[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22690-22691]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10457]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0987]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Generic Clearance for
the Collection of Qualitative Data on Tobacco Products and
Communications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by June
15, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to [email protected]. All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0796.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber Sanford, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Data on Tobacco
Products and Communications

OMB Control Number 0910-0796--Extension

    Under section 1003(d)(2)(D) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (21 U.S.C. 393(d)(2)(D)), FDA is authorized to conduct educational
and public information programs.
    In conducting studies relating to the regulation and communications
related to tobacco products, FDA will need to employ formative
qualitative research including focus groups, usability testing, and/or
in-depth interviews (IDIs) to assess knowledge and perceptions about
tobacco-related topics with specific target audiences. The information
collected will serve three major purposes. First, formative research
will provide critical knowledge about target audiences. FDA must
understand people's knowledge and perceptions about tobacco-related
topics before developing survey/research questions as well as stimuli
for experimental studies. Second, by collecting communications
usability information, FDA will be able to serve and respond to the
ever-changing demands of consumers of tobacco products. Additionally,
we will be able to determine the best way to present messages. Third,
initial testing will allow FDA to assess consumer understanding of
survey/research questions and study stimuli. Focus groups and/or IDIs
with a sample of the target audience will allow FDA to refine the
survey/research questions and study stimuli while they are still in the
developmental stage. FDA will collect, analyze, and interpret
information gathered through this generic clearance in order to: (1)
Better understand characteristics of the target audience--its
perceptions, knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors--and use
these in the development of appropriate survey/research questions,
study stimuli, or communications; (2) more efficiently and effectively
design survey/research questions and study stimuli; and (3) more
efficiently and effectively design experimental studies.
    FDA is requesting approval of this new generic clearance for
collecting information through the use of qualitative methods (i.e.,
individual interviews, small group discussions, and focus groups) for
studies involving all tobacco products regulated by FDA. This
information will be used as a first step to explore concepts of
interest and assist in the development of quantitative study proposals,
complementing other important research efforts at FDA. This information
may also be used to help identify and develop communication messages,
which may be used in education campaigns. Focus groups play an
important role in gathering information because they allow for an in-
depth understanding of individual attitudes, beliefs, motivations, and
feelings. Focus group research serves the narrowly defined need for
direct and informal public opinion on a specific topic. In the Federal
Register of November 17, 2017 (82 FR 54351), FDA published a 60-day
notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of
information. FDA received one comment by a private citizen that was
PRA-related.
    (Comment) The commenter stated that FDA should use the data we have
collected in the past instead of collecting new information. The
comment does not go in detail or provide any alternatives.
    (Response) This collection is a valuable tool for conducting
research. The studies FDA has conducted through this collection of
information have been essential in helping FDA meet its mission as a
science-based regulatory agency and implementing the Family Smoking
Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Pub. L. 111-31). Future submissions
submitted under this generic clearance will continue to assist FDA in
its mission to protect and promote public health.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Number of
              Type of interview                   Number of     responses per   Total  annual        Average  burden per  response          Total hours
                                                 respondents     respondent       responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In-Person Individual IDIs....................           1,092               1           1,092  1........................................           1,092
IDI Screener.................................           1,800               1           1,800  .083 (5 minutes).........................             149
Focus Group Interviews.......................           4,701               1           4,701  1.5......................................           7,052
Focus Group Screener.........................           3,996               1           3,996  .25 (15 minutes).........................             999
Usability Testing............................           2,322               1           2,322  .5 (30 minutes)..........................           1,161
Usability Testing Screener...................           2,028               1           2,028  .083 (5 minutes).........................             168
                                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .........................................          10,621
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The number of respondents to be included in each new pretest may
vary, depending on the nature of the material or message being tested
and the target audience. Table 1 provides examples of the types of
studies that may be administered and estimated burden levels during a
3-year period. Time to read, view, or listen to the message being
tested is built into the ``Hours per Response'' figures.
    FDA has updated the estimated burden that was published in the 60-
day notice. The estimated burden for this collection has increased by
4,437 hours from 6,184 to 10,621. FDA attributes this increase to
adding usability testing, and increasing the overall number of studies
planned the next 3 years.

    Dated: May 10, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-10457 Filed 5-15-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 155 (Wednesday, August 12, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 48386]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19993]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement:
[To Be Published]

STATUS:  Closed Meeting.

PLACE:  100 F Street NE., Washington, DC.

DATE AND TIME OF PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED MEETING:  Thursday, August 13,
2015.

CHANGE IN THE MEETING:  Cancellation of Meeting.
    The Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 2:00
p.m. has been cancelled.
    For further information please contact the Office of the Secretary
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 10, 2015.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19993 Filed 8-10-15; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 48300]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22390]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81853; File No. SR-CBOE-2017-057]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission
Action on Proposed Rule Change To Amend Interpretation and Policy .07
of Exchange Rule 4.11, Position Limits, To Increase the Position Limits
for Options on Certain ETFs

October 11, 2017.
    On August 15, 2017, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Interpretation and
Policy .07 of Exchange Rule 4.11, Position Limits, to increase the
position limits for options on the following exchange traded funds and
exchange traded notes: iShares China Large-Cap ETF, iShares MSCI EAFE
ETF, iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF, iShares Russell 2000 ETF,
iShares MSCI Brazil Capped ETF, iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond Fund
ETF, iPath S&P 500 VIX Short-Term Futures ETN, PowerShares QQQ Trust,
and iShares MSCI Japan ETF. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on August 31, 2017.\3\ The Commission
received no comments regarding the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81483 (August 25,
2017), 82 FR 41457.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day for this filing is October 15, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission
action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds that it is
appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on
the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the
proposed rule change.
    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ and for
the reasons stated above, the Commission designates November 29, 2017,
as the date by which the Commission should either approve or
disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-CBOE-2017-057).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

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

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-22390 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42593-42598]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14001]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0169; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00462-T;
Amendment 39-22460; AD 2023-12-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is 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 determination that new or more restrictive
airworthiness

limitations are necessary. This AD requires revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate more
restrictive airworthiness limitations. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 7, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 7,
2023.

ADDRESSES:
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0169; 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, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), 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.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com; website
bombardier.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
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-0169.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabriel Kim, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-
228-7300; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier,
Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and -1A11 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on February 27, 2023 (88 FR 12276). The NPRM was
prompted by AD CF-2022-15, dated April 7, 2022, issued by Transport
Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada (referred to after
this as the MCAI). The MCAI states that during a design review, it was
discovered that three candidate certification maintenance requirements
(CCMRs) which were dispositioned as maintenance review board report
(MRBR) tasks had reached or exceeded the limit for escalation and that
exceeding the CCMR limitations could result in unsafe conditions. The
MCAI also states that Bombardier issued certification maintenance
requirements (CMRs) to prevent escalation and reduce the interval, as
applicable, for these tasks, which consist of a functional test of the
landing-gear emergency extension; an operational test of the brake
shutoff valve; and a visual check of the passenger-door vent-flap
mechanism.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program as applicable to incorporate more
restrictive airworthiness limitations. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the following unsafe conditions:
     Dormant failure of the landing gear emergency extension
system, which could lead to failure to extend the landing gear when
normal gear extension has failed. This unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in an annunciated failure to extend both main
landing gears or all landing gears.
     Dormant failure of the brake shut off valve in the open
state. This unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
uncommanded braking during takeoff.
     Dormant failure of the vent flap assembly where it fails
in the closed position, which could result in the failure to prevent
the initiation of cabin pressurization when the passenger door is not
fully closed, latched and locked. This unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in the passenger door opening under pressure on
ground or during flight.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0169.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from an individual who supported the NPRM
without change.
    The FAA received additional comments from NetJets. The following
presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to
each comment.

Request for Clarification on Repetitive Intervals

    NetJets requested that the FAA clarify the repetitive intervals for
the CMR tasks after initial accomplishment. NetJets pointed to the
language in paragraph B of Transport Canada AD CF-2022-15, which states
that after doing the initial actions at the time specified in Table 1
of Transport Canada AD CF-2022-15 (similar to Figure 1 to paragraph (g)
of this AD), accomplishing the CMR tasks are to be done at the
intervals specified in the applicable TLMC manual identified in Table 2
of the Transport Canada AD CF-2022-15 (similar to Figure 2 to paragraph
(g) of this AD).
    The FAA agrees that the repetitive interval is not specified in
this AD; however, operators can find this information in the
corresponding TLMC as identified in Figure 2 to paragraph (g) of this
AD. Although Transport Canada AD CF-2022-15 requires both revising the
maintenance program to include limitations, and doing certain
repetitive actions and/or maintaining CDCCLs, this AD only requires the
revision of the maintenance program. Requiring a revision of the
maintenance program rather than requiring individual repetitive actions
or maintaining CDCCLs requires operators to record AD compliance only
at the time the revision to the program is made. Repetitive actions or
maintaining the CDCCLs specified in the airworthiness limitations must
be complied with in accordance with 14 CFR 91.403(c). This AD has not
been changed in this regard.

Request To Clarify Initial Compliance Time for Certain Airplanes

    NetJets requested clarification on initial compliance times for
airplanes having more than 1,550 flight hours but have not previously
accomplished the specific CMR or associated airplane maintenance manual
(AMM) task.
    The FAA agrees to clarify. For an airplane that has more than 1,550
flight hours, but has not previously accomplished an associated task,
the initial compliance time is within 30 days after the effective date
of this AD. Paragraph (g) of this AD specifies the initial compliance
time is within the applicable time specified in Figure 1 to paragraph
(g) of this AD, or within 30 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later. For example, for task 32-34-00-101, an airplane
that has more than 1,550 flight hours is beyond the initial compliance
time specified in Figure 1 to paragraph (g) of the AD, so the ``within
30 days after the effective date of this AD'' would come later. This AD
has not been changed in this regard.

Conclusion

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another

country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the
comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting
this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial
changes, 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 the following AMM tasks from Bombardier.
     Tasks 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension;'' 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake
Shutoff Valve;'' and 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism;'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the
Bombardier Global Express Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC),
Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 34, dated March 1, 2022. (For
obtaining the tasks for Bombardier Global Express TLMC, Publication No.
BD-700 TLMC, use Document Identification No. GL 700 TLMC.)
     Tasks 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension;'' 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake
Shutoff Valve;'' and 52-11-00-101, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism;'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the
Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS TLMC,
Revision 21, dated March 1, 2022. (For obtaining the tasks for
Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS TLMC,
use Document Identification No. GL XRS TLMC.)
     Tasks 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension;'' 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake
Shutoff Valve;'' and 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism;'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the
Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 25,
dated March 1, 2022. (For obtaining the tasks for Bombardier Global
5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, use Document Identification No.
GL 5000 TLMC.)
     Tasks 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension;'' 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake
Shutoff Valve;'' and 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism;'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the
Bombardier Global 5000 Featuring Global Vision Flight Deck (GVFD) TLMC,
Publication No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC, Revision 15, dated March 1, 2022.
(For obtaining the tasks for Bombardier Global 5000 Featuring GVFD
TLMC, Publication No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC, use Document Identification
No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC.)
     Tasks 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension;'' 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake
Shutoff Valve;'' and 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism;'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the
Bombardier Global 6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC, Revision 15,
dated March 1, 2022. (For obtaining the tasks for Bombardier Global
6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC, use Document Identification
No. GL 6000 TLMC.)
    This service information specifies more restrictive airworthiness
limitations for CMRs. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different airplane models in different configurations.
    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

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 413 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this AD:
    The FAA has determined that revising the maintenance or inspection
program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although the
agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator to operator.
Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes
for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-operator
estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, the
agency estimates the average total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90
work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

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:

2023-12-02 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-22460; Docket No. FAA-
2023-0169; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00462-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective August 7, 2023.

(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 9002 through 9860 inclusive, 9862 through 9871 inclusive,
9873 through 9879 inclusive, 60005, 60024, 60030, 60032, 60037,
60043, 60045, 60049, 60056, 60057, 60061 and 60068.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that more restrictive
airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe conditions identified in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (3) of this AD.
    (1) Dormant failure of the landing gear emergency extension
system, which could lead to failure to extend the landing gear when
normal gear extension has failed. This unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in an annunciated failure to extend both
main landing gears or all landing gears.
    (2) Dormant failure of the brake shut off valve in the open
state. This unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
uncommanded braking during take-off.
    (3) Dormant failure of the vent flap assembly where it fails in
the closed position, which could result in the failure to prevent
the initiation of cabin pressurization when the passenger door is
not fully closed, latched and locked. This unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in the passenger door opening under pressure
on ground or during flight.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 30 days from the effective date of this AD, revise the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate the information specified in the certification
maintenance requirements (CMR) tasks identified in Figure 1 to
paragraph (g) of this AD of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,''
of the applicable Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC) manuals
identified in Figure 2 to paragraph (g) of this AD. The initial
compliance time for doing the tasks is at the applicable time
specified in Figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 30 days
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

Figure 1 to paragraph (g)--New CMR Tasks
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03JY23.003

Figure 2 to paragraph (g)--Applicable TLMCs
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03JY23.004

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

(h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the
actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

(i) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
International Validation Branch, mail it to ATTN: Program Manager,

Continuing Operational Safety, at the address identified in
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD or email to: [email protected]. If
mailing information, also submit information by email. Before using
any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight
Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada or Bombardier, Inc.'s Transport
Canada Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO,
the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(j) Additional Information

    (1) Refer to Transport Canada AD CF-2022-15, dated April 7,
2022, for related information. This Transport Canada AD may be found
in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-0169.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Gabriel Kim,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Task 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global Express Time Limit/Maintenance Check manual
(TLMC), Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 34, dated March 1,
2022.
    Note 1 to paragraph (k)(2)(i): For obtaining the tasks specified
in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through (iii) of this AD for Bombardier
Global Express TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 34, dated
March 1, 2022, use Document Identification No. GL 700 TLMC.
    (ii) Task 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake Shutoff
Valve,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the Bombardier
Global Express TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 34, dated
March 1, 2022.
    (iii) Task 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global Express TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC,
Revision 34, dated March 1, 2022.
    (iv) Task 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS
TLMC, Revision 21, dated March 1, 2022.
    Note 2 to paragraph (k)(2)(iv): For obtaining the tasks
specified in paragraphs (k)(2)(iv) through (vi) of this AD for
Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS TLMC,
use Document Identification No. GL XRS TLMC.
    (v) Task 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake Shutoff
Valve,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the Bombardier
Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS TLMC, Revision
21, dated March 1, 2022.
    (vi) Task 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS
TLMC, Revision 21, dated March 1, 2022.
    (vii) Task 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC,
Revision 25, dated March 1, 2022.
    Note 3 to paragraph (k)(2)(vii): For obtaining the tasks
specified in paragraphs (k)(2)(vii) through (ix) of this AD for
Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, use
Document Identification No. GL 5000 TLMC.
    (viii) Task 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake
Shutoff Valve,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the
Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision
25, dated March 1, 2022.
    (ix) Task 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC,
Revision 25, dated March 1, 2022.
    (x) Task 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global 5000 Featuring Global Vision Flight Deck
(GVFD) TLMC, Publication No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC, Revision 15, dated
March 1, 2022.
    Note 4 to paragraph (k)(2)(x): For obtaining the tasks specified
in paragraphs (k)(2)(x) through (xii) of this AD for Bombardier
Global 5000 Featuring GVFD TLMC, Publication No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC,
use Document Identification No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC.
    (xi) Task 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake Shutoff
Valve,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the Bombardier
Global 5000 Featuring GVFD TLMC, Publication No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC,
Revision 15, dated March 1, 2022.
    (xii) Task 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global 5000 Featuring GVFD, Publication No. GL 5000
GVFD TLMC, Revision 15, dated March 1, 2022.
    (xiii) Task 32-34-00-101, ``Functional Test of the Landing-Gear
Emergency Extension,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global 6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC,
Revision 15, dated March 1, 2022.
    Note 5 to paragraph (k)(2)(xiii): For obtaining the tasks
specified in paragraphs (xiii) through (xv) of this AD for
Bombardier Global 6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC, use
Document Identification No. GL 6000 TLMC.
    (xiv) Task 32-43-25-101, ``Operational Test of the Brake Shutoff
Valve,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of the Bombardier
Global 6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC, Revision 15, dated
March 1, 2022.
    (xv) Task 52-11-00-106, ``Visual Check of the Passenger-Door
Vent-Flap Mechanism,'' of Part 2, ``Airworthiness Limitations,'' of
the Bombardier Global 6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC,
Revision 15, dated March 1, 2022.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com; website
bombardier.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 protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on June 12, 2023.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-14001 Filed 6-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 38711]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15391]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1665-001.
    Applicants: Novo BioPower, LLC.
    Description: Amendment to Novo Biopower, LLC Market-Based Rate
Tariff to be effective 7/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/18/13.
    Accession Number: 20130618-5124.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1722-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Due West PPA--RS 329 to be effective 7/2/2012.
    Filed Date: 6/18/13.
    Accession Number: 20130618-5089.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/9/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1723-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Prosperity PPA--RS 333 to be effective 7/2/2012.
    Filed Date: 6/18/13.
    Accession Number: 20130618-5093.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/9/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1724-000.
    Applicants: Nevada Power Company.
    Description: Rate Schedule No. 133 Transmission Service Agreement--
ORNI 47 LLC to be effective 1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 6/18/13.
    Accession Number: 20130618-5132.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/9/13.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 19, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15391 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 13 (Friday, January 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4192-4193]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00996]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Ford Motor Company

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Ford Motor Company's (Ford)
petition for an exemption of the Edge vehicle line in accordance with
Sec.  543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft
Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has
determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as
standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). Ford
also requested confidential treatment of specific information in its
petition. The agency will address Ford's request for confidential
treatment by separate letter.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2014 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated October 15, 2012, Ford
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the MY 2014 Ford Edge vehicle
line. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking pursuant
to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard,
based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard equipment
for an entire vehicle line.
    Under Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant
exemptions for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, Ford
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design,
and location of the components of the antitheft device for the Edge
vehicle line. Ford stated that the 2014 Edge will be equipped with the
Ford SecuriLock device (also known as the Passive Antitheft System or
PATS) as standard equipment or the Ford Intelligent Access with Push
Button Start (IAwPB) antitheft device as optional equipment. Ford
further stated that the Edge vehicles with base trim (SE) will only be
offered with PATS. However, the entire vehicle line will be installed
with a passive, electronic immobilizer device using encrypted
transponder technology. Key components of the Securilock/PATS antitheft
device will include an electronic transponder key, powertrain control
module, transceiver module, ignition lock, and a passive immobilizer.
Key components of the IAwPB device are electronic keyfob, remote
function actuator (RFA), body control module (BCM) or Smart Power
Distribution Junction Box (SPDJB), the PEPS/RFA module, the power train
control module and a passive immobilizer. Ford stated that its MY 2014
Edge vehicle line will also be equipped with several other standard
antitheft features common to Ford vehicles (i.e., hood release located
inside the vehicle, counterfeit resistant VIN labels and secondary
VINs, cabin accessibility only with the use of a valid key fob or
keycode). Ford further stated that there will also be a separate
perimeter alarm available on its Edge vehicle line. The perimeter alarm
activates a visible and audible alarm if unauthorized access is
attempted. Ford's submission is considered a complete petition as
required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the general requirements
contained in Sec.  543.5 and the specific content requirements of Sec.
543.6.
    In the SecuriLock device, when the ignition key is turned to the
``Run/Start'' position, the transceiver module reads the ignition key
code and transmits an encrypted message from the keycode to the control
module, which then determines key validity and authorizes engine
starting by sending a separate encrypted message to the powertrain
control module (PCM). In the IAwPB device, when the ``StartStop''
button is pressed, the transceiver module reads the key code and
transmits an encrypted message from the keycode to the control module
to determine validity and authorizes engine starting by sending a
separate encrypted message to the body control module (BCM), and the
PCM. Ford stated that the powertrain will function only if the keycode
matches the unique identification keycode previously programmed into
the BCM/RFA. In both devices, if the codes do not match, the vehicle
will be inoperable. Ford pointed out that in addition to the programmed
key, there are three modules that must be matched together in order to
start the vehicle adding even an additional level of security to the
IAwPB device.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Ford
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Ford
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Ford provided a
detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the device is
reliable and durable since the device complied with its own specified
requirements for each test.
    Ford also stated that incorporation of several features in both
devices further supports reliability and durability of the devices.
Specifically, some of those features include: Encrypted communication
between the transponder, control function and the power train control
module; no moving parts; 18 quintillion possible codes making key
duplication virtually impossible; inability to mechanically override
the device to start the vehicle; and the body control module/remote
function actuator and the power train control module share security
data that during vehicle assembly form matched modules that if
separated from each other will not function in other vehicles.
    Ford compared the device proposed for its vehicle line with other
devices which NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-
marking requirements. Ford stated that it believes that the standard
installation of either the SecuriLock device or the IAwPB device would
be an effective deterrent against vehicle theft.
    Ford stated that it installed the SecuriLock device on all MY 1996
Ford Mustang GT and Cobra models and other selected models. Ford stated
that in the 1997 model, the SecuriLock device was extended to the
complete Ford Mustang vehicle line as standard equipment. Ford also
stated that according to the National Insurance

Crime Bureau (NICB) theft statistics, MY 1997 Mustangs installed with
the SecuriLock device showed a 70% reduction in theft rate compared to
the MY 1995 Mustangs.
    Ford also reported that beginning with MY 2010, the SecuriLock
device was installed as standard equipment on all of its North American
Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles but was offered as optional
equipment on its 2010 F-series Super Duty pickups, Econoline and
Transit Connect vehicles. Ford further stated that beginning with MY
2010, the IAwPB was standard equipment on the Lincoln MKT vehicles and
starting with MY 2011, the device was offered as standard equipment on
the Lincoln MKX and optionally on the Lincoln MKS, Taurus, Edge,
Explorer and the Focus vehicles. Starting with 2013, the IAwPB was
offered as standard equipment on the Lincoln MKZ and offered as
optional equipment on the Ford Fusion, C-Max and Escape vehicles. Theft
rate data is not available for model years' (MYs') 2011-2013.
    Ford stated that both antitheft devices are of the same design and
performance as that of the MY 2011 Ford Explorer vehicle line. Ford was
granted an exemption for the Explorer vehicle line on May 28, 2010 by
NHTSA (See 75 FR 30103) beginning with its MY 2011 vehicles. Since the
agency granted Ford's exemption for its MY 2011 Explorer vehicle line,
there has been no available theft rate information for this vehicle.
The Explorer was granted an exemption from the parts marking
requirements on May 28, 2010 (75 FR 30103). Ford also referenced theft
rate data published by NHTSA showing that the theft rates for the Edge
is lower than the median theft rate for all vehicles from MY's 2000-
2009. Ford stated that since the SecuriLock or the IAwPB devices are
the primary theft deterrents on Ford Edge vehicles, it believes that
the very low theft rates are likely to continue or improve in the
future. The theft rate data for the MY 2010 Ford Edge is 0.8783 and the
average theft rate using three MYs' (2008-2010) data is 1.1655.
    The agency agrees that the device is substantially similar to
devices installed on other vehicle lines for which the agency has
already granted exemptions.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7 (b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of Part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part 541. The agency
finds that Ford has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Ford Edge vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR part 541). This conclusion is based on the information Ford
provided about its device.
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Ford on the device,
the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Edge vehicle line
is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle
theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). The agency concludes that the
device will provide the five types of performance listed in Sec.
543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts
of unauthorized persons to enter or operate a vehicle by means other
than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by
unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and durability of
the device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Ford's
petition for exemption for the Edge vehicle line from the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541,
appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft
Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains
publication requirements incident to the disposition of all Part 543
petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product
nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted
and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order
to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from
the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If Ford decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5 and
541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Ford wishes in the future to modify the device
on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a Part 543
exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under
this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the line's
exemption is based. Further, Part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting Part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

    Issued on: January 11, 2013.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2013-00996 Filed 1-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 20817]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8298]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-1383-000]

Diamond State Generation Partners, LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Diamond State Generation Partners, LLC's application for market-based
rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 19, 2012.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 30, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-8298 Filed 4-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 187 (Thursday, September 26, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50766-50767]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20553]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R05-RCRA-2018-0375; FRL-10000-08-Region 5]

Ohio: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final authorization.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is granting Ohio
final authorization for changes to its hazardous waste program under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Agency published
a proposed rule on June 11, 2019 and provided for public comment. No
comments were received on the proposed revisions. No further
opportunity for comment will be provided.

DATES: This final authorization is effective September 26, 2019.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R05-RCRA-2018-0375. All documents in the docket are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available electronically
through http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Gromnicki, Ohio Regulatory
Specialist, US EPA Region 5, LL-17J, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. What changes to Ohio's hazardous waste program is EPA authorizing
with this action?

    On February 19, 2019, Ohio submitted a complete program revision
application seeking authorization of changes to its hazardous waste
program in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. EPA now makes a final
decision that Ohio's hazardous waste program revisions that are being
authorized are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program, and therefore satisfy all of the requirements
necessary to qualify for final authorization. For a list of State rules
being authorized with this final authorization, please see the proposed
rule published in the June 11, 2019 Federal Register at 84 FR 27057.

B. What is codification and is EPA codifying the Ohio's hazardous waste
program as authorized in this action?

    Codification is the process of placing citations and references to
the State's statutes and regulations that comprise the State's
authorized hazardous waste program into the Code of Federal
Regulations. EPA does this by adding those citations and references to
the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. EPA is not codifying the
authorization of Ohio's revisions at this time. However, EPA reserves
the ability to amend 40 CFR part 272, subpart KK, for the authorization
of Ohio's program changes at a later date.

C. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final authorization revises Ohio's authorized hazardous waste
management program pursuant to Section 3006 of RCRA and imposes no
requirements other than those currently imposed by State law. For
further information on how this authorization complies with applicable
executive orders and statutory provisions, please see the proposed rule
published in the June 11, 2019, Federal Register at 84 FR 27057. The
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this document and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This
final action will be effective September 26, 2019.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of sections
2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).

    Dated: September 4, 2019.
Cheryl L. Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019-20553 Filed 9-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 151 (Monday, August 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38263-38264]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16775]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1983-0002; FRL-9980-82--Region 10]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Frontier Hard Chrome, Inc.
Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 announces
the deletion of the Frontier Hard Chrome, Inc. (FHC) Superfund Site
(Site) located in Vancouver, Washington, from the National Priorities
List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and
the State of Washington, through the Department of Ecology, have
determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been
completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions
under Superfund.

DATES: This action is effective August 6, 2018.

ADDRESSES:
    Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1983-0002. All documents in the docket
are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the site information repositories. Locations, contacts,
phone numbers and viewing hours are:
    Records Center, U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155,
Seattle, Washington,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
    Vancouver Community Library, 901 C Street, Vancouver, Washington,
360-906-5000, between 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday to Thursday, or
10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Friday to Sunday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremy Jennings, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 155, ECL-122, Seattle, Washington 98101-3123, telephone:
206-553-2724, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site to be deleted from the NPL is:
Frontier Hard Chrome, Inc., Vancouver, Washington. A Notice of Intent
to Delete for this Site was published in the Federal Register (83 FR
23409-23412) on May 21, 2018.
    The closing date for comments on the Notice of Intent to Delete was
June 20, 2018. One anonymous comment was received. The comment did not
oppose deletion of the Site from the NPL, and included a non-Site
specific gratuitous statement about the EPA Administrator. Since the
comment was not adverse to the intended EPA action, there is no need to
evaluate or respond. EPA continues to believe that the Site meets the
National Contingency Plan deletion criteria, and is proceeding with
deletion of the Site from the NPL. A Responsiveness Summary was
prepared and placed in both the docket, EPA-HQ-SFUND-1983-0002,
www.regulations.gov and in the site information repositories listed
above.
    EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that appear to present a
significant risk to public health, welfare, or the environment.
Deletion from the NPL does not preclude further remedial action.
Whenever there is a significant release from a site deleted from the
NPL, the deleted site may be restored to the NPL without application of
the hazard ranking system. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not
affect responsible party liability in the unlikely event that future
conditions warrant further actions.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.

Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as
follows:

PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION
CONTINGENCY PLAN

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 13626,
77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3
CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.,
p. 193.

Appendix B to Part 300--[Amended]

0
2. Table 1 of appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the listing
under Washington for ``Frontier Hard Chrome, Inc''.

[FR Doc. 2018-16775 Filed 8-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 86 (Monday, May 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26508-26510]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09372]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88761; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2020-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 1.1
To Modify the Definition of ``UTP Derivative Securities Product'' and
Rule 5.1-E(a) To Incorporate the Modified Definition of ``UTP Exchange
Traded Product''

April 28, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on April 16, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``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 self-regulatory organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 (1) Rule 1.1 to modify the
definition of ``UTP Derivative Securities Product'' and (2) Rule 5.1-
E(a) to incorporate the definition of UTP Derivative Securities Product
as set forth in revised Rule 1.1. The proposed rule change is available

on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend (1) Rule 1.1 to modify the
definition of ``UTP Derivative Securities Product'' and (2) Rule 5.1-
E(a) to incorporate the definition of UTP Derivative Securities Product
as set forth in revised Rule 1.1.
Rule 1.1
    Rule 1.1(k) currently provides that the term ``Derivative
Securities Product'' means a security that meets the definition of
``derivative securities product'' in Rule 19b-4(e) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and a ``UTP Derivative Securities Product'' means
a Derivative Securities Product that trades on the Exchange pursuant to
unlisted trading privileges. The Exchange proposes to amend the
definition of ``UTP Derivative Securities Product'' to mean one of the
following Derivative Securities Products that trades on the Exchange
pursuant to unlisted trading privileges: Equity Linked Notes,
Investment Company Units, Index-Linked Exchangeable Notes, Equity Gold
Shares, Equity Index-Linked Securities, Commodity-Linked Securities,
Currency-Linked Securities, Fixed-Income Index-Linked Securities,
Futures-Linked Securities, Multifactor-Index-Linked Securities, Trust
Certificates, Currency and Index Warrants, Portfolio Depository
Receipts, Trust Issued Receipts, Commodity-Based Trust Shares, Currency
Trust Shares, Commodity Index Trust Shares, Commodity Futures Trust
Shares, Partnership Units, Paired Trust Shares, Trust Units, Managed
Fund Shares, Managed Trust Securities, and Managed Portfolio Shares.
    This proposed change is based on NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE
National'') Rule 1.1(m) and NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE Chicago'') Rule
1.1(k).\4\ This list is designed to align the rules of the Exchange
with the rules of NYSE National and NYSE Chicago and to enumerate the
types of Derivative Securities Products to which the Exchange would
extend unlisted trading privileges (``UTP'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ NYSE National and NYSE Chicago have filed proposed rule
changes for immediate effectiveness to amend their respective rules
to add Managed Portfolio Shares to their definitions of UTP Exchange
Traded Products. See SR-NYSENAT-2020-16 (filed April 16, 2020) and
SR-NYSECHX-2020-13 (filed April 16, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule 5.1-E(a)
    Rule 5.1-E(a)(1) provides that the Exchange may extend UTP to any
security that is an NMS stock (as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS
under the Act) that is listed on another national securities exchange.
Rule 5.1-E(a)(2) further specifies that a UTP Derivative Security,
which is defined in that Rule as a ``new derivative securities
product'' as defined in Rule 19b-4(e) under the Exchange Act and traded
pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act, would be subject to the
additional rules enumerated in Rule 5.1-E(a)(2)(i)-(v).
    Because the Exchange proposes to modify the definition of UTP
Derivative Securities Product in Rule 1.1(k) to conform to the rules of
NYSE National and NYSE Chicago, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule
5.1-E(a)(2) to eliminate redundant text and cross reference the term
``UTP Derivative Securities Product'' as it is defined in Rule 1.1.
This proposed change would also conform Rule 5.1-E(a) with the
comparable NYSE National rule.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, because it
is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market, to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) & (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposed rule change ensures that Rule
1.1 identifies and publicly states the complete list of Derivative
Securities Products to which UTP may be extended for trading on the
Exchange. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change
removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open
market, promotes just and equitable principles of trade, and protects
investors and the public interest by promoting consistency with the
rules of the Exchange's affiliated markets and by providing additional
specificity, clarity, and transparency in the Exchange's rules with
respect to the Derivative Securities Products that may be traded on a
UTP basis on the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend Rule 5.1-E(a)(2)
also removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and
open market, promotes just and equitable principles of trade, and
protects investors and the public interest because it proposes to
conform this rule governing the trading of UTP Derivative Securities
Products with the comparable rule of the Exchange's affiliated market,
NYSE National, which has been approved by the Commission.\7\ The
proposed rule change would also remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and
protect investors and the public interest by promoting continuity
across affiliated exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In its Order approving the NYSE National rule on which this
proposed change is based, the Commission found that the NYSE
National rules set forth an ``appropriate framework for the trading
of Exchange Traded Products on a UTP basis on the Exchange'' and are
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. See Securities and
Exchange Act Release No. 83289 (May 17, 2018), 83 FR 23968 (May 23,
2018), at 23975.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change would
conform Exchange rules, as described herein, with the comparable rules
of its affiliated exchanges, NYSE National and NYSE Chicago, and permit
UTP trading of Derivative Securities Products on the Exchange in a
manner consistent with its affiliated exchanges.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to 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) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \10\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\11\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission notes that
the Exchange's proposal would conform the Exchange's rules, as
described herein, to the corresponding rules of its affiliated
exchanges.\12\ Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposal
raises no new or novel regulatory issues and waiver of the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest. The Commission therefore waives the 30-day operative
delay and designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon
filing.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ See NYSE National Rules 1.1 and 5.1 and NYSE Chicago Rule
1.1.
    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also 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, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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-NYSEArca-2020-34 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-NYSEArca-2020-34. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2020-34 and should be submitted
on or before May 26, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-09372 Filed 5-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P