[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26383-26387]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12128]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0504; Product Identifier 2018-NM-046-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 707 series airplanes and Model 720 and 720B
series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report indicating
that a fracture of the midspar fitting resulted in the separation of
the inboard strut and engine from the airplane, and a determination
that existing inspections are not sufficient for timely detection of
cracking. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of
certain nacelle strut spar and overwing fittings, and diagonal braces
and associated fittings; replacement of the diagonal brace assembly on
certain airplanes; and applicable related investigative and corrective
actions. We are proposing

this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards 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 on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0504.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0504; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Chang, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-627-
5210; email: [email protected] or George Garrido, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-627-
5210; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0504;
Product Identifier 2018-NM-046-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because
of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    We have received reports of cracking of the midspar fittings and of
the engine and nacelle strut separating from the airplane. We issued AD
2012-16-12, Amendment 39-16159 (77 FR 49708, August 17, 2012) to
require inspection of the inboard and outboard strut midspar fittings
and AD 2015-11-04, Amendment 39-18167 (80 FR 30605, May 29, 2015) to
require replacement of all engine strut midspar fittings and to
initiate a life limit program. Since that time, we have determined that
inspections of other strut fittings are needed for timely detection of
cracking. Cracks have been reported in the diagonal brace end fittings,
forward mating fittings, aft mating fittings, overwing support
fittings, and the upper surface and the aft lug(s) of the front spar
fittings on the nacelle struts, numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4. This cracking is
attributed to fatigue in the end fittings and stress corrosion or
fatigue in the mating fittings. This condition, if not addressed, could
result in cracks that grow beyond a critical length, allowing strut
fittings to fail and reducing the structural integrity of the nacelle.
This, in combination with damage to adjacent attachment structure,
could result in the loss of an engine from the airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed the following service information.
     Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4, dated
February 21, 2017. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive detailed inspections of the diagonal brace tube for any
crack; repetitive detailed inspections and high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspections of the nacelle strut diagonal brace end fittings,
forward mating fitting, and aft mating fitting for any crack; an
alternative dye penetrant inspection of vertical webs on aft mating
fitting for any crack; an HFEC inspection of the diagonal brace tube
for any crack; and corrective actions.
     Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3365, Revision 3, dated
March 9, 2017. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive detailed, HFEC, and ultrasonic inspections of the overwing
support fittings for any crack at the bolt hole forward of the wing
front spar and at the holes for the four fasteners attaching the
fitting to the spar, and related investigative and corrective actions.
     Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3514, Revision 1, dated
November 9, 2016. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive detailed and surface HFEC inspections of the front spar
fittings at nacelle struts numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 for cracks, and
replacement of cracked front spar fittings.
    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.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service
Information.'' For information on the procedures and compliance times,
see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0504.
    The phrase ``related investigative actions'' is used in this
proposed AD. Related investigative actions are follow-on actions that
(1) are related to the primary action, and (2) further investigate the
nature of any condition found. Related investigative actions in an AD
could include, for example, inspections.
    The phrase ``corrective actions'' is used in this proposed AD.
Corrective actions correct or address any condition found. Corrective
actions in an AD could include, for example, repairs.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4, dated February
21, 2017; Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3365, Revision 3, dated
March 9, 2017; and Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3514, Revision 1,
dated November 9, 2016; specify to contact the manufacturer for certain
instructions, but this proposed AD would require using repair methods,
modification deviations, replacement deviations, and alteration
deviations in one of the following ways:
     In accordance with a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 65 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed inspections per Service   36 work-hours x $85              $0  $3,060 per           $198,900 per
 Bulletin A3364, Revision 4.        per hour = $3,060                    inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                    per inspection
                                    cycle.
HFEC inspections per Service       128 work-hours x                  0  $10,880 per          $707,200 per
 Bulletin A3364, Revision 4.        $85 per hour =                       inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                    $10,880 per
                                    inspection cycle.
Inspections per Service Bulletin   20 work-hours x $85               0  $1,700 per           $110,500 per
 A3365, Revision 3.                 per hour = $1,700                    inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                    per inspection
                                    cycle.
Detailed inspections per Service   12 work-hours x $85               0  $1,020 per           $66,300 per
 Bulletin A3514, Revision 1.        per hour = $1,020                    inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                    per inspection
                                    cycle.
HFEC inspections per Service       32 work-hours x $85               0  $2,720 per           $176,800 per
 Bulletin A3514, Revision 1.        per hour = $2,720                    inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                    per inspection
                                    cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.
    We estimate that any necessary proposed replacement of affected
fittings would take about 96 work-hours for a cost of $8,160 per
fitting. We have received no definitive data on the parts costs of the
affected fittings. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft
that might need this replacement.

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.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the
Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We 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 this 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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2018-0504; Product Identifier
2018-NM-046-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 23, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 82-24-03, Amendment 39-4496 (47 FR 51099,
November 12, 1982) (``AD 82-24-03'') and AD 2005-08-15, Amendment
39-14067 (70 FR 21136, April 25, 2005) (``AD 2005-08-15'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 707-100 Long
Body, -200, -100B Long Body, and -100B Short Body series airplanes;
Model 707-300, -300B, -300C, and -400 series airplanes; and Model
720 and 720B series airplanes; certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54, Nacelles/
pylons.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that a fracture of
the midspar fitting resulted in the separation of the inboard strut
and engine from the airplane, and a determination that existing
inspections for other nacelle strut fittings are not sufficient for
timely detection of cracking. We are issuing this AD to address
cracks, which if not detected and corrected, could grow beyond a
critical length, allowing the strut fitting to fail and reducing the
structural integrity of the nacelle. This, in combination with
damage to adjacent attachment structure, could result in the loss of
an engine from the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Detailed Inspections of the Front Spar Fittings at
Nacelle Struts Numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4

    Prior to the accumulation of 3,500 total flight hours; within
700 flight hours after the most recent inspection specified in
Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3514, dated July 29, 2004, was
done; or within three months after the effective date of this AD;
whichever occurs later: Do a detailed inspection for cracking of the
front spar fittings at nacelle struts numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 707 Alert
Service Bulletin A3514, Revision 1, dated November 9, 2016. If any
cracking is found, before further flight, replace the affected
fitting, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3514, Revision 1, dated November
9, 2016. Repeat the inspections thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 700 flight hours.

(h) Repetitive Surface High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) Inspections
of the Aft Lugs on the Front Spar Fittings at Nacelle Struts Numbers 1,
2, 3, and 4

    Within 1,500 flight cycles or 48 months after the most recent
detailed inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD was done,
whichever occurs first, do a surface HFEC inspection for cracking of
the aft lugs on the front spar fittings at nacelle struts numbers 1,
2, 3, and 4, and do all applicable corrective actions, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 707 Alert Service
Bulletin A3514, Revision 1, dated November 9, 2016, except as
required by paragraph (l)(4) of this AD. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,500 flight cycles or 48
months, whichever occurs first.

(i) Repetitive Inspections of the Overwing Support Fitting at Nacelle
Struts Numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4

    At the times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3365, Revision 3, dated March 9,
2017, except as required by paragraph (l)(1) of this AD: Do the
inspections specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of this AD
and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 707
Alert Service Bulletin A3365, Revision 3, dated March 9, 2017,
except as required by paragraph (l)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.
Repeat the inspections thereafter at the applicable time specified
in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing 707 Alert Service
Bulletin A3365, Revision 3, dated March 9, 2017.
    (1) Do a detailed inspection for any crack at all five holes in
the overwing support fitting, and at the flange radii.
    (2) Do the inspection specified in paragraph (i)(2)(i) or
(i)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Do a surface HFEC inspection for any crack in the overwing
support fitting around the hole immediately forward of the spar
chord, with the bolt in place, and at the flange radii.
    (ii) Do an open hole HFEC inspection for any crack in the
overwing support fitting at the hole immediately forward of the spar
chord.
    (3) Do the inspection specified in paragraph (i)(3)(i) or
(i)(3)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Do an ultrasonic inspection for any crack in the overwing
support fitting around the four holes common to the fitting and the
spar chord, with the bolts in place.
    (ii) Do a surface HFEC inspection for any crack in the overwing
support fitting around the four holes common to the fitting and the
spar chord, with the bolts in place.

(j) Inspections of the Nacelle Strut Diagonal Braces and Associated
Fittings

    For airplanes with nacelle strut diagonal braces and associated
fittings which have accumulated 7,500 flight cycles or more: At the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance'' of
Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4, dated February
21, 2017, except as required by paragraph (l)(2) of this AD, do the
inspections specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (j)(3) of this
AD. Repeat the inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals
specified in tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision
4, dated February 21, 2017. If any crack is found during any
inspection required by this paragraph, before further flight, do all
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4,
dated February 21, 2017, except as required by paragraph (l)(3) of
this AD.
    (1) Do a detailed inspection of the nacelle strut diagonal brace
end fittings, diagonal brace tube, forward mating fitting, and aft
mating fitting for any crack.
    (2) Do HFEC inspections of the nacelle strut diagonal brace end
fittings, forward mating fitting, and aft mating fitting for any
crack. As an alternative for the aft mating fitting, do a dye
penetrant inspection of vertical webs on aft mating fitting for any
crack.
    (3) Do an HFEC inspection of the diagonal brace tube for any
crack.

(k) Replacement

    For Group 3, 4, and 6 airplanes as identified in Boeing 707
Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4, dated February 21, 2017,
on which the outboard diagonal brace end fitting (forward or aft)
attach holes have been oversized as specified in Boeing 707 Alert
Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4, dated February 21, 2017: Within
1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, replace the
diagonal brace assembly, in accordance with Figure 3 of Boeing 707
Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4, dated February 21, 2017.

(l) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3365, Revision
3, dated March 9, 2017, uses the phrase ``the Revision 3 date of
this service bulletin,'' this AD requires using ``the effective date
of this AD.''
    (2) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision
4, dated February 21, 2017, uses the phrase ``the Revision 4 date of
this service bulletin,'' this AD requires using ``the effective date
of this AD.''
    (3) Where Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3364, Revision 4,
dated February 21, 2017; and Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin
A3365, Revision 3, dated March 9, 2017; specify contacting Boeing:
This AD requires repair using a method approved in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.
    (4) Where Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3514, Revision 1,
dated November 9, 2016, specifies contacting Boeing: This AD
requires replacement using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.

(m) Terminating Action for Other ADs

    (1) Accomplishing the initial inspections required by paragraph
(j) of this AD terminates all requirements of AD 82-24-03.
    (2) Accomplishing the initial inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, terminates all requirements of AD 2005-08-15.

(n) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install, on
any airplane, a front spar fitting having a part number other than
the part numbers specified in paragraph 2.C.2. of Boeing 707 Alert
Service Bulletin A3514, Revision 1, dated November 9, 2016.

(o) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority
to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards
District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of
the person(s) identified in paragraph (p)(1) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager

of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, replacement, or alteration
required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been
authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, to make those
findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation,
replacement deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the
certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(p) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Jeffrey Chang,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5263; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected] or George
Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO
Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:
562-627-5232; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on May 24, 2018.
James Cashdollar,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-12128 Filed 6-6-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 241 (Thursday, December 16, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78601-78602]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31557]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0935]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, New
Orleans Harbor, Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, Orleans
Parish, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
SR 39 (Judge Seeber/Claiborne Avenue)

vertical lift bridge across the Inner Harbor Navigational Canal, mile
0.9, (Gulf Intracoastal Waterway mile 6.7 East of Harvey Lock), at New
Orleans, Orleans Parish, Louisiana. This deviation is necessary to
adjust the counterweight wire ropes on the bridge. This deviation
allows the bridge to remain closed for two (2) 72-hour time periods
within a two-week period.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 12:01 a.m. on Friday, January
7, 2011 until 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, January 23, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0935 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0935 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail Mrs. Donna Gagliano, Transportation Assistant, Eighth
Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, US Coast Guard; telephone 504-671-
2128 or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Louisiana Department of Transportation
and Development has requested a temporary deviation in order to perform
maintenance from the published regulation for the SR 39 (Judge Seeber/
Claiborne Avenue) vertical lift bridge across the Inner Harbor
Navigational Canal, mile 0.9, (GIWW mile 6.7 EHL). The bridge provides
40 feet of vertical clearance when closed above mean high water, and
156 feet above MHW in the open-to-navigation position. Currently,
according to 33 CFR 117.458(a), the draw of the bridge shall open on
signal; except that, from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 5:45
p.m. Monday through Friday, the draw need not be open for the passage
of vessels. The draw shall open at any time for a vessel in distress.
    This deviation allows the bridge to remain closed to navigation/for
two (2) 72-hour periods within a two-week time between January 7, 2011
and January 23, 2011. As required by 33 CFR 117.40(a), the exact dates
of the closures will be determined at a later date, allowing deep draft
vessel movements just before and/or between the closure periods. Exact
times and dates for the closures will be published in the Local Notice
to Mariners and broadcast via the Coast Guard Broad Notice to Mariners
system.
    Navigation on the waterway consists mainly of tugs with tows and
ships. The Coast Guard has coordinated the closure with waterway users,
industry, and other Coast Guard units. These dates and this schedule
were chosen to minimize the significant effects on vessel traffic;
however, some vessels that can pass under the bridge in the closed-to-
navigation position can do so any time. The bridge will not be able to
open for emergencies.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35, this work will be performed with
flexibility in order to return the bridge to normal operations as soon
as possible. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: December 2, 2010.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-31557 Filed 12-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21223-21224]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07622]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94606; File No. SR-ICEEU-2022-003]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to Amendments to the ICE Clear
Europe Futures & Options Guaranty Fund Policy

April 5, 2022.
    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 March 28, 2022, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or
the ``Clearing House'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule changes described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared primarily by
ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii)
thereunder,\4\ such that the proposed rule change was immediately
effective upon filing with the Commission. On April 4, 2022, ICE Clear
Europe filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change to make
certain changes to Exhibit 1A and the confidential Exhibit 5.\5\ The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1 (hereafter the
``proposed rule change''), from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(ii).
    \5\ In Amendment No. 1, ICEEU revised Exhibit 1A to include a
statement on the burden on competition and revised confidential
Exhibit 5 to include a filing number on page 25 thereof; however,
the substance of the proposal is unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or the ``Clearing
House'') submits this partial amendment (``Amendment No. 1'') to its
previously submitted rule changes (the ``Initial Filing'') to amend its
Futures & Options Guaranty Fund Policy (``F&O Guaranty Fund Policy'' or
``Policy'').\6\ Amendment No. 1 is intended to make an update to (i)
Exhibit 1A of the Initial Filing to include a statement by the Clearing
House on the burden on competition and (ii) the confidential Exhibit 5
as set out in the Initial Filing to include a filing number on page 25
thereof. The proposed rule changes as set out in the Initial Filing are
otherwise unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules and the
F&O Guaranty Fund Policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

(a) Purpose
    The purpose of Amendment No. 1 is to add Section IIB (which is a
statement of the Clearing House on the burden of competition) to
Exhibit 1A of the Initial Filing and to add the filing number SR-ICEEU-
2022-003 to the header in page 25 of confidential Exhibit 5 as set out
in the Initial Filing. The Clearing House's statement on the burden of
competition was already described in Form 19b-4 of the Initial Filing
but omitted from Exhibit 1A of the Initial Filing.
(b) Statutory Basis
    The description of the statutory basis for the amendments set forth
in the Initial Filing, as amended hereby, is unchanged.

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed amendments would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The amendments
are being adopted to update and clarify the Clearing House's F&O
Guaranty Fund Policy, which relates to the Clearing House's internal
processes for determining and reviewing the F&O Fund level in
accordance with the Rules. ICE Clear Europe does not believe the
amendments will result in any immediate change to the F&O Fund level.
Further, ICE Clear Europe does not believe the amendments would affect
the costs of clearing, the ability of market participants to access
clearing, or the market for clearing services generally. Therefore, ICE
Clear Europe does not believe the proposed rule change imposes any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received from Members, Participants or Others

    The statement on comments on the proposed rule change in the
Initial Filing, as set forth in the Initial Filing, as amended hereby,
is unchanged.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \8\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2022-003 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-ICEEU-2022-003 Amendment
No. 1. 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 such filings will also be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE
Clear Europe and on ICE Clear Europe's website at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/regulation.
    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-ICEEU-2022-003 and should be
submitted on or before May 2, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-07622 Filed 4-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 59)]
[Notices]
[Page 15498-15499]
[DOCID:fr28mr06-96]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IA-2500/803-187]

Adler Management, L.L.C.; Notice of Application

March 21, 2006.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

ACTION: Notice of application for exemption under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act'').

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

Applicant: Adler Management, L.L.C. (``Applicant'').

Relevant Advisers Act Sections: Exemption requested under section
202(a)(11)(F) from section 202(a)(11).

Summary of Application: Applicant requests that the SEC issue an order
declaring it and its employees acting within the scope of their
employment to be persons not within the intent of section 202(a)(11),
which defines the term ``investment adviser.''

Filing Dates: The application was filed on July 25, 2005, and amended
on January 31, 2006.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. Interested persons may
request a hearing by writing to the SEC's Secretary and serving
Applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing
requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on April 13, 2006,
and should be accompanied by proof of service on Applicant, in the form
of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason
for the request, and the issues contested. Persons may request
notification of a hearing by writing to the SEC's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicant, Adler Management, L.L.C., c/
o Luz Campa, 10350 Bren Road West, Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine E. Marshall, Senior Counsel,
or Jennifer Sawin, Assistant Director, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of
Investment Management, Office of Investment Adviser Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the
SEC's Public Reference Branch.

Applicant's Representations

    1. Applicant was organized in 1996 to serve exclusively as a
``family office'' for the members of the Rauenhorst family, its
entities and charities. Applicant states this will continue to be the
sole purpose for its existence. Applicant provides services to: (i)
Gerald and Henrietta Rauenhorst, their lineal descendants (including by
adoption) and spouses of their lineal descendants (the ``Rauenhorst
Family''); (ii) entities that receive investment advisory services from
Applicant that are beneficially and solely owned by (with one exception
as provided herein) or solely for the benefit of various members of the
Rauenhorst Family, and several entities that do not and will not
receive investment advisory services from Applicant and each of which
is majority-owned by members of the Rauenhorst Family and is also owned
by employees or former employees of Applicant (``Rauenhorst Family
Entities''); and (iii) charitable entities that were created by and are
administered under the discretion of members of the Rauenhorst Family
(``Rauenhorst Family Charities''). (Persons receiving services from
Applicant are referred to herein as ``Clients''. Clients that receive
investment advisory services from Applicant are referred to herein as
``Advisory Clients''.)
    2. Applicant is owned exclusively by members of the Rauenhorst
Family and its Board of Directors is composed exclusively of members of
the Rauenhorst Family. Applicant's Board of Directors oversees all
aspects of Applicant's operations.
    3. Applicant represents that as a ``family office'', it provides a
wide range of general management services to Clients, including budget
preparation and management services; recordkeeping, bookkeeping and
accounting services; federal and state tax return preparation services;
real asset management services; insurance and risk management services;
custodian and executor services; estate planning services; federal and
state tax planning; coordination with accountants and attorneys;
investment advisory services; and other administrative services.
    4. Applicant represents that the fees it receives cover only its
costs and are not intended to generate a profit.
    5. Applicant represents that it does not hold itself out to the
public as an investment adviser. Applicant represents that it is not
listed in any phone book as an investment adviser or in any other
directory as an investment adviser.
    6. Applicant represents that it does not engage in advertising and
that it will not solicit or accept as a client any person who is not a
member of the Rauenhorst Family, a Rauenhorst Family Entity or a
Rauenhorst Family Charity.

Applicant's Legal Analysis

    1. Section 202(a)(11) of the Advisers Act defines the term
``investment adviser'' to mean ``any person who, for compensation,
engages in the business of advising others, either directly or through
publications or writings, as to the value of securities or as to the
advisability of investing in, purchasing, or selling securities, or
who, for compensation and as part of a regular business, issues or
promulgates analyses or reports concerning securities * * *.'' Section
202(a)(11)(F) of the Advisers Act authorizes the SEC to exclude from
the definition of ``investment adviser'' persons not within the intent
of section 202(a)(11).
    2. Section 203(a) of the Advisers Act requires investment advisers
to register with the SEC except as provided in section 203(b) and 203A.
Section 203(b) of the Advisers Act provides exemptions from this
registration requirement.
    3. Applicant represents that it currently relies on the
registration exemption provided in section 203(b)(3) of the Advisers
Act because it only has thirteen (13) clients. Applicant represents,
however, that this exemption is operating as a constraint on its
ability to provide advisory services to Clients, as children in the
Rauenhorst Family cease to be minors and leave their childhood
households. Applicant represents that it is not eligible for any other
registration exemptions provided in section 203(b) and that it is not
prohibited from registering with the SEC under section 203A(a) because
Applicant has assets under management of not less than $25,000,000.
    4. Applicant requests that the SEC issue an order pursuant to
section 202(a)(11)(F) declaring it and its employees acting within the
scope of their employment to be persons not within the intent of
section 202(a)(11).
    5. Applicant states that there is no public interest in requiring
it to be registered under the Advisers Act. Applicant states that it
was formed to be

the ``family office'' for the Rauenhorst Family. Applicant represents
that all of its clients are members of the Rauenhorst Family,
Rauenhorst Family Entities or Rauenhorst Family Charities. Applicant
further asserts that the interests of the Applicant, its employees and
its Clients are closely aligned because Applicant is owned exclusively
and controlled by members of the Rauenhorst Family; Applicant's
employees are fully accountable to Applicant's Board of Directors,
which consists exclusively of members of the Rauenhorst Family; and the
Clients are all either members of the Rauenhorst Family, Rauenhorst
Family Entities and Charities. Applicant represents that only one
person who is not a Rauenhorst Family member has any beneficial
interest in a Rauenhorst Family Entity that is an Advisory Client of
Applicant. This person is a long-standing loyal family employee, and he
will not be permitted to increase his existing investment or to invest
in other Rauenhorst Family Entities. Applicant states that apart from
this isolated exception, it will prohibit persons that are not members
of the Rauenhorst Family, Rauenhorst Family Charities or Rauenhorst
Family Entities from investing in Rauenhorst Family Entities that are
Applicant's Advisory Clients.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicant further states that Rauenhorst Family Entities
that are only majority-owned by members of the Rauenhorst Family and
are owned by employees or former employees of Applicant do not and
will not receive investment advisory services from Applicant.

    For the SEC, by the Division of Investment Management, under
delegated authority.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-4430 Filed 3-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on January 12, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2003-15536

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  Air Atlanta Europe Limited	Date Filed:  June 30, 2003, as
amended, November 14, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to engage in
charter foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between
the United Kingdom and the United States; and authority to conduct other
charters in accordance with Part 212 of the Department’s rules.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representative:  Don H. Hainbach<PHONE_NUMBER>

DOT Analyst:  Gordon H. Bingham<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  On July 9, 2003, Ronald Greene, a former pilot
for Air Atlanta Icelandic, filed comments in this docket.  Captain
Greene’s comments are primarily directed at certain procedures of his
former employer, Air Atlantic Icelandic (a part owner of the applicant
here).  Concerning Air Atlanta Europe’s specific request, Captain
Greene stated that allowing Air Atlanta Europe to serve the United
States would add a new competitor to an already troubled airline
industry in the U.S.  No other comments were filed in response to Air
Atlanta Europe’s amended application.

DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved							Action date:  January 12, 2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  January 12, 2004--January 12,
2005

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  July 23, 1977,
Air Services Agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as amended (the Agreement).

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  X  Standard exemption
conditions (attached)

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  Air Atlanta
Europe (AAE) submitted its application pursuant to the May 25, 1989,
Exchange of Notes (1989 Exchange of Notes) between the United States and
the United Kingdom under which the aviation authorities of each country
will normally accept, on a reciprocal basis, the other government’s
fitness and citizenship determinations in regard to carriers seeking
authority to conduct certain bilateral services, including the authority
sought by AAE.  Based on the record in this case, we found that AAE is
operationally and financially qualified to conduct the proposed
services, and that it is substantially owned and effectively controlled
by homeland nationals.  We make this finding based on the 1989 Exchange
of Notes.  By memorandum dated July 30, 2003, the FAA advised us that it
knew of no reason why we should act unfavorably on AAE’s application.

We did not find the concerns raised by Captain Greene dispositive in the
present proceeding involving the UK carrier AAE.  Rather, what is
germane to our determination here is that the authority sought by AAE
involves rights available to designated carriers of the United Kingdom
under the Agreement, and the applicant is properly designated by its
government to conduct the proposed services.

2

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
_________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant was qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the

extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in the
referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

				Attachment

Foreign Carrier Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its
plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security Administration
has determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be
served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

  AAE is properly licensed and designated (Note No. 55 dated July 2,
2003) by the Government of the United Kingdom to perform the proposed
services.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 247 (Friday, December 23, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 94270]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31009]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 219

[Docket No. FRA-2001-11213, Notice No. 21]

Drug and Alcohol Testing: Determination of Minimum Random Testing
Rates for 2017

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of determination.

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

SUMMARY: This notice of determination provides the FRA Administrator's
minimum annual random drug and alcohol testing rates for calendar year
2017.

DATES: Effective December 23, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Powers, FRA Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager, W33-310, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>); or
Sam Noe, FRA Drug and Alcohol Program Specialist (telephone 615-719-
2951).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For the next calendar year, FRA determines
the minimum annual random drug testing rate and the minimum annual
random alcohol testing rate for railroad employees covered by hours of
service laws and regulations (covered service employees) based on the
railroad industry data available for the two previous calendar years
(for this Notice, calendar years 2014 and 2015). Railroad industry data
submitted to FRA's Management Information System (MIS) shows the rail
industry's random drug testing positive rate for covered service
employees has continued to be below 1.0 percent for the applicable two
calendar years. FRA's Administrator has therefore determined the
minimum annual random drug testing rate for the period January 1, 2017,
through December 31, 2017, will remain at 25 percent of covered service
employees under Sec.  219.602 of FRA's drug and alcohol rule (49 CFR
part 219). In addition, because the industry-wide random alcohol
testing violation rate for covered service employees has continued to
be below 0.5 percent for the applicable two calendar years, the
Administrator has determined the minimum random alcohol testing rate
will remain at 10 percent of covered service employees for the period
January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017, under Sec.  219.608.
Because these rates represent minimums, railroads may conduct FRA
random testing at higher rates.
    In a June 10, 2016, final rule, FRA expanded the scope of part 219
to cover maintenance-of-way (MOW) employees (81 FR 37894). MOW
employees will become subject to FRA random drug and alcohol testing on
June 12, 2017, when the final rule takes effect. In 1994, when FRA, in
concert with the other DOT modes, established a drug MIS system (58 FR
68232, December 23, 1993), FRA set its initial minimum random drug
testing rate at 50 percent for covered employees because of the lack of
data to gauge the extent of the drug abuse problem at that time. FRA
set its minimum random alcohol testing rate for covered employees at 25
percent for the same reason. As its MIS data continued to show
consistently low industry-wide drug and alcohol positive rates among
covered employees, FRA lowered its minimum annual random drug and
alcohol testing rates to their current respective rates of 25 and 10
percent.
    Similarly, because FRA has no MIS data for MOW employees yet, the
Administrator has determined that for the period June 12, 2017, through
December 31, 2017, the minimum annual random drug testing rate will be
set at 50 percent of MOW employees, and the minimum annual random
alcohol testing rate will be set at 25 percent of MOW employees. As
with covered employees, because these rates represent minimums,
railroads may conduct FRA random testing of MOW employees at higher
rates.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 20, 2016.
Sarah E. Feinberg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-31009 Filed 12-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 235 (Thursday, December 6, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72709-72712]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29412]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. FAA-2003-14766; Amendment No. 91-327; SFAR No. 77]
RIN 2120-AK07

Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Territory and
Airspace of Iraq

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action is taken to allow U.S. civil flight operations to
and from Erbil and Sulaymaniyah International Airports in Northern Iraq
by any United States (U.S.) air carrier or commercial operator, any
person exercising the privileges of an airman certificate issued by the
FAA except such persons operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a
foreign air carrier (who are not covered by the prohibition), or a
person operating an aircraft registered in the United States unless the
operator of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier (which also is not
covered by the prohibition). The FAA has recently determined that a
full flight prohibition is no longer necessary for these airports in
Northern Iraq, and this action will allow flights to be conducted
provided that certain measures are taken. Additional adjustments to the
current flight prohibition may be appropriate as the risk to aviation
safety and security lessens in other parts of the country, and
ultimately the prohibition may be lifted completely.

DATES: This action is effective January 7, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions about this
final rule, contact: Will Gonzalez, Air Transportation Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. For legal
questions, contact: Lorna John, Office of the Chief Counsel, AGC-200,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA is responsible for the safety of flight in the United
States and for the safety of U.S. civil operators, U.S.-registered
aircraft, and U.S.-certificated airmen throughout the world. Also, the
FAA is responsible for issuing rules affecting the safety of air
commerce and national security. The FAA's authority to issue rules for
aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle I, Section 106(g), describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. Section 40101(d)(1)
provides that the Administrator shall consider in the public interest,
among other matters, assigning, maintaining, and enhancing safety and
security as the highest priorities in air commerce. Section
40105(b)(1)(A) requires the Administrator to exercise his authority
consistently with the obligations of the U.S. Government under
international agreements. Furthermore, the FAA has broad authority
under section 44701(a)(5) to prescribe regulations governing the
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce and national security.

I. Background

    On October 16, 1996, SFAR No. 77 was issued to prohibit flight
operations within the territory and airspace of Iraq by any U.S. air
carrier or commercial operator, by any person exercising the privileges
of an airman certificate issued by the FAA except persons operating
U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier (who are not covered
by the prohibition), or by a person operating an aircraft registered in
the United States, unless the operator of such aircraft is a foreign
air carrier (which also is not covered by the prohibition). The
prohibition was issued in response to concerns for the safety and
security of U.S. civil flights within the territory and airspace of
Iraq. In the final rule, the FAA cited a threat made by then President
Saddam Hussein who urged his air defense forces to ignore both the
southern and northern no-fly zones and to attack ``any air target of
the aggressors.'' The FAA was concerned that this threat could apply to
civilian as well as military aircraft, and therefore issued SFAR 77.
    In early 2003, a U.S.-led coalition removed Saddam Hussein's regime
in Iraq from power. The FAA anticipated that when hostilities ended in
Iraq, humanitarian efforts would be needed to assist the people of
Iraq. To facilitate those efforts, in April 2003, the FAA amended
paragraph 3 of SFAR No. 77 to clarify what the approval process was for
such flights, making clear that operations could not be authorized by
another agency without the approval of the FAA.
    On November 19, 2003, the FAA determined that certain limited
overflights of Iraq could be conducted safely, subject to the
permission of the appropriate authorities in Iraq and in accordance
with the conditions established by those authorities. Accordingly, the
FAA amended SFAR No. 77 to permit overflights of Iraq above Flight
Level (FL) 200. That amendment also allowed aircraft departing from
countries adjacent to Iraq to operate at altitudes below FL 200 within
Iraq to the extent necessary to permit a climb above FL 200 if the
climb performance of the aircraft would not permit operation above FL
200 prior to entering Iraqi airspace.

    Results of recent evaluations of airports in Iraq prompted the FAA
to consider removing the flight prohibition for Erbil and Sulaymaniyah.
The Erbil and Sulaymaniyah International Airports have supported non-
U.S. air carrier operations for a number of years without incident.
Based largely on the initiation of those operations and on improvements
in the operational environment, the FAA has determined that flights by
U.S. operators may now be conducted safely to these two airports under
certain conditions.
    Therefore, the FAA is amending paragraph (b) (former paragraph 2)
of SFAR No. 77 to allow certain flights from outside Iraq to and from
the international airports of Erbil and Sulaymaniyah in the northern
provinces of Iraq by any U.S. air carrier or commercial operator, by
any person exercising the privileges of an airman certificate issued by
the FAA, except persons operating U.S.-registered aircraft for a
foreign air carrier (who are not currently affected by the
prohibition), or a person operating an aircraft registered in the
United States, unless the operator of such aircraft is a foreign air
carrier (which also is not currently affected by the prohibition). The
FAA is committed to actively and continually evaluating airports in
other regions of Iraq so that they can be used by U.S. civil operators.
It is anticipated that additional adjustments to the SFAR may be
appropriate as the risk to aviation safety and security lessens in
other parts of the country, and ultimately the SFAR may be lifted
completely.
    Before U.S. air carriers begin commercial operations to either
Erbil or Sulaymaniyah, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
must review the current security situation.\1\ Consequently, all U.S.
air carriers who are required to have a TSA-approved security program
under 49 CFR 1544.101 that are planning operations to and from Erbil or
Sulaymaniyah must contact TSA before initiating service to obtain
appropriate security approvals to operate the proposed service.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In matters relating to aviation security, the FAA works
closely with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),
which, pursuant to Subtitle I, Sections 114(d) and (f) of Title 49
of the United States Code, is responsible for civil aviation
security, including the implementation and adequacy of security
measures at airports and other transportation facilities. With
respect to foreign airports, the TSA, on behalf of the Secretary of
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), implements the
requirement set forth in Section 44907 of Title 49 to assess the
effectiveness of the security measures maintained at foreign
airports (1) Served by an air carrier; (2) from which a foreign air
carrier serves the United States as a last point of departure; (3)
that pose a high risk of introducing danger to international air
travel; or (4) that the DHS Secretary considers appropriate. Among
its other authorities, the TSA has the general authority under
Section 40113 of Title 49 to prescribe regulations, standards, and
procedures and issue orders in carrying out its security
responsibilities.
    \2\ U.S. air carriers also must hold any necessary U.S. and
Iraqi economic operating authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under new paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) (former paragraphs 2(c) and
(d)) of SFAR No. 77, flights may be operated by persons covered by
paragraph (a) (former paragraph 1) of the SFAR within the territory and
airspace of Iraq north of the 34[deg]30' North latitude below FL200 to
and from Erbil International Airport (ORER) or Sulaymaniyah
International Airport (ORSU) to and from points outside Iraq. All other
flight operations by persons covered by paragraph (a) (former paragraph
1) of SFAR No. 77 within the territory and airspace of Iraq north of
the 34[deg]30' North latitude and in other areas within the territory
and airspace of Iraq must be in accordance with paragraphs (b)(1),
(b)(2), (c) and (d) (former paragraphs 2(a), 2(b), 3 and 4) of SFAR No.
77.
    Under new paragraph (b)(5) (former paragraph 2(e)), prior to
conducting operations under paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) (former
paragraphs 2(c) and 2(d)), the operator must apply for and obtain a
letter of authorization (LOA) or operations specification (OpSpec), as
appropriate, from the Director, Flight Standards Service, AFS-1, which
will specify the limitations and conditions under which the operation
must be conducted. An OpSpec or LOA addresses operational safety both
for the particular flight and for continuing operations. The FAA often
uses OpSpecs and LOAs to manage specific operations conducted pursuant
to underlying regulations. In this instance, the OpSpecs and LOAs will
address the residual risk associated with operating into and out of
ORER or ORSU. Generally, the operator must:
     Have a method for obtaining current reports and
information on airport conditions, navigation aids, weather, and any
other factors that may affect the safety of flight including
commercially available current threat information. This includes both
preflight planning and enroute operations.
     Use specific airways to enter Iraqi airspace.
     Operate in accordance with the Iraq Aeronautical
Information Publication (AIP).
     Minimize time below FL200 within the amended airspace.
     Not land at airports other than ORER and ORSU, except in
an emergency.
     Report any security incidents/events to the FAA Washington
Operations Center (WOC) via phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Comply with 14 CFR parts 91, 119, 125, 135 or 121.
    While the conditions imposed in the OpSpec or LOA may be similar to
the conditions imposed in OpSpecs and LOAs issued under exemptions or
approvals for operations to the rest of Iraq, the threshold for
issuance of an OpSpec or an LOA for flight operations into and out of
ORER or ORSU is significantly different and does not rise to the level
required for an exemption or approval for operations to the rest of
Iraq. In order for an operator to receive an OpSpec or LOA under the
approval process that applies to the rest of Iraq, a U.S. government
agency must request approval of the specific operation or series of
operations. Approval is granted only if the request for approval
includes a written contract between the U.S. government agency and the
operator, a plan approved by the U.S. government agency describing how
the threats to the operation will be mitigated, and any other
information requested by the FAA. That information will not be required
for flights into and out of ORER or ORSU. The FAA will not require any
contractual relationship between the operator and another U.S.
government agency, and it will not require another agency to request
operations be permitted. Nor will there be a requirement for a threat
mitigation plan, although there may be some requirements that the
operator provide the FAA with information regarding the situation in or
around the airports.

Good Cause Justification for Waiving Notice and Comment

    Because the circumstances described herein require immediate action
and results in a lessening of the current flight prohibition, I find
that notice and public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. I also find that
this action is fully consistent with the obligations under 49 U.S.C.
40105 to ensure that I exercise my duties consistently with the
obligations of the United States under international agreements.

II. Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination,
International Trade Impact Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates Assessment

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses.

First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354)
requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes
on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39)
prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing
U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with
the base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the
FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this final rule.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected impact on costs and benefits is so minimal that a
proposed or final rule does not warrant a full evaluation, this order
permits that a statement to that effect and the basis for it be
included in the preamble if a full regulatory evaluation of the cost
and benefits is not prepared. Such a determination has been made for
this final rule. The reasoning for this determination follows: This
rule will permit additional flights to be flown within the territory of
Iraq north of the 34[deg]30' North latitude to or from Erbil
International Airport (ORER) and Sulaymaniyah International Airport
(ORSU). The relaxation of restrictions on operations to and from these
two airports provides more commercial opportunities for operators, as
well as improved consumer choice, and therefore, has more benefits than
costs. Further, this expansion of opportunities is likely to lower
transportation costs associated with these trips today. For example,
with this rule U.S. operators may operate directly into these two
airports without incurring the cost of contracting with a foreign
operator or using foreign-registered aircraft. Therefore, the rule
expands commercial opportunities with an expected minimal additional
cost.
    FAA has, therefore, determined that this final rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
    This rule permits more flights to Iraq; permits more direct flights
which reduce costs; and expands revenue opportunity. Therefore, as the
acting FAA Administrator, I certify that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has
assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined that it
will reduce obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States and
is consistent with this Act.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $143.1 million in lieu of $100
million. This rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the
Internet by--
    1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
    3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Federal Digital
System at: http://www.fdsys.gov.
    You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Make
sure to identify the amendment or docket number of this rulemaking.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information
or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its
jurisdiction. If you are a small entity and you have a question
regarding this document, you may contact your local FAA official, or
the person listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at
the

beginning of the preamble. You can find out more about SBREFA on the
Internet at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91

    Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation safety,
Freight, Iraq.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends Chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, as follows:

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101,
44111, 44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722,
46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531;
articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation
(61 Stat. 1180).

0
2. Amend part 91 by removing SFAR No. 77.

0
3. Amend Subpart M by adding Sec.  91.1605 to read as follows:

Sec.  91.1605  Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 77--Prohibition
Against Certain Flights Within the Territory and Airspace of Iraq.

    (a) Applicability. This rule applies to the following persons:
    (1) All U.S. air carriers or commercial operators;
    (2) All persons exercising the privileges of an airman certificate
issued by the FAA except such persons operating U.S.-registered
aircraft for a foreign air carrier; or
    (3) All operators of aircraft registered in the United States
except where the operator of such aircraft is a foreign air carrier.
    (b) Flight prohibition. No person may conduct flight operations
over or within the territory of Iraq, except as provided in paragraphs
(c) and (d) of this section or except as follows:
    (1) Overflights of Iraq may be conducted above flight level (FL)
200 subject to the approval of, and in accordance with the conditions
established by, the appropriate authorities of Iraq.
    (2) Flights departing from the countries adjacent to Iraq whose
climb performance will not permit operations above FL200 prior to
entering Iraqi airspace may operate at altitudes below FL200 within
Iraq to the extent necessary to permit a climb above FL200, subject to
the approval of, and in accordance with the conditions established by,
the appropriate authorities of Iraq.
    (3) Flights originating from or destined to areas outside of Iraq
may be operated to or from Erbil International Airport (ORER) or
Sulaymaniyah International Airport (ORSU) within the territory of Iraq
north of 34[deg]30' North latitude. Such flights may operate below
FL200 only when initiating an arrival to or departure from Erbil
International Airport (ORER) or Sulaymaniyah International Airport
(ORSU).
    (4) Flights departing Erbil and Sulaymaniyah whose climb
performance will not permit operation above FL200 prior to entering
Iraqi airspace south of the 34[deg]30' North latitude may operate at
altitudes below FL 200 to the extent necessary to permit a climb above
FL200.
    (5) Prior to conducting the flight operations described in
paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) of this section, the operator must obtain a
letter of authorization or operations specification, as appropriate,
from the Director, Flight Standards Service, AFS-1, which will specify
the limitations and conditions under which the operation must be
conducted. All flights conducted under paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) of
this section are subject to the approval of, and must be conducted in
accordance with the conditions established by the appropriate
authorities of Iraq.
    (c) Permitted Operations. This SFAR does not prohibit persons
described in paragraph (a) of this section from conducting flight
operations within the territory and airspace of Iraq when such
operations are authorized either by another agency of the United States
Government with the approval of the FAA, or by an exemption granted by
the Administrator.
    (d) Emergency situations. In an emergency that requires immediate
decision and action for the safety of the flight, the pilot in command
of an aircraft may deviate from this SFAR to the extent required by
that emergency. Except for U.S. air carriers or commercial operators
that are subject to the requirements of parts 119, 121, or 135, each
person who deviates from this rule shall, within ten (10) days of the
deviation, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays, submit
to the Flight Standards Service Air Transportation Division (AFS-200) a
complete report of the operations of the aircraft involved in the
deviation including a description of the deviation and the reasons
therefore.

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 28, 2012.
Michael P. Huerta,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-29412 Filed 12-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 174 (Thursday, September 8, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 62010]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21503]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0798]

Safety Zones; Fireworks Events in Captain of the Port New York
Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce various safety zones within the
Captain of the Port New York Zone on the specified dates and times.
This action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators
from hazards associated with fireworks displays. During the enforcement
period, no person or vessel may enter the safety zones without
permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP).

DATES: The regulation for the safety zones described in 33 CFR 165.160
will be enforced on the dates and times listed in the table in
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Petty Officer First Class Ronald Sampert U.S. Coast
Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety
zones listed in 33 CFR 165.160 on the specified dates and times as
indicated in Table 1 below. This regulation was published in the
Federal Register on November 9, 2011 (76 FR 69614).

                                 Table 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rose Event, Pier D, Hudson River Safety  Launch site: A barge located in
 Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(5.7).               approximate position
                                          40[deg]42'57.5'' N.,
                                          074[deg]01'34'' W., (NAD
                                          1983), approximately 375 yards
                                          southeast of Pier D, Jersey
                                          City, New Jersey. This Safety
                                          Zone is a 360-yard radius from
                                          the barge.
                                          Date: September 10,
                                          2016.
                                          Time: 7 p.m.-9 p.m.
2. Pop Event Planning, Ellis Island       Launch site: A barge
 Safety Zone., 33 CFR 165.160(2.2).       located between Federal
                                          Anchorages 20-A and 20-B, in
                                          approximate position
                                          40[deg]41'45'' N.,
                                          074[deg]02'09'' W., (NAD 1983)
                                          about 365 yards east of Ellis
                                          Island. This Safety Zone is a
                                          360-yard radius from the
                                          barge.
                                          Date: September 15,
                                          2016.
                                          Time: 8:45 p.m.-10
                                          p.m.
3. Save the Date, Ellis Island Safety     Launch site: A barge
 Zone, 33 CFR 165.160(2.2).               located between Federal
                                          Anchorages 20-A and 20-B, in
                                          approximate position
                                          40[deg]41'45'' N.,
                                          074[deg]02'09'' W., (NAD 1983)
                                          about 365 yards east of Ellis
                                          Island. This Safety Zone is a
                                          360-yard radius from the
                                          barge.
                                          Date: October 27,
                                          2016.
                                          Time: 8:30 p.m.-10
                                          p.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.160, vessels may not enter the
safety zones unless given permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. Spectator vessels may transit outside the safety zones
but may not anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of other
vessels. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or
local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.160(a) and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard will provide mariners with advanced notification of
enforcement periods via the Local Notice to Mariners and marine
information broadcasts.
    If the COTP determines that a safety zone need not be enforced for
the full duration stated in this notice, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners
may be used to grant general permission to enter the safety zone.

    Dated: August 18, 2016.
M.H. Day,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2016-21503 Filed 9-7-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


NCER STANDING SUBCOMMITTEE

DRAFT AGENDA

December 14, 2007

10:00 am – 12:00 pm Eastern Time

Participation by Teleconference Only

866-299-3188

code:<PHONE_NUMBER>#

10:00 - 10:15 am	Welcome

	-  Roll Call	Dr. Martin Philbert,

	-  Purpose of Teleconference Call	Subcommittee Chair

	-  Introduction of New NCER Director

10:15 - 10:20 am	Administrative Procedures	Ms. Susan Peterson

		BOSC Executive Committee

		DFO

10:20– 10:30 am	Public Comment

10:30 - 12:00 pm	Subcommittee Discussion	Dr. Martin Philbert		- Summary of Draft Report Progress  	Subcommittee Chair and

	-  Draft Report Discussion

	- Draft Report Next Steps and Schedule

12:00 pm	Adjourn

            A Federal Advisory Committee for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and Development