[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 193 (Monday, October 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60207-60211]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23703]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73266; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2014-095]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Provide a New Optional
Functionality to Minimum Quantity Orders

September 30, 2014.
    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 September 18, 2014, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ proposes a rule change to provide a new optional
functionality to Minimum Quantity Orders. The text of the proposed rule
change is available from NASDAQ's Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/Filings/, at NASDAQ's principal office, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NASDAQ 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. NASDAQ has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to provide a new optional functionality
to Minimum Quantity Orders.\3\ A Minimum Quantity Order allows a market
participant to specify a minimum share amount at which it will execute.
For example, a market participant seeking to buy or sell a large
position may desire to execute only if a large quantity of shares can
be traded to reduce the price impact of the security being bought or
sold. A Minimum Quantity Order will not execute unless the volume of
contra-side liquidity available to execute against the order meets or
exceeds the designated minimum. When a Minimum Quantity Order is
received by the Exchange, it will execute immediately \4\ if there is
sufficient liquidity available on the Exchange within the limit price
of the Minimum Quantity Order. Furthermore, the order will execute if
the sum of the shares of one or more orders is equal to or greater than
its minimum quantity. In the case of multiple orders being aggregated
to meet the minimum

quantity, each contra-side order creates a separate execution and thus
there can be multiple executions that, in aggregate, equal or exceed
the minimum quantity. If a Minimum Quantity Order does not execute
immediately due to lack of contra-side liquidity that is equal to or
greater than the designated minimum, the order will post \5\ to the
NASDAQ order book as a Non-Displayed Order.\6\ Once posted, a Minimum
Quantity Order will execute only if an incoming order is marketable
against the resting Minimum Quantity Order and is equal to or greater
than the minimum quantity set on the resting Minimum Quantity Order.
Once posted, multiple potential executions cannot be aggregated to meet
the minimum quantity requirement of the Minimum Quantity Order. If a
Minimum Quantity Order executes partially and the number of shares
remaining is less than the minimum quantity of the order, the minimum
quantity of the order is reduced to the remaining share size. If a
Minimum Quantity Order is received that is marketable against a resting
contra-side order with size that does not meet the minimum quantity
requirement, the Minimum Quantity Order will be posted on the book as a
Non-Displayed Order at the locking price.\7\ For example, if a Minimum
Quantity Order is received to buy 1,000 shares at $10 with a minimum
quantity restriction of 500 shares and there is a resting sell order
for 300 shares at $10, the Minimum Quantity Order will be posted as a
Non-Displayed Order at $10. Furthermore, the Exchange notes that a
subsequent order without a minimum quantity restriction that is
marketable against the resting contra-side interest will result in an
execution because the market participant entering the Minimum Quantity
Order has expressed its intention not to execute against liquidity
below a certain minimum size, and therefore cedes execution priority to
any new orders that would otherwise have a lower priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Rule 4751(f)(5).
    \4\ A Minimum Quantity Order would satisfy the requirements of
Regulation NMS and not trade through a protected quotation.
    \5\ Orders post to the NASDAQ book only if they are designated
with a time in force that allows for posting. For example, an IOC
order never posts to the book.
    \6\ A Non-Displayed Order is a limit order that is not displayed
in the NASDAQ system, but nevertheless remains available for
potential execution against all incoming orders until executed in
full or cancelled. See Rule 4751(e)(3). Minimum Quantity Orders are
always Non-Displayed when posted on the Exchange book.
    \7\ SEC Rule 610(d) under Regulation NMS restricts displayed
quotations that lock or cross protected quotations in NMS stock, but
does not apply to non-displayed trading interest, like a resting
Minimum Quantity Order. See 17 CFR 242.610(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ is proposing to add a new optional functionality to further
enhance the utility of Minimum Quantity Orders to market
participants.\8\ In particular, some market participants have noted
that they avoid sending large Minimum Quantity Orders to NASDAQ out of
concern that such orders may interact against small orders entered by
professional traders. These participants are concerned that such
interaction may negatively impact the execution of their larger orders.
Often institutional orders are much larger in size than the average
order in the marketplace. Furthermore, in order to facilitate the
liquidation or acquisition of a large position, multiple orders are
submitted into the market, which although larger than the average order
in the market, only represent a small proportion of the overall
institutional position to be executed. The various strategies used to
execute large size are based on a desire to limit price movement of the
stock the institution is pursuing. Executing in small sizes, even if in
aggregate it meets a minimum quantity designation, may impact the
market such that the additional orders that the institution has yet to
submit to the market may be more costly to execute. If an institution
is able to execute in larger sizes, the contra-party to the execution
is less likely to be a participant that reacts to short term changes in
the stock price and as such the price impact to the stock could be less
acute when larger individual executions are obtained by the
institution.\9\ As a consequence of this concern, these orders are
often executed away from the Exchange in dark pools, at least some of
which have the functionality proposed herein,\10\ or via broker-dealer
internalization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The option is available at the port level. Accordingly, all
orders entered through a particular port will receive the selected
functionality. All trading ports default to the current
functionality.
    \9\ The Commission has long recognized this concern: ``Another
type of implicit transaction cost reflected in the price of a
security is short-term price volatility caused by temporary
imbalances in trading interest. For example, a significant implicit
cost for large investors (who often represent the consolidated
investments of many individuals) is the price impact that their
large trades can have on the market. Indeed, disclosure of these
large orders can reduce the likelihood of their being filled.'' See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42450 (February 23, 2000), 65 FR
10577, 10581 (February 28, 2000) (SR-NYSE-99-48) (emphasis added).
    \10\ For example, IEX Services LLC (``IEX'') is an alternative
trading venue, regulated by the SEC pursuant to Regulation ATS. 17
CFR 242.300-303. IEX describes itself as ``Dedicated to
institutionalizing fairness in the markets. . . .'' (See http://www.iextrading.com/about/). IEX provides a Minimum Quantity order
parameter (``MQTY''), which allows a subscriber to designate a
minimum indicated share size that must be satisfied for the order to
be executed. See http://www.iextrading.com/services/. There are two
methods that IEX will apply to determine the satisfaction of MQTY
condition of orders. Under ``Method 2,'' an MQTY order may
have a Minimum Execution size, which provides execution of the order
if the resting order with the highest priority which would trade
with the active order would trade shares equal to or greater than
the minimum quantity defined on the active order. This is precisely
the functionality the Exchange is proposing. The Exchange notes that
the BIDS Alternative Trading System also has functionality that
allows its subscribers to select a minimum size requirement, which
prevents a subscriber's interest from interacting with contra-side
interest if its size is less than the specified minimum. See http://www.bidstrading.com/solutions/faqs/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, to attract larger Minimum Quantity Orders to the
Exchange NASDAQ is proposing new optional functionality that will allow
a market participant to designate a minimum individual execution size,
and thus allow users to avoid interaction with such smaller orders
resting on the book. As discussed above, under the current rule a
Minimum Quantity Order will execute against any number of smaller
contra-side orders that, in aggregate, meet the minimum quantity set by
the market participant. For example, if a market participant entered a
Minimum Quantity Order to buy with a price of $10, a size of 1,000 and
a minimum quantity of 500, and the order was marketable against two
resting sell orders for 300 and 400 shares, the System would aggregate
both orders for purposes of meeting the minimum quantity, thus
resulting in executions of 300 shares and 400 shares respectively with
the remaining 300 shares of the Minimum Quantity Order posting to the
book with a minimum quantity restriction of 300 shares. The proposed
new optional functionality will not allow aggregation of smaller
executions to satisfy the minimum quantity of a Minimum Quantity Order.
Using the same scenario as above, but with the proposed new
functionality and a minimum execution size requirement of 400 shares
selected by the market participant, the Minimum Quantity Order would
not execute against the two sell orders because the order at the top of
the NASDAQ order book is less than 400 shares. The new functionality
will reprice the Minimum Quantity Order to the next best price and post
the order to the NASDAQ order book as a Non-Displayed Order when the
top of the NASDAQ order book is of insufficient size to satisfy the
minimum execution size requirement. Applied to the example above, the
order would post to the NASDAQ order book as a Non-Displayed Order to
buy 1,000 shares at $9.99. NASDAQ notes that the market participant
entering the Minimum Quantity Order has expressed its intention not to
execute against liquidity below a certain minimum size, and therefore
cedes execution priority when it would lock resting orders

against which it would otherwise execute if it were not for the minimum
execution size restriction.
    NASDAQ believes that it is appropriate to adjust the price to the
next best price prior to posting on the NASDAQ order book because, by
using the minimum execution size option, the submitter of the order is
choosing to reduce the number of situations in which the order could
potentially execute. Thus an order without this further restriction
provides greater contribution to the price discovery process of the
market. All bona fide market participation that results in an execution
on a data feed contributes to the price discovery process that is
essential to a proper functioning market. However, there are different
degrees to which activity within the market contributes to price
discovery. A displayed order at the NBBO of an Exchange, and the
subsequent execution thereof, contributes significantly to price
discovery because both the displayed order prior to execution, and the
execution itself, provide a reference price to the market. Further, a
non-displayed order on an exchange contributes to price discovery as it
is part of the continuous auction on a market with publicly displayed
orders and quotes--albeit the contribution of a non-displayed order on
an exchange is less than the contribution of a displayed order on the
exchange. Furthermore, a non-displayed order on a dark pool contributes
less to price discovery because it is resting in a less transparent
trading venue that is not part of the continuous auction of a lit
exchange. If one were to rank the contribution to price discovery that
different market activity provides, it would include the following
(listed from least price discovery contribution to most):
     Order resting in dark pool (no contribution)
     Non-Displayed order on exchange (no or very little
contribution)
     Order execution in dark pool (some contribution, execution
reported publicly via TRF)
     Non-Displayed order execution on Exchange (contribution as
part of continuous auction, execution reported publicly, and priority
is behind displayed--i.e., priority is ceded to orders that contribute
more to price discovery)
     Displayed order on exchange (significant contribution)
     Displayed order execution on exchange (significant
contribution, publicly displayed order plus execution reported
publicly)

In this sense the proposed change continues to contribute more
meaningfully to price discovery than an order in a dark pool because it
is part of the continuous auction market on NASDAQ \11\ but, similar to
a regular non-displayed order ceding priority to displayed orders on
the Exchange, the enhanced MAQ order will cede price priority to orders
that do not contain the minimum execution size restriction. Also unlike
the current process, the proposed new functionality will cancel the
remainder of a marketable Minimum Quantity Order that is partially
filled upon entry if the partially executed Minimum Quantity Order
would lock resting contra-side liquidity that does not meet the minimum
execution size requirement. Under the current process, a Minimum
Quantity Order that receives a partial execution has the remainder of
the order posted to the NASDAQ order book as a Non-Displayed Order. The
proposed new functionality will, instead, cancel any shares not
executed after a partial execution of a Minimum Quantity Order if there
are more shares that remain resting on the book at a price that would
satisfy the limit price of the Minimum Quantity Order but that are not
executable against the incoming Minimum Quantity Order due to the
minimum execution size set on the order. For example, a Minimum
Quantity Order to buy priced at $10 with a size of 1,000 and a minimum
quantity of 500, that is marketable against two sell orders on the
NASDAQ order book, one for 500 shares and one for 400 shares, would
result in the execution of 500 shares and the cancellation of the
remaining 500 shares. Under the current process, the order would
receive two partial executions of 500 and 400 shares, and the remaining
100 shares would be posted to the NASDAQ order book as a Non-Displayed
Order to buy priced at $10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ It is worth noting that NASDAQ has the single biggest pool
of liquidity among individual exchanges. For example, in July The
NASDAQ Stock Market accounted for 16.3% of consolidated NMS security
volume. The next biggest single pool of liquidity was NYSE with
11.2%. See http://www.NASDAQTrader.com historical volume for more
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ notes that when a non-IOC Minimum Quantity Order is
partially executed and cancelled in this situation, the contra-side
liquidity that is not executed may be Non-Displayed. If a Minimum
Quantity Order is cancelled due to Non-Displayed contra-side liquidity,
the submitter of the order will know that there may be a resting order
or orders at the price of the Minimum Quantity Order and also that the
resting order or orders are for fewer shares than the minimum execution
size required by the order. NASDAQ believes this is acceptable because
the Minimum Quantity Order has already partially executed for a size of
at least one round lot and thus the order submitter has taken on risk
due to the execution and therefore contributed to price discovery in
the market place. Furthermore, this is not unlike the information that
is obtained when a Post-Only Order \12\ is repriced due to resting Non-
Displayed contra-side liquidity. In fact, this Minimum Quantity Order
scenario is more beneficial to the market as it results in an execution
which provides a greater contribution to price discovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Rule 4751(f)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed change, a resting MAQ order will operate the
same way as it does currently. When an order with a minimum quantity is
posted on the book, it will only execute against incoming orders if the
individual incoming order is equal to or greater than the minimum
designated on the order. The primary difference between the current
functionality and the proposed new functionality is that upon receipt,
an incoming order with a minimum quantity designation will only execute
against individual resting orders if the order at the top of the book
meets or exceeds the minimum on the order. The Exchange believes that
this is no different than a recently-adopted change to the NYSE Arca
MPL-IOC order type,\13\ which allows ETP holders to designate a minimum
execution size when checking the book for liquidity and does not allow
an execution unless it is against an order that is equal to or greater
than the minimum designated on the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See NYSE Arca Rule 7.31(h)(6); see also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 71366 (January 22, 2014), 79 FR 4515 (January 28,
2014) (SR-NYSEArca-2014-01).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\14\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in particular, in that the proposal is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the

public interest. Specifically, the proposed change to the functioning
of the Minimum Quantity Order will provide market participants,
including institutional firms who ultimately represent individual
retail investors in many cases, with better control over their orders,
thereby providing them with greater potential to improve the quality of
their order executions. Currently, the rule allows the market
participant to designate a minimum acceptable quantity on an order
that, upon entry, may aggregate multiple executions to meet the minimum
quantity requirement. Once posted to the book, however, the minimum
quantity requirement is equivalent to a minimum execution size
requirement. The Exchange is now proposing to provide a market
participant with control over the execution of their Minimum Quantity
Order by allowing them an option to designate the minimum individual
execution size upon entry. The control offered by the proposed change
is consistent with the various types of control currently provided by
exchange order types. For example, NASDAQ and other exchanges offer
limit orders, which allow a market participant control over the price
it will pay or receive for a stock.\16\ Similarly, exchanges offer
order types that allow market participants to structure their trading
activity in a manner that is more likely to avoid certain transaction
cost related economic outcomes.\17\ Moreover and as discussed above,
other trading venues provide the very functionality that the Exchange
is proposing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ See, e.g., Rule 4751(f)(3).
    \17\ For example, NASDAQ's Post-Only Order. See Rule
4751(f)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, some market participants have requested the
functionality proposed herein so they may avoid transacting with
smaller orders that they believe ultimately increases the cost of the
transaction. Market participants such as large institutions that
transact a large number of orders on behalf of retail investors have
noted that, because NASDAQ does not have this functionality, they avoid
sending large orders to NASDAQ to avoid potentially more expensive
transactions.\18\ In this regard, NASDAQ notes that the proposed new
optional functionality may improve the NASDAQ market by attracting more
order flow, which is currently trading on less transparent venues that
contribute less to price discovery and price competition than
executions and quotes that occur on lit exchanges. Such new order flow
will further enhance the depth and liquidity on the Exchange, which
supports just and equitable principals of trade. Furthermore, the
proposed modification to the Minimum Quantity Order is consistent with
providing market participants with greater control over the nature of
their executions so that they may achieve their trading goals and
improve the quality of their executions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ As noted, the proposal is designed to attract liquidity to
the Exchange by allowing market participants to designate a minimum
size of contra-side order to interact with, thus providing them with
functionality available to them on dark markets. The designation of
a minimum size may reduce the interaction that such new order flow
would have with smaller contra-side orders on the Exchange, some of
which may be retail order flow. The Exchange notes that, since the
order flow attracted by this functionality may also represent retail
investors and is in addition to the existing order flow currently on
the Exchange, market quality for retail investors should not be
negatively impacted ultimately. Accordingly, the Exchange does not
believe that retail orders will be disadvantaged by the proposed
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
Specifically, the proposed change allows market participants to
condition the processing of their orders based on a minimum execution
size. The changes to the Minimum Quantity Order will enhance the
functionality offered by NASDAQ to its members, thereby promoting its
competitiveness with other exchanges and non-exchange trading venues
that plan to, or already, offer similar functionality. As a
consequence, the proposed change will promote competition among
exchanges and their peers, which, in turn, will decrease the burden on
competition rather than place an unnecessary burden thereon.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: (a) By order approve
or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-095 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-NASDAQ-2014-095. 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-NASDAQ-2014-095 and should
be submitted on or before October 27, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-23703 Filed 10-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 228 (Friday, November 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74144-74146]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30168]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0046]

QPS Evaluation Services, Inc.: Request for Renewal of Recognition
and Applications for Expansion of Recognition

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the application of QPS
Evaluation Services, Inc. (QPS), for renewal of recognition as a
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). Additionally, this
notice announces QPS's applications for expansion of its recognition as
an NRTL and presents the Agency's preliminary finding to grant the
application.

DATES: Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this
notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on
or before December 14, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods:
    1. Electronically: Submit comments and attachments electronically
at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions.
    2. Facsimile: If submissions, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, commenters may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at
(202) 693-1648.
    3. Regular or express mail, hand delivery, or messenger (courier)
service: Submit comments, requests, and any attachments to the OSHA
Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2010-0046, Technical Data Center, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-2625,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY number: (877) 889-
5627). Note that security procedures may result in significant delays
in receiving comments and other written materials by regular mail.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security
procedures concerning delivery

of materials by express mail, hand delivery, or messenger service. The
hours of operation for the OSHA Docket Office are 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m.,
e.t.
    4. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
the OSHA docket number (OSHA-2010-0046). OSHA places comments and other
materials, including any personal information, in the public docket
without revision, and these materials will be available online at
http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the Agency cautions commenters
about submitting statements they do not want made available to the
public, or submitting comments that contain personal information
(either about themselves or others) such as Social Security numbers,
birth dates, and medical data.
    5. Docket: To read or download submissions or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g.,
copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download
through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating docket
submissions.
    6. Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of
the comment period on or before December 14, 2015 to the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-
1644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; phone:
(202) 693-2110, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    OSHA recognition of an NRTL signifies that the organization meets
the requirements specified in Section 1910.7. Recognition is an
acknowledgment that the organization can perform independent safety
testing and certification of the specific products covered within its
scope of recognition. Each NRTL's scope of recognition includes (1) the
type of products the NRTL may test, with each type specified by its
applicable test standard; and (2) the recognized site(s) that has/have
the technical capability to perform the product-testing and product-
certification activities for test standards within the NRTL's scope.
Recognition is not a delegation or grant of government authority;
however, recognition enables employers to use products approved by the
NRTL to meet OSHA standards that require product testing and
certification. OSHA maintains an informational Web site for each NRTL
that details its scope of recognition available at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    The Agency processes applications by an NRTL for renewals and
expansions of recognition following requirements in Appendix A to 29
CFR 1910.7. OSHA conducts renewals in accordance with the procedures in
29 CFR 1910.7, App. II.C. OSHA processes applications for modifying the
scope of recognition in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.7, App. IB4. In
accordance with these procedures, NRTLs may submit an application to
modify its scope of recognition at any time within its recognition
period. For renewals, NRTLs must submit a request to OSHA, between nine
months and one year before the expiration date of its current
recognition. A renewal request includes an application for renewal and
any additional information demonstrating its continued compliance with
the terms of its recognition and 29 CFR 1910.7. If OSHA did not conduct
an on-site assessment of the NRTL's headquarters and key sites within
the past 18 to 24 months, the Agency will schedule the necessary on-
site assessments prior to the expiration date of the NRTL's
recognition. Upon review of the submitted material and, as necessary,
the successful completion of the on-site assessment, OSHA announces its
preliminary decision to grant or deny renewal and QPS's requested scope
expansion in the Federal Register and solicits comments from the
public. OSHA then publishes a final Federal Register notice responding
to any comments and announcing the Agency's Final Decision on modifying
an NRTL's scope of recognition and on the renewal of the NRTL's
recognition.

II. Notice of Application for Expansion

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is providing
notice that QPS is applying for expansion of its current recognition as
an NRTL. QPS requests the addition of seven test standards to its NRTL
scope of recognition.
    QPS currently has one facility (site) recognized by OSHA for
product testing and certification, with its headquarters located at:
QPS Evaluation Services, Inc., 81 Kelfield Street, Unit 8, Toronto,
Ontario, M9W 5A3.

III. General Background on the Application for Expansion

    QPS submitted two applications, one dated July 16, 2014, and one
dated June 9, 2015 (QPS Exhibit 14-1--Expansion Application for Six
Standards OSHA-2010-0046 and QPS Exhibit 15-1--Amended Expansion
Application to Add an Additional Standard OSHA-2010-0046), to expand
its recognition to include seven additional test standards. These two
applications were combined. OSHA staff performed a comparability
analysis and reviewed other pertinent information. OSHA performed an
on-site review in relation to these applications (as well as the
application for renewal) on July 16-17, 2015.
    Table 1 below lists the appropriate test standards found in QPS's
applications for expansion for testing and certification of products
under the NRTL Program.

Table 1--Proposed Appropriate Test Standards for Inclusion in QPS's NRTL
                          Scope of Recognition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Test standard                     Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 48.............................  Standard for Electric Signs.
UL 8750...........................  Standard for Light Emitting Diode
                                     (LED) Equipment for Use in Lighting
                                     Products.
UL 73.............................  Standard for Motor-Operated
                                     Appliances.

UL 1310...........................  Standard for Class 2 Power Units.
UL 1598...........................  Luminaries.
UL 1741...........................  Standard for Inverters, Converters,
                                     Controllers and Interconnection
                                     System Equipment for Use with
                                     Distributed Energy Resources.
ANSI/ISA 12.12.01.................  Nonincendive Electrical Equipment
                                     for Use in Class I and II, Division
                                     2 and Class III, Divisions 1 and 2
                                     Hazardous (Classified) Locations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. General Background on Application for Renewal

    OSHA is additionally providing notice that QPS is applying for
renewal of its current recognition as an NRTL. QPS initially received
OSHA recognition as an NRTL on March 2, 2011 (76 FR 11518) for a five-
year period expiring on March 2, 2016. QPS submitted a timely request
for renewal, dated April 21, 2015 (Exhibit 2--Renewal Application,
OSHA-2010-0046) and retains its recognition pending OSHA's final
decision in this renewal process. The current address of QPS facilities
recognized by OSHA and included as part of the renewal request are:
    1. QPS Evaluation Services, Inc., 81 Kelfield Street,Unit 8,
Toronto, Ontario, M9W 5A3 Canada.

V. Notice of Preliminary Findings of the Applications

    QPS submitted acceptable applications for expansion of its scope of
recognition. OSHA's review of the application file and on-site review
indicate that QPS can meet the requirements prescribed by 29 CFR 1910.7
for expanding its recognition to include the addition of the test
standards for NRTL testing and certification noted in Table 1 above.
This preliminary finding does not constitute an interim or temporary
approval of QPS's applications.
    This requested renewal covers QPS's existing NRTL scope of
recognition. OSHA evaluated QPS's application for renewal, conducted an
on-site review of QPS's facilities and preliminarily determined that
QPS can continue to meet the requirements prescribed by 20 CFR 1910.7
for recognition. This information includes OSHA's most recent on-site
assessment of QPS's facilities conducted on July 16-17, 2015 (Toronto,
Canada). The assessors found some nonconformances with the requirements
of 29 CFR 1910.7. QPS addressed these issues sufficiently to meet the
applicable NRTL requirements. This preliminary finding does not
constitute an interim or temporary approval of the application.
    OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether QPS meets the
requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion and renewal of its
recognition as an NRTL. Comments should consist of pertinent written
documents and exhibits. Commenters needing more time to comment must
submit a request in writing, stating the reasons for the request.
Commenters must submit the written request for an extension by the due
date for comments. OSHA will limit any extension to 10 days unless the
requester justifies a longer period. OSHA may deny a request for an
extension if it is not adequately justified. To obtain or review copies
of the exhibits identified in this notice, as well as comments
submitted to the docket, contact the Docket Office, Room N-2625,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, at the above address. These materials also are available online
at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. OSHA-2010-0046.
    OSHA staff will review all comments submitted to the docket in a
timely manner and, after addressing the issues raised by these
comments, will recommend whether to grant QPS's application for renewal
and for expansion of its scope of recognition. The Assistant Secretary
will make the final decision on granting the application and, in making
this decision, may undertake other proceedings prescribed in Appendix A
to 29 CFR 1910.7.
    OSHA will publish a public notice of this final decision in the
Federal Register.

Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice.
Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25,
2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on November 23, 2015.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2015-30168 Filed 11-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 63 [ EPA R06 OAR 2005 TX 0034; FRL ]

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation of Authority to Texas AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Proposed Rule.

SUMMARY: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ( TCEQ) has submitted a request for receiving delegation of EPA authority for implementation and enforcement of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAPs) for all sources ( both part 70 and non part 70 sources). The requests apply to certain NESHAPs promulgated by EPA, as adopted by TCEQ on May 25, 2005 ( 40 CFR part 63 standards). The delegation of authority under this action does not apply to sources located in Indian Country. EPA is providing notice that proposes to approve the delegation of certain NESHAPs to TDEQ.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before [ Insert date 30 days from date of publication in the Federal Register].

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Mr. Jeff Robinson, Air Permits Section ( 6PD R),

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202 2733.

Comments may also be submitted electronically or through hand delivery/ courier by following 2 the detailed instructions in the Addresses section of the direct final rule located in the final rules section of the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Robinson, Air Permits Section,

Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division ( 6PD R), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202 2733, at ( 214) 665 6435, or at robinson. jeffrey@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of this Federal Register,

EPA is approving TCEQ's request for delegation of authority to implement and enforce certain NESHAPs for all sources ( both Part 70 and non Part 70 sources). TCEQ has adopted certain NESHAPs into Texas' state regulations. In addition, EPA is waiving its notification requirements so sources will only need to send notifications and reports to TCEQ.

The EPA is taking direct final action without prior proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for this approval is set forth in the preamble to the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn, and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as 3 final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is published in the Rules section of this Federal Register.

Authority: 42 U. S. C. 7412.

Dated: April 24, 2006.

Richard E. Greene, Regional Administrator, Region 6.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 12, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67298-67299]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26924]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0280; Airspace Docket No. 13-ANM-13]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Ennis, MT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Ennis, MT, to
accommodate new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS)
standard instrument approach procedures at Ennis-Big Sky Airport. This
improves the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)
operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, February 6, 2014. 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 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On September 4, 2013, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish controlled airspace
at Ennis, MT (78 FR 54415). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Except for minor
editorial changes, this rule is the same as proposed in the NPRM.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.9X dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15,
2013, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface within a 7-mile radius of Ennis-Big Sky Airport,
Ennis, MT, and 1,200 feet above the surface within the prescribed
cutout, to accommodate new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach
procedures at the airport. This action is necessary for the safety and
management of IFR operations.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 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
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code.
Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses 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 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 establishes
controlled airspace at Ennis-Big Sky Airport, Ennis, MT.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially

significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances
exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of 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(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 the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15,
2013 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANM MT E5 Ennis, MT [New]

Ennis-Big Sky Airport, Ennis, MT
    (Lat. 45[deg]16'28'' N., long. 111[deg]38'56'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of the Ennis-Big Sky Airport; that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within an area
bounded by a line beginning at lat. 46[deg]09'00'' N., long.
112[deg]04'00'' W.; to lat. 45[deg]50'00'' N., long. 111[deg]33'00''
W.; to lat. 45[deg]33'00'' N., long. 111[deg]32'00'' W.; to lat.
45[deg]11'00'' N., long. 111[deg]27'00'' W.; to lat. 45[deg]07'00''
N., long. 111[deg]44'00'' W.; to lat. 45[deg]20'00'' N., long.
112[deg]00'00'' W.; to lat. 45[deg]40'00'' N., long. 111[deg]49'00''
W.; to lat. 45[deg]51'00'' N., long. 112[deg]27'00'' W.; to lat.
46[deg]08'00'' N., long. 112[deg]15'00'' W., thence to the point of
beginning.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 1, 2013.
Clark Desing,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-26924 Filed 11-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 158)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 45972-45973]
[DOCID:fr16au07-26]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-28921; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-091-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-300, -400, and -500
Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This
proposed AD would require, among other actions, modifying the door-
mounted escape system of the forward right side door slide compartment.
This proposed AD results from reports indicating that the forward right
escape slide inflated 90 degrees out of alignment after deployment from
the forward right side slide compartment. We are proposing this AD to
prevent the escape slide from being unusable during an emergency
evacuation and consequent injury to passengers or crewmembers.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 1, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow

the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov
 and follow the instructions for sending your

comments electronically.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this
proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Hettman, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin & Environmental Systems Safety Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2007-
28921; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-091-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We will

also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov
, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after the Docket Management System receives them.

Discussion

    We have received reports indicating that the forward door escape
slide inflated 90 degrees out of alignment after deployment from the
forward right side slide compartment, on Boeing Model 737-300, -400,
and -500 airplanes. During deployment of the escape slide, the escape
slide may be temporarily restricted within the slide compartment. This
added restriction can delay the escape slide from aligning to a proper
orientation before inflation. If inflation begins before the escape
slide extends from the door, it can result in a sideways slide
deployment. This condition, if not corrected, could result in the
escape slide being unusable during an emergency evacuation and
consequent injury to passengers or crewmembers.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-25-
1567, dated March 21, 2007. The service information describes
procedures for modifying the door-mounted escape system of the forward
right side door slide compartment. The modification includes:
     Removing the bottle retainer, rubber pad, and window; and
cleaning the pan assembly.
     Modifying the window cutout and applying a primer coating
and enamel finish.
     Installing a new window.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 737-25-1430, Revision 1, dated April 10,
2003, which is required by AD 2004-02-08, amendment 39-13443 (69 FR
4452, January 30, 2004), is necessary to be done prior to or
concurrently with Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-25-
1567. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-24-1430 describes procedures for
replacing the hinge assembly of the escape slide compartment with a new
assembly.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 1,949 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 660 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The modification and installation actions would take
about 2 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per
work hour. Required parts would cost about $207 per airplane. Based on
these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators
is $242,220, or $367 per airplane.

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 have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    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); 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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]

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

BOEING: Docket No. FAA-2007-28921; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
091-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October
1, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-300, -400, and -500
series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-25-1567, dated March
21, 2007.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports indicating that the forward
door escape slide inflated 90 degrees out of alignment after
deployment from the forward right side slide compartment. We are
issuing this AD to prevent the escape slide from being unusable
during an emergency evacuation and consequent injury to passengers
or crewmembers.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Modification and Installation

    (f) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, modify
the door-mounted escape system of the forward right side door slide
compartment, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-25-1567, dated March
21, 2007.

Prior to or Concurrent Requirement

    (g) Prior to or concurrently with the requirements of paragraph
(f) of this AD, accomplish the requirements of AD 2004-02-08,
amendment 39-13443.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 30, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-16110 Filed 8-15-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 10, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 112)]
[Notices]
[Page 32700-32701]
[DOCID:fr10jn08-32]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

June 2, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP96-320-090.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits an interim
negotiated rate letter agreement in relation to the Southeast Expansion
Project.
    Filed Date: 05/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080529-0085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 09, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP97-186-006.
    Applicants: Trunkline Gas Company, LLC.
    Description: Trunkline Gas Co, LLC submits Third Revised Sheet 28
to FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1, to become effective 6/1/08.
    Filed Date: 05/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080530-0318.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 10, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-390-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Rockies Express Pipeline submits reconciliation filing
pertaining to penalty charges incurred by Rockies Express' shippers
during the period from 1/1/07 through 12/31/07 and the allocation of
penalty charge revenue to Rockies Express.
    Filed Date: 05/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080530-0320.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 10, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-391-000.

    Applicants: Sabine Pipe Line LLC.
    Description: Sabine Pipe Line LLC submits Volume 1 of its FERC Gas
Tariff effective July 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 05/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080530-0321.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 10, 2008.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings 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 e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-12930 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P