco Thornbird
 33x13.50R17LT Interco Irok

III. Noncompliance

    STA explains that in both cases, the noncompliance is that the
sidewalls of the subject tires incorrectly state the ply material and
number of plies and, therefore, do not meet the applicable requirement
specified in either paragraph S6.5 of FMVSS No. 119 or paragraphs
S5.5(e) and (f) of FMVSS No.

139. Specifically, the subject tires were incorrectly marked in the
following ways:
 8-17.5LT STA Super Traxion
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 6 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 4 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
 8-17.5 STA Super Transport
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 6 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 4 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
 8-14.5LT G/14STA Super Transport
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 6 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 6 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 8 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 6 Ply Nylon
 8-14.5LT F 12 STA Super Transport
Sidewall marked as Tread: 6 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 6 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 8 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 6 Ply Nylon
 7.50-18 STA Super Traxion
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 4 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 6 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
 7.50-17 STA Super Transport
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 4 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 6 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 6 Ply Nylon
 10.00-20 STA Super Transport
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 10 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 10 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 8 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 6 Ply Nylon
 37x12.50R20LT Interco SSR
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 3 Poly + 2 Steel + 1 Nylon, Sidewall: 3
Poly
    Correct marking should be Tread: 2 Poly + 2 Steel + 2 Nylon,
Sidewall: 2 Poly
 37x12.50R17LT Interco SSR
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 3 Poly + 2 Steel + 1 Nylon, Sidewall: 3
Poly
    Correct marking should be Tread: 2 Poly + 2 Steel + 2 Nylon,
Sidewall: 2 Poly
 35x12.50-16LT Interco Thornbird
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 4 Ply Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply Nylon
    Correct marking should be Tread: 4 Poly + 2 Nylon, Sidewall: 4 Ply
Poly
 33x13.50R17LT Interco Irok
    Sidewall marked as Tread: 3 Poly + 2 Steel + 1 Nylon, Sidewall: 3
Poly
    Correct marking should be Tread: 2 Poly + 2 Steel + 1 Nylon,
Sidewall: 2 Poly

IV. Rule Requirements

    Paragraph S6.5(f) of FMVSS No. 119 and paragraphs S5.5(e) and (f)
of FMVSS No. 139 include the requirements relevant to these petitions.
Paragraph S6.5(f) of FMVSS 119 requires that each tire shall be marked
on each sidewall with the actual number of plies and the composition of
the ply cord material in the sidewall and, if different, in the tread
area. Paragraphs 5.5(e) and (f) of FMVSS No. 139 require that each tire
must be marked on one sidewall with the generic name of each cord
material used in the plies (both sidewall and tread area) of the tire,
the actual number of plies in the sidewall, and the actual number of
plies in the tread area, if different.

V. Summary of STA's Petitions

    The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of STA's Petitions,'' are the views and arguments provided by
STA. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the
views of the Agency.
    STA described the subject noncompliances and stated that the
noncompliances are inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle
safety. In support of its petitions, STA offers the following
reasoning:
    1. The subject tires were manufactured as designed and meet or
exceed all other marking and performance requirements of FMVSS No. 119
or 139, as applicable.
    2. The noncompliance is not a safety concern, having no effect on
operation of the tire and no impact on the retreading, repairing, or
recycling industries.
    3. All the tires in inventory and the mold information are being
corrected and all future production and sales by STA of these tires
will have the correct information on both sidewalls.
    4. STA stated that they are not aware of any warranty claims,
adjustments, field reports, customer complaints, legal claims, or any
incidents, accidents, or injuries related to the subject condition.
    5. STA says that NHTSA has granted a number of similar petitions
relating to incorrectly identifying the actual number of plies in the
tread area. STA went on to cite the following petitions in which the
Agency has previously granted:
    a. Continental Tire the Americas, LLC, Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential noncompliance, 83 FR 36668 (July 30, 2018).
    b. Sumitomo Rubber Industries, Ltd., Grant of Petition for Decision
of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 83 FR 13002 (March 26, 2018).
    c. Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC, Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 47049 (August 2,
2013).
    d. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 74 FR 10804 (March 12, 2009).
    e. Nitto Tire U.S.A., Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 17764 (March 30, 2016).
    f. Hankook Tire America Corp., Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 79 FR 30688 (May 28, 2014).
    STA concludes by again contending that the subject noncompliances
are inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petitions to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliances, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
these petitions only apply to the subject tires that STA no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliances existed.
However, any decision on these petitions does not relieve tire
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after STA
notified them that the subject noncompliances existed.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-22021 Filed 10-5-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 155 (Monday, August 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39883-39885]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17208]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86587; File No. 4-747]

Program for Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Pursuant to
Rule 17d-2; Order Approving and Declaring Effective a Proposed Plan for
the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Between the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. and the Long-Term Stock Exchange,
Inc.

August 7, 2019.
    On July 11, 2019, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') and the Long-Term Stock Exchange, Inc. (``LTSE'') (together
with FINRA, the ``Parties'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'') a plan for the allocation of
regulatory responsibilities, dated July 11, 2019 (``17d-2 Plan'' or the
``Plan''). The Plan was published for comment on July 17, 2019.\1\ The
Commission received no comments on the Plan. This order approves and
declares effective the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86356 (July 11,
2019), 84 FR 34225.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Introduction

    Section 19(g)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\2\ among other things, requires every self-regulatory
organization (``SRO'') registered as either a national securities
exchange or national securities association to examine for, and enforce
compliance by, its members and persons associated with its members with
the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the SRO's own rules,
unless the SRO is relieved of this responsibility pursuant to Section
17(d) or Section 19(g)(2) of the Act.\3\ Without this relief, the
statutory obligation of each individual SRO could result in a pattern
of multiple examinations of broker-dealers that maintain memberships in
more than one SRO (``common members''). Such regulatory duplication
would add unnecessary expenses for common members and their SROs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(g)(1).
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(d) and 15 U.S.C. 78s(g)(2), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17(d)(1) of the Act \4\ was intended, in part, to eliminate
unnecessary multiple examinations and regulatory duplication.\5\ With
respect to a common member, Section 17(d)(1) authorizes the Commission,
by rule or order, to relieve an SRO of the responsibility to receive
regulatory reports, to examine for and enforce compliance with
applicable statutes, rules, and regulations, or to perform other
specified regulatory functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(d)(1).
    \5\ See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Report of the Senate
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs to Accompany S.
249, S. Rep. No. 94-75, 94th Cong., 1st Session 32 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To implement Section 17(d)(1), the Commission adopted two rules:
Rule 17d-1 and Rule 17d-2 under the Act.\6\ Rule 17d-1 authorizes the
Commission to name a single SRO as the designated examining authority
(``DEA'') to examine common members for compliance with the financial
responsibility requirements imposed by the Act, or by Commission or SRO
rules.\7\ When an SRO has been named as a common member's DEA, all
other SROs to which the common member belongs are relieved of the
responsibility to examine the firm for compliance with the applicable
financial responsibility rules. On its face, Rule 17d-1 deals only with
an SRO's obligations to enforce member compliance with financial
responsibility requirements. Rule 17d-1 does not relieve an SRO from
its obligation to examine a common member for compliance with its own
rules and provisions of the federal securities laws governing matters
other than financial responsibility, including sales practices and
trading activities and practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17d-1 and 17 CFR 240.17d-2, respectively.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 12352 (April 20,
1976), 41 FR 18808 (May 7, 1976).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address regulatory duplication in these and other areas, the
Commission adopted Rule 17d-2 under the Act.\8\ Rule 17d-2 permits SROs
to propose joint plans for the allocation of regulatory
responsibilities with respect to their common members. Under paragraph
(c) of Rule 17d-2, the Commission may declare such a plan effective if,
after providing for appropriate notice and comment, it determines that
the plan is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and for the
protection of investors; to foster cooperation and coordination among
the SROs; to remove impediments to, and foster the development of, a
national market system and a national clearance

and settlement system; and is in conformity with the factors set forth
in Section 17(d) of the Act. Commission approval of a plan filed
pursuant to Rule 17d-2 relieves an SRO of those regulatory
responsibilities allocated by the plan to another SRO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 12935 (October 28,
1976), 41 FR 49091 (November 8, 1976).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proposed Plan

    The proposed 17d-2 Plan is intended to reduce regulatory
duplication for firms that are common members of both LTSE and
FINRA.\9\ Pursuant to the proposed 17d-2 Plan, FINRA would assume
certain examination and enforcement responsibilities for common members
with respect to certain applicable laws, rules, and regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The proposed 17d-2 Plan refers to these common members as
``Dual Members.'' See Paragraph 1(c) of the proposed 17d-2 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the Plan delineates the proposed regulatory
responsibilities with respect to the Parties. Included in the proposed
Plan is an exhibit (the ``LTSE Certification of Common Rules,''
referred to herein as the ``Certification'') that lists every LTSE
rule, and select federal securities laws, rules, and regulations, for
which FINRA would bear responsibility under the Plan for overseeing and
enforcing with respect to LTSE members that are also members of FINRA
and the associated persons therewith (``Dual Members'').
    Specifically, under the 17d-2 Plan, FINRA would assume examination
and enforcement responsibility relating to compliance by Dual Members
with the rules of LTSE that are substantially similar to the applicable
rules of FINRA,\10\ as well as any provisions of the federal securities
laws and the rules and regulations thereunder delineated in the
Certification (``Common Rules''). In the event that a Dual Member is
the subject of an investigation relating to a transaction on LTSE, the
plan acknowledges that LTSE may, in its discretion, exercise concurrent
jurisdiction and responsibility for such matter.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See paragraph 1(b) of the proposed 17d-2 Plan (defining
Common Rules). See also paragraph 1(f) of the proposed 17d-2 Plan
(defining Regulatory Responsibilities). Paragraph 2 of the Plan
provides that annually, or more frequently as required by changes in
either LTSE rules or FINRA rules, the parties shall review and
update, if necessary, the list of Common Rules. Further, paragraph 3
of the Plan provides that LTSE shall furnish FINRA with a list of
Dual Members, and shall update the list no less frequently than once
each calendar quarter.
    \11\ See paragraph 6 of the proposed 17d-2 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Plan, LTSE would retain full responsibility for
surveillance and enforcement with respect to trading activities or
practices involving LTSE's own marketplace, including, without
limitation, registration pursuant to its applicable rules of associated
persons (i.e., registration rules that are not Common Rules); its
duties as a DEA pursuant to Rule 17d-1 under the Act; and any LTSE
rules that are not Common Rules.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See paragraph 2 of the proposed 17d-2 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed Plan is consistent with the
factors set forth in Section 17(d) of the Act \13\ and Rule 17d-2(c)
thereunder \14\ in that the proposed Plan is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest and for the protection of investors, fosters
cooperation and coordination among SROs, and removes impediments to and
fosters the development of the national market system. In particular,
the Commission believes that the proposed Plan should reduce
unnecessary regulatory duplication by allocating to FINRA certain
examination and enforcement responsibilities for common members that
would otherwise be performed by LTSE and FINRA. Accordingly, the
proposed Plan promotes efficiency by reducing costs to common members.
Furthermore, because LTSE and FINRA will coordinate their regulatory
functions in accordance with the Plan, the Plan should promote investor
protection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(d).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that, under the Plan, LTSE and FINRA have
allocated regulatory responsibility for those LTSE rules, set forth in
the Certification, that are substantially similar to the applicable
FINRA rules in that examination for compliance with such provisions and
rules would not require FINRA to develop one or more new examination
standards, modules, procedures, or criteria in order to analyze the
application of the rule, or a common member's activity, conduct, or
output in relation to such rule. In addition, under the Plan, FINRA
would assume regulatory responsibility for certain provisions of the
federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are set forth in the Certification. The Common Rules covered by the
Plan are specifically listed in the Certification, as may be amended by
the Parties from time to time.
    According to the Plan, LTSE will review the Certification, at least
annually, or more frequently if required by changes in either the rules
of LTSE or FINRA, and, if necessary, submit to FINRA an updated list of
Common Rules to add LTSE rules not included on the then-current list of
Common Rules that are substantially similar to FINRA rules; delete LTSE
rules included in the then-current list of Common Rules that are no
longer substantially similar to FINRA rules; and confirm that the
remaining rules on the list of Common Rules continue to be LTSE rules
that are substantially similar to FINRA rules.\15\ FINRA will then
confirm in writing whether the rules listed in any updated list are
Common Rules as defined in the Plan. Under the Plan, LTSE will also
provide FINRA with a current list of common members and shall update
the list no less frequently than once each quarter.\16\ The Commission
believes that these provisions are designed to provide for continuing
communication between the Parties to ensure the continued accuracy of
the scope of the proposed allocation of regulatory responsibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See paragraph 2 of the Plan.
    \16\ See paragraph 3 of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is hereby declaring effective a Plan that, among
other things, allocates regulatory responsibility to FINRA for the
oversight and enforcement of all LTSE rules that are substantially
similar to the rules of FINRA for common members of LTSE and FINRA.
Therefore, modifications to the Certification need not be filed with
the Commission as an amendment to the Plan, provided that the Parties
are only adding to, deleting from, or confirming changes to LTSE rules
in the Certification in conformance with the definition of Common Rules
provided in the Plan. However, should the Parties decide to add an LTSE
rule to the Certification that is not substantially similar to a FINRA
rule; delete an LTSE rule from the Certification that is substantially
similar to a FINRA rule; or leave on the Certification an LTSE rule
that is no longer substantially similar to a FINRA rule, then such a
change would constitute an amendment to the Plan, which must be filed
with the Commission pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The Commission also notes that the addition to or deletion
from the Certification of any federal securities laws, rules, and
regulations for which FINRA would bear responsibility under the Plan
for examining, and enforcing compliance by, common members, also
would constitute an amendment to the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    This Order gives effect to the Plan filed with the Commission in
File No. 4-747. The Parties shall notify all members affected by the
Plan of their rights and obligations under the Plan.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 17(d) of the Act, that
the Plan

in File No. 4-747, between FINRA and LTSE, filed pursuant to Rule 17d-2
under the Act, is approved and declared effective.
    It is further ordered that LTSE is relieved of those
responsibilities allocated to FINRA under the Plan in File No. 4-747.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(34).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-17208 Filed 8-9-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49871-49873]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17846]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2016-8246; Special Conditions No. 25-624-SC]

Special Conditions: ATR Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500 and ATR-
72-102/-202/-212/-212A Airplanes; Seats With Non-Traditional, Large,
Non-Metallic Panels

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for ATR Model ATR-42-200/-
300/-320/-500 and ATR-72-102/-202/-212/-212A airplanes. These airplanes
will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state
of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport-
category airplanes. This design feature is seats with non-traditional,
large, non-metallic panels. The applicable airworthiness regulations do
not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design
feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on ATR on July 29, 2016. We must
receive your comments by September 12, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2016-8246
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Shelden, Airframe and Cabin
Safety, ANM-115, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
425-227-2785; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of, and
opportunity for prior public comment on, these special conditions is
impracticable because these procedures would significantly delay
issuance of the design approval, and thus delivery, of the affected
airplanes.
    In addition, the substance of these special conditions has been
subject to the public-comment process in several prior instances with
no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that good
cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon
publication in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On March 2, 2016, ATR applied for a change to type certificate no.
A53EU for the installation of seats constructed of non-traditional,
non-metallic materials in the Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500, and ATR-
72-102/-202/-212/-212A airplanes.
    The Model ATR-42/-72 series airplanes are twin-engine,
turbopropeller-powered, transport-category airplanes with maximum
passenger capacity up to 74, depending upon airplane model.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, ATR must show that the Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500 and
ATR-72-102/-202/-212/-212A airplanes, as changed, continue to meet the
applicable provisions of the regulations listed in type certificate no.
A53EU, or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of
application for the change, except for earlier amendments as agreed
upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500
and ATR-72-102/-202/-212/-212A airplanes because of a novel or unusual
design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions
of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on
the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to
the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500 and ATR-72-102/-202/-
212/-212A airplanes must comply with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission
requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the noise-certification
requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500 and ATR-72-102/-202/-212/-212A
airplanes will incorporate the following novel or unusual design
feature:
    Passenger seats that incorporate non-traditional, large, non-
metallic panels in lieu of the traditional metal frame covered by
fabric.

Discussion

    In the early 1980s, the FAA conducted extensive research on the
effects of post-crash flammability in the passenger cabin. As a result
of this research and service experience, the FAA adopted new standards
for interior surfaces associated with large surface-area parts.
Specifically, the rules require measurement of heat release and smoke
emission (part 25, Appendix F, parts IV and V) for the affected parts.
Heat release has been shown to have a direct correlation with post-
crash-fire survival time. Materials that comply with the standards
(i.e., Sec.  25.853, ``Compartment interiors'' at Amendment 25-61 and
Amendment 25-66) extend survival time by approximately 2 minutes over
materials that do not comply.
    At the time these standards were written, the potential application
of the requirements of seat heat release and smoke emission was
explored. The seat frame itself was not a concern because it was
primarily made of aluminum and only small amounts of non-metallic
materials. Research determined that the overall effect on survivability
was negligible, whether or not the food trays met the heat-release and
smoke-emission requirements. The requirements therefore did not address
seats. The preambles to both the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM),
Notice No. 85-10 (50 FR 15038, April 16, 1985), and the Final Rule at
Amendment 25-61 (51 FR 26206, July

21, 1986), specifically note that seats were excluded ``because the
recently adopted standards for flammability of seat cushions will
greatly inhibit involvement of the seats.''
    Subsequently, the Final Rule at Amendment 25-83 (60 FR 6615, March
6, 1995) clarified the definition of minimum panel size: ``It is not
possible to cite a specific size that will apply in all installations;
however, as a general rule, components with exposed surface areas of
one square foot or less may be considered small enough that they do not
have to meet the new standards. Components with exposed surface areas
greater than two square feet may be considered large enough that they
do have to meet the new standards. Those with exposed surface areas
greater than one square foot, but less than two square feet, must be
considered in conjunction with the areas of the cabin in which they are
installed before a determination could be made.''
    In the late 1990s, the FAA issued Policy Memorandum 97-112-39,
``Guidance for Flammability Testing of Seat/Console Installations,''
October 17, 1997 (http://rgl.faa.gov). That memo was issued when it
became clear that seat designs were evolving to include large, non-
metallic panels with surface areas that would impact survivability
during a cabin-fire event, comparable to partitions or galleys. The
memo noted that large-surface-area panels must comply with heat-release
and smoke-emission requirements, even if they were attached to a seat.
If the FAA had not issued such policy, seat designs could have been
viewed as a loophole to the airworthiness standards that would result
in an unacceptable decrease in survivability during a cabin-fire event.
    In October of 2004, an issue was raised regarding the appropriate
flammability standards for passenger seats that incorporated non-
traditional, large, non-metallic panels in lieu of the traditional
metal covered by fabric. The FAA Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
and Transport Standards Staff reviewed this design, and determined that
it represented the kind and quantity of material that should be
required to pass the heat-release and smoke-emissions requirements. The
FAA has determined that special conditions would be issued to apply the
standards defined in 14 CFR 25.853(d) to seats with large, non-metallic
panels in their design. Traditional seat panels would not be covered by
the special conditions.
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500 and ATR-72-102/-202/-212/-212A
airplanes. Should ATR apply at a later date for a change to the type
certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would apply to that
model as well. These special conditions apply to new seat-certification
programs. Previously approved seats are not affected by these special
conditions.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on two model series of airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the
notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been
derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is
unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change
from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would
significantly affect the certification of the airplane, which is
imminent, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment
are unnecessary and impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting
these special conditions upon publication in the Federal Register. The
FAA is requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views
that may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities
for comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for ATR Model ATR-42-200/-300/-320/-500
and ATR-72-102/-202/-212/-212A airplanes for new seat-certification
programs.
    1. Compliance with 14 CFR part 25 Appendix F, parts IV and V,
``Heat release and smoke emission,'' is required for seats that
incorporate non-traditional, large, non-metallic panels that may be
either a single component or multiple components in a concentrated area
in their design.
    2. The applicant may designate up to and including 1.5 square feet
of non-traditional, non-metallic panel material per seat place that
does not have to comply with special condition 1, above. A triple seat
assembly may have a total of 4.5 square feet excluded on any portion of
the assembly (e.g., outboard seat place, 1 sq. ft.; middle, 1 sq. ft.;
and inboard, 2.5 sq. ft.)
    3. Seats need not meet the test requirements of 14 CFR part 25
Appendix F, parts IV and V, when installed in compartments that are not
otherwise required to meet these requirements. Examples include
airplanes:
    a. With passenger capacities of 19 or fewer;
    b. that do not have smoke-emission and heat-release test
requirements in their certification basis, and that are not required by
14 CFR 121.312 to conduct such tests; or
    c. that are exempted from smoke-emission and heat-release testing.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 21, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-17846 Filed 7-28-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32007-32008]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12565]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Environmental Impact Statement for Tulsa--Oklahoma City Passenger
Rail Corridor, Oklahoma, Lincoln, Creek, and Tulsa Counties, OK

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS).

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

SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to advise the public that FRA and
the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT) Rail Division intend
to prepare an EIS pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA) for the State of Oklahoma High-Speed Rail Initiative:
Tulsa--Oklahoma City Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan in
Oklahoma, Lincoln, Creek, and Tulsa counties, Oklahoma. The EIS will
evaluate passenger rail alternatives for the approximately 106-mile
corridor between Tulsa and Oklahoma City, which currently has no
passenger rail service. This corridor is part of the South Central High
Speed Rail Corridor and is a federally-designated high-speed rail (HSR)
corridor. ODOT envisions the Tulsa--Oklahoma City passenger rail
corridor to be a new, dedicated HSR line for the majority of its
length.

DATES: FRA invites the public, governmental agencies, and all other
interested parties to comment on the scope of the EIS. All such
comments should be provided in writing, within thirty (30) days of the
publication of this notice, at the address listed below. Comments may
also be provided orally or in writing at the scoping meetings for the
Project. Scoping meeting dates, times and locations, in addition to
related Project information can be found online at
www.TulsaOKCRailCorridor.com.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of the EIS may be mailed or
emailed within thirty (30) days of the publication of this notice to
Catherine Dobbs, Transportation Industry Analyst, Office of Railroad
Policy and Development, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
Johnson Bridgwater, Federal Programs Manager, Oklahoma Department of
Transportation Rail Division, 200 NE. 21st Street, Oklahoma City, OK
73105-3204.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Dobbs, Transportation
Industry Analyst, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington 20590, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Johnson Bridgwater, Federal Programs
Manager, Oklahoma Department of Transportation Rail Division, 200 NE.
21st Street, Oklahoma City, OK 73105-3204, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Environmental Review Process: The EIS will be prepared in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),
the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing
NEPA and the FRA's Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts as
set forth in 64 FR 28545 dated May 26, 1999 (Environmental Procedures).
The EIS will also address Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation
Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. 303) and other applicable Federal and state laws
and regulations. The study will result in a NEPA document that will
address overall issues of concern, including but not limited to:
     Describing the purpose and need for the proposed action.
     Describing the environment likely to be affected by the
proposed action.
     Developing evaluation criteria to identify alternatives
that meet the purpose and need of the proposed action.
     Identifying the range of reasonable alternatives that
satisfy the purpose and need for the proposed action.
     Developing the no-build alternative to serve as a baseline
for comparison.
     Describing and evaluating the potential environmental
impacts and mitigation associated with the proposed alternatives.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Railroad Administration, in
cooperation with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT), will
prepare the EIS for the State of Oklahoma High-Speed Rail Initiative:
Tulsa--Oklahoma City Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan. The
proposed route would begin in Oklahoma City at the Santa Fe Depot and
proceed easterly toward Tulsa, terminating at the Union Station in
Tulsa. This route is an

important component of the South Central High-Speed Rail Corridor.
Passenger trains would travel at speeds up to 125 miles per hour. As
part of the EIS, various alternative rail line routes will be analyzed
including shared use options with the BNSF Railway, Union Pacific
Railroad, Stillwater Central Railroad and the Tulsa Sapulpa Union
Railway. Dedicated high-speed passenger rail lines and/or a combination
of dedicated and shared use corridors will also be considered. In
addition, the EIS will analyze the potential impacts of locations/
modifications of stations, power or fueling stations, and maintenance
facilities to support passenger rail operations.
    The EIS will complete an analysis of passenger rail alternatives in
the study area and evaluate the environmental impacts using a
combination of Geographic Information System (GIS) data, field
investigations and site visits/sampling where necessary. The primary
environmental resources located within the study area that may be
affected are: Agricultural, residential, commercial, and industrial
properties; streams and floodplains; wetlands; and open space. FRA and
ODOT will seek to avoid and minimize impacts to these resources, as
well as cultural resources and protected lands. Minimization and
mitigation measures will be identified and committed to within the EIS
where appropriate.
    In accordance with the NEPA, the FRA and ODOT will invite comments
and suggestions regarding the scope of the project from all interested
parties to ensure that all issues are addressed related to this
proposal and any significant impacts are identified. Letters describing
the proposed action and soliciting comments will be sent to appropriate
federal, state, and local agencies, Native American tribes, and private
organizations who might have previously expressed or who are known to
have an interest in this project. Federal agencies with jurisdiction by
law or special expertise with respect to potential environmental issues
will be requested to act as a Cooperating Agency in accordance with 40
CFR 150.16.
    ODOT will lead the outreach activities beginning with scoping
meetings (dates to be determined). Public involvement initiatives
including public meetings, project Web site, and outreach will be held
throughout the course of this study. Opportunities for public
participation will be announced through mailings, notices,
advertisements, press releases and a project Web site, accessible at
www.TulsaOKCRailCorridor.com. One or more public hearings will be held
after the draft EIS is released and made available for public and
agency review. Public notice will be given for the time and place of
public hearings.
    Comments or questions concerning this proposed action and the EIS
are invited from all interested parties and should be directed to the
FRA at the address provided above.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 15, 2013.
Corey Hill,
Director, Office of Passenger and Freight Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-12565 Filed 5-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 18, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32893-32895]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14981]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81128; File No. SR-ISE-2017-66]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Eliminate Fees
and Rebates for Trades Executed on June 30, 2017 in INET Launch Symbols

July 12, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 30, 2017, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees to eliminate
fees and rebates for trades executed on June 30, 2017 in INET Launch
Symbols.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.ise.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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Schedule of
Fees to eliminate fees and rebates for trades executed on June 30, 2017
in the following symbols: ACN, ACOR, AEO, AFSI, AMJ, AOBC, BKD, BTE,
BV, CBI, CCL, CLR, CME, CNQ, ADM, ADSK, AGNC, ASHR, BBT, BK, BSX, CIEN,
and IBM (``INET Launch Symbols'').\3\ This change is being made in
connection with the migration of the Exchange's trading system to the
Nasdaq INET technology, which began on June 12, 2017.\4\ On June 9,
2017, the Exchange filed a proposed rule change that eliminated fees
and rebates for trades in FX Options that began trading on INET with
the launch of the re-platformed trading system.\5\ In addition, on June
27, 2017 the Exchange filed another proposed rule change that
eliminated fees and rebates for trades in symbol KANG that began
trading on INET on that date.\6\ The Exchange now proposes to similarly
eliminate fees and rebates for trades in INET Launch Symbols executed
on the INET trading system on June 30, 2017. With this change, no fees
or rebates will be charged for executions on INET during the month of
June. Because the Exchange is eliminating fees and rebates for trades
in these products, trades in INET Launch Symbols executed on June 30,
2017 will not be counted towards a member's tier for June activity. In
addition, activity in the following INET Launch Symbols that are Select
Symbols \7\ will not be counted for purposes of determining Market
Maker Plus \8\ tiers: ADM, ADSK,

AGNC, ASHR, BBT, BK, BSX, CIEN, and IBM. The proposed change would
allow the Exchange to bill June fees solely based on activity traded on
the current T7 trading system, and is an inducement for members to
trade the first symbols launched on the INET trading system as there
would be no transaction fees for doing so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The INET Launch Symbols will begin trading on INET on June
30, 2017.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80432 (April 11,
2017), 82 FR 18191 (April 17, 2017) (SR-ISE-2017-03).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80999 (June 22,
2017) 82 FR 29354 (June 28, 2017) (SR-ISE-2017-59).
    \6\ See SR-ISE-2017-63 (publication pending).
    \7\ ``Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols listed
on the Nasdaq ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.
    \8\ A Market Maker Plus is a Market Maker who is on the National
Best Bid or National Best Offer a specified percentage of the time
for series trading between $0.03 and $3.00 (for options whose
underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was less
than or equal to $100) and between $0.10 and $3.00 (for options
whose underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was
greater than $100) in premium in each of the front two expiration
months. The specified percentage is at least 80% but lower than 85%
of the time for Tier 1, at least 85% but lower than 95% of the time
for Tier 2, and at least 95% of the time for Tier 3. A Market
Maker's single best and single worst quoting days each month based
on the front two expiration months, on a per symbol basis, will be
excluded in calculating whether a Market Maker qualifies for this
rebate, if doing so will qualify a Market Maker for the rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it is designed to
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to
eliminate fees and rebates for INET Launch Symbols during the initial
launch of the Exchange's re-platformed trading system. Eliminating fees
and rebates in the INET Launch System during the launch will simplify
the Exchange's billing and serve as an inducement for members to trade
the first symbols migrated to the INET trading system. Because the
Exchange is offering free executions in these symbols, volume executed
in INET Launch Symbols on June 30, 2017 will not be counted towards any
volume based tiers. Similar treatment was afforded to the first symbol
launched on the Nasdaq GEMX, LLC INET trading system,\11\ and also to
other symbols traded on ISE INET during the launch.\12\ For the same
reason, activity in the following INET Launch Symbols that are Select
Symbols will not be counted for purposes of determining Market Maker
Plus tiers. The Exchange believes that these changes will be attractive
to members that trade on the new INET trading system. The Exchange also
believes that this proposed change is not unfairly discriminatory as it
will apply to trades in INET Launch Symbols that are executed by all
members. As noted above, the INET Launch Symbols were selected for this
treatment as those products, together with the Exchange's proprietary
FX Options and KANG, will be the first symbols traded on the INET
trading system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80184 (March 9,
2017), 82 FR 13893 (March 15, 2017) (SR-ISEGemini-2017-09)
    \12\ See supra notes 5 and 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\13\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed
change is intended to ease members' transition to the re-platformed
INET trading system and is not designed to have any significant
competitive impact. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct their order flow
to competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to
remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described
above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes reflect this
competitive environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \15\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or
appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of
investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2017-66 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-66. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-66 and should be
submitted on or before August 8, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-14981 Filed 7-17-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 120 (Friday, June 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28656-28657]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13147]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0460; FRL-9963-23-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Requirements for Certified Applicators Using
1080 Collars for Livestock Protection (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Requirements for Certified
Applicators Using 1080 Collars for Livestock Protection to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the
ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2017. Public comments
were previously requested via the Federal Register on September 26,
2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an
additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR
is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 24, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2016-0460, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amaris Johnson, Field and External
Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Supporting documents for the Requirements
for Certified Applicators Using 1080 Collars for Livestock Protection
ICR (EPA ICR No. 1249.11, OMB Control No. 2070-0074), which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The information in this ICR enables the agency to obtain
information needed to track the use of registered Livestock Protection
Collar products which contain solutions of Sodium Monofluoroacetate
(Compound 1080). The mandatory record-keeping requirements for these
Compound 1080 collars were imposed by an administrative judge in
October 1982 and confirmed by the agency in 1983. It ensures the proper
use and function of the 1080 collar products, and demonstrates there is
no threat of unreasonable harm to non-target animals or people.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Certified pesticide applicators that
apply or hold inventory of 1080 collars, and the reporting agencies
(state government, NAICS 999200) responsible for implementing and
administering a 1080 collar monitoring program.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory.
    Estimated number of respondents: 33 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated burden: 1,431 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $64,213 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 513 hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This decrease reflects voluntary cancellation of the
1080 Livestock Protection Collar registration formerly held by the
South Dakota Department of Agriculture and the removal of estimated
burden associated with submission of annual Livestock Protection Collar
production reports erroneously included in the previous renewal of this
ICR. This resulted in a corresponding decrease in the associated
burden. This change is an adjustment.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2017-13147 Filed 6-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P