[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47-48]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0093]
RIN 2127-AL34

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Child Restraint Systems,
Incorporation by Reference

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA has received petitions asking the Agency to extend the
comment period for a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to update
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, ``Child
restraint systems.'' The NPRM proposed to incorporate a new test sled
assembly to conduct compliance tests of child restraints and update a
number of the test procedures of the standard. The comment period for
the NPRM is scheduled to end on January 4, 2021. In response to
petitions from the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association and the
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, the Agency is extending the
comment period by 90 days.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published on November 2, 2020,
at 85 FR 69388, is extended to April 5, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be
sure someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> before
coming.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Regardless of how you submit your comments, please mention the
docket number identified in the heading of this document.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its decision-making process.
DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal
information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at www.transportation.gov/privacy. In order to facilitate
comment tracking and response, the Agency encourages commenters to
provide their name, or the name of their organization; however,
submission of names is completely optional. Whether or not commenters
identify themselves, all timely comments will be fully considered.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to www.regulations.gov, or the street address
listed above. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call
(202) 366-9332 before coming. Follow the online instructions for
accessing the dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues, you may call
Cristina Echemendia, Office of Crashworthiness Standards (telephone:
202-366-6345) (fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>). For legal issues, you may call
Deirdre Fujita, Office of Chief Counsel (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) (fax:
202-366-3820). Address: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 31501(b) of the Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) requires the Secretary
(NHTSA, by delegation) to commence and complete a rulemaking to amend
the standard seat assembly in FMVSS No. 213 to better simulate a single
representative motor vehicle rear seat. Pursuant to this mandate, on
November 2, 2020, NHTSA published an NPRM proposing to amend FMVSS No.
213 by updating the standard seat assembly NHTSA uses to test child
restraint systems (CRSs) for compliance with the standard's dynamic
performance requirements. This NPRM proposed other amendments to
modernize FMVSS No. 213, including ways to streamline the Agency's use
of test dummies to assess restraint performance. NHTSA provided a 60-
day comment period for the November 2, 2020 proposal, which closes on
January 4, 2021.

Petitions

    The Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA),
representing manufacturers of child restraint systems, submitted a
petition on December 14, 2020 requesting a 120-day extension of the
comment period for the November 2, 2020 NPRM.\1\ JPMA provided several
reasons for extending the comment period, including the need for social
distancing and restrictions on businesses due to the public health
emergency, the delay in public release of the drawing package for the
standard seat assembly referenced by the NPRM, and the plans of some
manufacturers to evaluate the proposed standard seat assembly by
fabricating and evaluating the assembly for repeatability and
reproducibility of results with the child restraint models they
produce. JPMA stated that the original 60-day comment period does not
adequately reflect the time necessary for manufacturers to evaluate the
potential implications of the NPRM thoroughly and to provide
constructive feedback to NHTSA. They argued that the proposed changes
are extensive, and evaluation of the changes requires the fabrication
of standard seat assemblies, which JPMA said would take 8 to 16 weeks
for delivery to the testing facilities. JPMA stated that ``[w]ithout
the ability to inspect, fully evaluate and conduct comparative testing
using this new bench, particularly in regard to its repeatability and
reproducibility characteristics, our CRS manufacturing members are
seriously limited in their ability to comment in the time period
prescribed in the current NPRM.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ JPMA requested that ``the comment period be extended to 180
days from the date of publication'' of the NPRM. NHTSA understands
this request to include the 60 days provided by the NPRM, which
means JPMA is requesting a 120-day extension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 11, 2020, the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
(CHOP) submitted a petition to extend the comment period. CHOP did not
specify the additional time sought but argued that remote teleworking
and competing work due to the public health emergency has created
challenges to gather all the individuals and relevant data to draft a
response.

Agency Decision

    In accordance with NHTSA's rulemaking procedures in 49 CFR part
553, subpart B, the Agency is granting the petitioners' requests to
extend the comment period, but is extending it only for 90 days. NHTSA
has determined that the petitioners have shown good cause for an
extension, and that the extension is consistent with the public
interest (49 CFR 553.19). Entities seeking to build the proposed
standard seat assembly need time to procure materials and fabricate the
assembly. NHTSA typically procures test seat assemblies in 6 to 8
weeks, but understand that it may take longer to obtain the seat
assembly discussed in the NPRM due to possible customer demand, the
time needed to procure the seat foam (8-12 weeks), and the business
restrictions caused by the public health emergency. However, JPMA has
not provided any basis explaining why it would take 8 to 16 weeks,
almost twice the normal time, to procure the assembly. Without a
reasoned explanation for the exceptionally long period, we conclude a
120-day extension is unwarranted and unduly delays the rulemaking.
    In considering the petitions, NHTSA weighed the statutory interest
in completing this rulemaking, the complexity and importance of the
rulemaking, and the basis for the requests. The 3-dimensional drawings
of the standard seat assembly were made public on November 16, 2020.\2\
Based on an 8 to 12-week lead time for fabrication and delivery of the
proposed seat assembly, NHTSA estimates entities could acquire the
proposed seat assembly for evaluation between mid-January and early
February 2021. A 90-day extension of the comment period provides
sufficient time following procurement of the seat assembly for
interested persons to test CRSs, analyze results, and prepare comments.
Therefore, NHTSA partially grants the requests for extending the
comment period by extending it for 90 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ JPMA incorrectly stated the publishing date was November 9,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency supports efforts to develop useful technical information
on the proposal and believes 90 additional days will achieve that
result. Extending the comment period 90 days balances the need to
provide more time to entities to assess the proposal with the need to
incorporate a representative vehicle seat in FMVSS No. 213 compliance
tests expeditiously. Incorporating a representative vehicle seat in
FMVSS No. 213 will provide a more meaningful assessment of the
performance of CRSs in vehicles on the road today.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date has passed,
interested persons are able to file comments in the docket, which NHTSA
will consider to the extent practicable. 49 CFR 553.23. NHTSA may also
continue to file relevant information in the docket as it becomes
available. Accordingly, the Agency recommends that readers periodically
check the docket for new material.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 49 CFR 501.8.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.8.
James C. Owens,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-29111 Filed 12-30-20; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: September 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 189)]
[Notices]
[Page 57492]
[DOCID:fr29se06-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. TX06-2-002]

Aero Energy LLC; Notice of Filing

September 25, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 13, 2006, Caithness Sagebrush 20, LLC
(Caithness Sagebrush 20) filed an Affidavit of Matthew W. Scobee, which
provides a detailed description of specific wind development plans that
will necessitate additional firm transmission capacity across the
Sagebrush Line for Caithness Sagebrush 20 use, pursuant to the
Commission's August 14, 2006 Order.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 4, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-16008 Filed 9-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13460-13463]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06119]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 79

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0131; FRL-9975-89-OAR]

Registration of Isobutanol as a Gasoline Additive: Opportunity
for Public Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Request for information.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'' or ``the
Agency'') is seeking public comment on any aspect of the use of
isobutanol in gasoline. Butamax Advanced Biofuels, LLC (``Butamax''), a
manufacturer of isobutanol, has submitted an application pursuant to
the regulations titled ``Registration of Fuels and Fuel Additives'' for
the registration of isobutanol as a gasoline additive at up to 16
volume percent. Butamax has submitted information that would likely
satisfy the applicable registration requirements. The Clean Air Act
requires the EPA to register a fuel or fuel additive once all the
applicable registration requirements have been met by the manufacturer.
Due to the potential for the widespread introduction of isobutanol into
commerce, we are taking steps to make the public aware of the
likelihood of this registration. We are seeking public comment
regarding any issues we should take into consideration for this
registration and any supplemental actions we should consider under the
Clean Air Act to further protect public health and welfare.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2018-0131, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will in general not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James W. Caldwell, Environmental
Engineer, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Mail Code 6405A, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; Telephone: (202) 343-
9303; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA is seeking public comment on any
aspect of the use of isobutanol in gasoline. Butamax Advanced Biofuels,
LLC (``Butamax''), a manufacturer of isobutanol, has submitted an
application pursuant to the regulations at 40 CFR part 79, Registration
of Fuels and Fuel Additives, for the registration of isobutanol, an
alcohol, as a gasoline additive at up to 16 volume percent. Our review
of the information Butamax has submitted leads us to believe that
Butamax would likely satisfy the applicable registration requirements
under 40 CFR part 79 (discussed in more detail below). Section 211(b)
of the Clean Air Act (Clean Air Act, CAA or the Act) requires the EPA
to register a fuel or fuel additive once all the applicable
registration requirements have been met by the manufacturer. While the
EPA does not have any specific concerns, due to the potential for the
widespread introduction of isobutanol into commerce, we are taking
steps to make the public aware of the likelihood of this registration
and are seeking public comment regarding any issues we should take into
consideration for this registration and/or any potential supplemental
actions we should consider under the Clean Air Act to further protect
public health and welfare.

I. Statutory and Regulatory Background

Section 211(a) and (b)--Fuels and Fuel Additives Designation and
Registration

    Section 211(a) of the Act authorizes the Administrator to designate
fuels and fuel additives (F/FAs) by regulations and, once designated,
to register such F/FAs prior to introduction into commerce. To date,
the Administrator has designated on-highway motor vehicle gasoline and
gasoline additives and on-highway motor vehicle diesel and diesel
additives for registration. The EPA codified the registration
requirements under Sections 211(b) and 211(e) of the Act at 40 CFR part
79. Registration requirements at 40 CFR part 79 include emissions
speciation testing and a literature search of the associated emissions
(Tier 1 testing) and animal testing of exposure to emissions for
purposes of determining health effects (Tier 2 testing). Manufacturers
with less than $50 million in total annual sales are considered small
businesses, as specified in the regulations at 40 CFR 79.58(d). In
certain cases, a small

business is exempt from some or all of these testing requirements. For
any potential registrant with $50 million or more in total annual
sales, Tier 1 and Tier 2 requirements must be met before registration.
    In addition, Sec. Sec.  79.11(i) and 79.21(h) respectively require
that fuel and fuel additive manufacturers demonstrate that their fuels
and fuel additives are substantially similar to those used in emissions
certification or have a waiver as part of 40 CFR part 79 registration.
    The Tier 1 registration regulations at 40 CFR 79.52 require a
characterization of the emission products that are generated by
evaporation and combustion of a gasoline with, if applicable, an
oxygenated additive such as isobutanol. Combustion testing must be
conducted with and without after-treatment of exhaust emissions. A
literature search for information on the potential toxicological
environmental, and other public welfare effects is required for
emission products, except that it is not required for those emission
products that are the same as the emission products for baseline
gasoline (represented in testing by a gasoline with no oxygenates such
as ethanol or isobutanol). This is because a test group organized by
the American Petroleum Institute (API) has tested baseline gasoline and
also conducted the literature search for its emission products. The
results of this testing and literature search were reported in the 1997
API baseline gasoline Tier 1 literature review.
    The regulations at 40 CFR 79.53 specify the requisite health
effects testing for compliance with Tier 2 as well as provisions for a
manufacturer that opts to rely on existing health effects test data to
satisfy these testing requirements. Additionally, the flexibility to
modify Tier 2 requirements and to require Alternative Tier 2 testing
can be found at 40 CFR 79.58(c). In 1998, EPA opted to modify the
standard Tier 2 testing requirements for gasoline and various
oxygenated gasoline blends and issued Alternative Tier 2 testing
requirements to the API ``Section 211(b) Research Group.'' This was
based on the EPA's determination that alternative test procedures would
yield more useful data than standard Tier 2 testing. The primary
difference between the testing for baseline gasoline and various
oxygenated gasoline blends, under the Alternative Tier 2 and standard
Tier 2 testing requirements, was that the Alternative Tier 2 testing
focused on identifying and evaluating potential adverse health effects
of evaporative emissions. It did not include examination of combustion
emissions. At the time, the EPA explained the rationale for focusing on
evaporative emissions and why the combustion emission studies would
likely not produce meaningful information as being due to
methodological complications caused by carbon monoxide (i.e., the
carbon monoxide component of the combustion exhaust emissions may be
lethal or otherwise compromise the health of the test animals). The EPA
required specific testing for baseline gasoline and various oxygenated
gasoline blends and these health studies have now been largely
completed and approved.
    The regulations at 40 CFR 79.54 provide for additional testing
under Tier 3 provisions if the Tier 1 and Alternative Tier 2 data or
other data obtained by the Agency indicates that such testing is
warranted. The EPA has yet to initiate a Tier 3 process for any fuel or
fuel additive. If the EPA were to require Tier 3 testing, we would
develop the testing protocol and requirements through a public process.

CAA Section 211(f)--Substantially Similar and Waivers

    Section 211(f)(1) of the Act makes it unlawful for any manufacturer
of any fuel or fuel additive to first introduce into commerce, or to
increase the concentration in use of, any fuel or fuel additive for use
by any person in motor vehicles manufactured after model year 1974
which is not substantially similar to any fuel or fuel additive
utilized in the certification of any model year 1975, or subsequent
model year, vehicle or engine under Section 206 of the Act. The EPA
last issued an interpretive rule on the phrase ``substantially
similar'' at 73 FR 22281 (April 25, 2008). Generally speaking, this
interpretive rule describes the types of unleaded gasoline that are
considered ``substantially similar'' to the unleaded gasoline utilized
in the EPA's emissions certification program by placing limits on a
gasoline's chemical composition and its physical properties, including
the amount of alcohols and ethers (oxygenates) that may be added to
gasoline. Gasoline and diesel fuels that are found to be
``substantially similar'' to the EPA's certification fuels may be
registered and introduced into commerce. The current ``substantially
similar'' interpretive rule for unleaded gasoline allows oxygen content
up to 2.7 percent oxygen by weight for certain ethers and alcohols,
which equates to approximately 12 volume percent isobutanol.\1\
Gasoline-isobutanol blends containing up to 16 volume percent
isobutanol would contain up to 3.7 percent oxygen by weight, which
exceeds the allowable limit for oxygen content under the current
``substantially similar'' interpretive rule, and would require a waiver
under section 211(f)(4) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 56 FR 5352 (February 11, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 211(f)(4) of the Act provides that upon application of any
fuel or fuel additive manufacturer, the Administrator may waive the
prohibitions of CAA section 211(f)(1) if the Administrator determines
that the applicant has established that such fuel or fuel additive, or
a specified concentration thereof, will not cause or contribute to a
failure of any emission control device or system (over the useful life
of the motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, nonroad engine or nonroad
vehicle in which such device or system is used) to achieve compliance
by the vehicle or engine with the emission standards to which it has
been certified pursuant to Sections 206 and 213(a) of the Act. In other
words, the Administrator may grant a waiver for a prohibited fuel or
fuel additive if the applicant can demonstrate that the new fuel or
fuel additive will not cause or contribute to engines, vehicles or
equipment failing to meet their emissions standards over their useful
lives. The statute requires that the Administrator shall take final
action to grant or deny the application, after public notice and
comment, within 270 days of receipt of the application.
    In addition, the regulations at Sec. Sec.  79.11(i) and 79.21(h)
require that fuel and fuel additive manufacturers must demonstrate that
their fuels and fuel additives, respectively, are substantially similar
or have a waiver as described in section 211(f) of the Act.

CAA Section 211(c)--Rulemaking To Regulate Fuels

    Section 211(c)(1) of the Act allows the Administrator, by
regulation, to ``control or prohibit the manufacture, introduction into
commerce, offering for sale, or sale of any fuel or fuel additive for
use in a motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or nonroad engine or
nonroad vehicle (A) if, in the judgment of the Administrator, any fuel
or fuel additive or any emission product of such fuel or fuel additive
causes, or contributes, to air pollution or water pollution (including
any degradation in the quality of groundwater) that may reasonably be
anticipated to endanger the public health or welfare, or (B) if
emission products of such fuel or fuel additive will impair to a
significant degree the performance of any emission control device or
system which is in general use, or which the Administrator

finds has been developed to a point where in a reasonable time it would
be in general use were such regulation to be promulgated.'' Prior to
doing so, the EPA must consider scientific and medical evidence as well
as the costs of any control and setting regulations under Section 202
of the Act. The EPA must also publish a finding that a control or
prohibition will not result in the use of other substitute fuels or
fuel additives that will also endanger public health or welfare.

II. Registration of Isobutanol

Isobutanol Background

    Isobutanol is a flammable colorless liquid that is used as a
gasoline additive and as an industrial solvent. Isobutanol is composed
of the chemical elements hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon and it can be
made from petroleum or renewable biomass, such as corn, grasses,
agricultural waste and other renewable sources. It can be used in
internal combustion engines as an additive to gasoline and is
registered under the 40 CFR part 79 as a gasoline additive for
manufacturers that are exempt from the Tier 1 and Alternative Tier 2
testing. A blend level of 16 percent for a non-exempt manufacturer
would require a new registration that would include meeting Tier 1 and
Alternative Tier 2 health effects testing requirements and a waiver
under CAA section 211(f)(4). Biobutanol is the common name for
isobutanol made from renewable sources.
    There has been an increased interest in the use of biobutanol as a
direct result of the requirements for increased use of renewable fuel
volumes, adopted in the Energy Information and Security Act of 2007.
These provisions require an increase in the use of renewable fuels,
with 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be used in the U.S. by
2022. Parties required to meet these standards are interested in cost
effective and practical ways to satisfy the standards and meet the
performance needs of the vehicles and engines. Biobutanol is one
potentially attractive option because of its higher energy density,
lower blending vapor pressure, and lower heat of vaporization in
comparison to other alcohols such as ethanol.

Current Isobutanol Registrations

    As previously discussed, regulations at 40 CFR 79.58(d) specify
that a company with total annual sales of less than $50 million is a
small business and is exempt in certain instances from applicable
testing requirements. The EPA has registered isobutanol as a fuel
additive for companies that qualified under this provision.
    Fuel and fuel additive manufacturers with total annual sales of $50
million or greater do not qualify as small businesses, are prohibited
from registering the use of isobutanol produced by small businesses,
and instead must comply with all applicable registration requirements,
including health effects testing. Gasoline manufacturers typically have
sales greater than $50 million per year and would need to register
isobutanol as an additive to their gasoline if they wanted to use it.
Therefore, a gasoline manufacturer cannot rely on the registration of a
small additive manufacturer as a means of complying with the 40 CFR
part 79 registration requirements. Additionally, because no gasoline
manufacturer has completed the 40 CFR part 79 registration
requirements, including required health effects testing for isobutanol,
the agency has yet to grant a registration request of isobutanol as an
additive to gasoline by a gasoline manufacturer. This has resulted in
limiting isobutanol to blending at terminals by parties that are not
gasoline manufacturers. See the definition of fuel manufacturer at 40
CFR 79.2(d). For this reason, among others, isobutanol has yet to be
introduced into commerce in any significant volume.

Butamax--Isobutanol Registration

    Butamax Advanced Biofuels, LLC (Butamax) has applied for
registration of the use of up to 16 percent by volume isobutanol as a
fuel additive in motor-vehicle gasoline.\2\ As discussed above, fuels
and fuel additives to motor-vehicle gasoline are required to be
registered by the EPA under 40 CFR part 79 prior to introduction into
commerce. As previously described, there are two main requirements for
the fuel or fuel additive manufacturer. First, the fuel or fuel
additive must be substantially similar to fuel additives used in
emissions certification, or, if not, have a waiver under CAA section
211(f)(4) (42 U.S.C. 7545(f)(4), 40 CFR 79.21(h)). A fuel containing a
blend of gasoline and 16 percent isobutanol is not substantially
similar to any EPA certification fuels so Butamax must operate via a
waiver under CAA section 211(f)(4) prior to registration. The EPA
allows manufacturers to use previously granted waivers if they can
satisfy the waiver's terms and conditions. Of relevance here is the
OCTAMIX waiver, which the EPA granted on February 8, 1988,\3\ and has
since modified the waiver on October 28, 1988,\4\ June 7, 2012,\5\ and
June 14, 2012.\6\ The waiver allows a variety of alcohols in gasoline,
including isobutanol, at up to 3.7 percent oxygen by weight. For a
gasoline with a typical density, this equates to a maximum of 16
percent isobutanol by volume when no other oxygenates are present.
Butamax has stated that it intends to produce the isobutanol fuel
additive for use in accordance with the OCTAMIX waiver. Butamax must
show that it will comply with all seven conditions in the OCTAMIX
waiver to be able to rely on that waiver to satisfy the registration
requirement at 40 CFR 79.21(h). The Agency has evaluated Butamax's
March 25, 2011 submission regarding Butamax\TM\ Advanced Biofuels LLC
and its application of the OCTAMIX Waiver for up to 16 volume percent
isobutanol as a fuel additive if blended with gasoline and agrees with
its evaluation that Butamax can meet all seven conditions specified in
the OCTAMIX waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Ethanol is allowed in gasoline at up to 15 percent by volume
for certain vehicles. Isobutanol at 16 percent by volume would not
have a vehicle restriction.
    \3\ See 53 FR 3636 (February 8, 1988).
    \4\ See 53 FR 43768 (October 28, 1988).
    \5\ See 77 FR 33733 (June 7, 2012).
    \6\ See 77 FR 35677 (June 14, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, a manufacturer must conduct Tier 1 and either Tier 2 or
Alternative Tier 2 health-effects testing, unless the manufacturer is
exempt under the small-business provisions specified at 40 CFR
79.58(d). Butamax does not qualify as a small business and is not
exempt from these testing requirements. Additionally, the regulations
at 40 CFR 79.53(b) allow a manufacturer to rely on existing health
effects test data that would provide ``reasonably comparable''
information in lieu of conducting health effects testing ``regarding
the carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, neurotoxicity, teratogenicity,
reproductive/fertility measures, and general toxicity effects of the
emissions for a fuel or additive'' for registration. The Agency's
current review leads it to believe that Butamax will likely meet the
requisite health effects testing requirements for isobutanol at 16
percent through its submittal of information on testing for the health
effects end points identified under Alternative Tier 2 testing
procedures for oxygenates.\7\ Similarly, the Agency also believes that
Butamax will likely meet the other requirements for registration on EPA
Form 3520-13,

Fuel Additive Manufacturer Notification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Letter to Dr. Carol Henry, American Petroleum Institute,
from Margo Oge, U.S. EPA, November 2, 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Recent Studies Regarding Isobutanol Blended Gasolines

    The OCTAMIX waiver evaluated a number of 1980s gasoline-fueled
vehicles on the effects of gasoline-alcohol mixtures (applicable to
isobutanol at up to 16 percent by volume) on those vehicles emissions
controls. Since then, studies have been conducted to evaluate the
potential effects of isobutanol on gasoline-fueled vehicles, engines,
and fuel dispensing and storage equipment. Recent testing on the use of
gasoline-isobutanol blended fuels illustrates that isobutanol-blended
fuels generally do not significantly affect oxides of nitrogen
(NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), or non-methane organic gas
(NMOG) emissions. In a recent study, gasoline was splash blended with
alcohols to produce four blends with a target value of 5.5 percent
oxygen by weight including a gasoline-isobutanol blend of 21 volume
percent isobutanol.\8\ The study found that the gasoline-isobutanol
blended fuel did not significantly affect NOX, CO, or NMOG
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Ratcliff, M. A.; Luecke, J.; Williams, A.; Christensen, E.;
Yanowitz, J.; Reek, A.; and McCormick, R. L.; Impact of higher
alcohols blended in gasoline on light-duty vehicle exhaust
emissions. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2013, 47 (23), pp 13865-13872.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a test of isobutanol exposure impacts on fueling infrastructure
materials, the observed swell for elastomers for exposures to 16
percent and 24 percent gasoline blends were similar to but slightly
less than the oxygen equivalent ethanol fuels of E10 and E17. Samples
of metals commonly found in fuel storage and dispensing systems were
immersed in 16 percent and 24 percent isobutanol blends at 60 [deg]C
for 28 days. In all cases, the annualized corrosion rates for
isobutanol based on weight loss were negligible.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Kass, M.; Theiss, T.; Janke, C.; Pawel, S.; et al;
Compatibility study for plastic, elastomeric, and metallic fueling
infrastructure materials exposed to aggressive formulations of
isobutanol-blended gasoline. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, in a 50-hour field emissions test of 175 horsepower and
215 horsepower boating engines, 16.1 volume percent isobutanol (blended
to 93 octane) showed similar total HC+NOX emissions compared
to a non-oxygenated certification gasoline.\10\ In that same test, CO
emissions were reduced using isobutanol vs. indolene which was expected
as isobutanol is a partially oxidized fuel. The enleanment reported for
16.1 percent isobutanol was in line with what is typical of E10
relative to indolene. The study noted that no operability issues were
observed while the marine engines were operated on the gasoline-
isobutanol blended fuels.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Until changed in the Tier 3 rulemaking (see 79 FR 23414,
April 28, 2014), certification gasoline did not contain ethanol, or
any other oxygenates. However, the Tier 3 rulemaking now requires
federal motor vehicle gasoline certification fuel to contain 10
volume percent ethanol.
    \11\ Wasil, J. R.; McKnight, J.; Kolb, R.; Munz, D.; Adey, J.;
and Goodwin, B.; In-use performance testing of butanol-extended fuel
in recreational marine engines and vessels. SAE [Tech Pap.] 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency believes that based on the referenced studies on the
potential effects of isobutanol on gasoline-fueled vehicles and engines
and its engineering judgement, that modern motor vehicles and engines
should continue to meet emissions standards and suffer no issues with
driveability or operability on gasoline-isobutanol blended fuels up to
16 volume percent. However, even though the information cited above
concerning regulated emissions, retail fuel dispensing and storage
equipment materials, and marine engines suggests that isobutanol
blended into gasoline should not pose any significant issues, the
narrowness of the size and scope of these studies does not address all
potential effects isobutanol may have on gasoline-fueled vehicles and
engines. Therefore, the Agency seeks comment on whether there is
available information on other areas that should be addressed for
gasoline-isobutanol blended fuels up to 16 volume percent. The Agency
could use information gleaned from this public comment process to
determine whether further controls might be necessary (potentially via
rulemaking under section 211(c) of the Act) to help ensure the smooth
introduction of isobutanol into the gasoline market or to help
determine whether the Agency should impose certain conditions on the
registration of isobutanol as a gasoline additive through 40 CFR part
79.

IV. Conclusion

    The EPA will register isobutanol for Butamax in accordance with the
regulations at 40 CFR part 79 once applicable requirements are met.
Butamax has submitted the required information, including: (1) The
speciation of exhaust and evaporative emissions for gasoline with 16
percent isobutanol (Tier 1 testing), (2) a literature search for health
information on the Tier 1 emissions found for that blend that were not
found in the Tier 1 testing of gasoline without any oxygenate, and (3)
the results of the Alternative Tier 2 health-effects testing for that
blend (animal exposure to evaporative emissions). Butamax has also
submitted information to demonstrate that it can comply with the
requirements of the OCTAMIX waiver, which allows the blending of
isobutanol into gasoline at up to 3.7 percent oxygen by weight, or 16
percent isobutanol by volume.
    The EPA seeks comments and any information and data on the use of
isobutanol in gasoline, including, but not limited to: (1) The need for
additional health-effects testing under the Tier 3 provisions in the
regulations, and (2) the need for additional regulatory controls for 16
percent isobutanol in gasoline, beyond those for gasoline at 40 CFR
parts 79 and 80, under the authority of CAA section 211(c).

    Dated: March 15, 2018.
Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2018-06119 Filed 3-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 62322]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24463]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AC13-170-000]

Duke Energy Progress, Inc.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on September 18, 2013, Duke Energy Progress, Inc.
(DEP) submitted a request to use Account 182.2, Unrecovered Plant and
Regulatory Study Costs, to account for the actual and planned early
retirement of certain generating units in North and South Carolina. DEP
also requests authority to amortize the balance in Account 182.2 to
Account 407, Amortization for Property Losses, Unrecovered Plant and
Regulatory Study Costs.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 or 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: October 28, 2013.

    Dated: October 7, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-24463 Filed 10-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 36)]
[Notices]
[Page 9800-9801]
[DOCID:fr22fe08-65]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0025; FRL-8349-6]

National Advisory Committee for Acute Exposure Guideline Levels
for Hazardous Substances; Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: A meeting of the National Advisory Committee for Acute
Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances (NAC/AEGL Committee)
will be held on March 3-5, 2008, in Alexandria, VA. At this meeting,
the NAC/AEGL Committee will address, as time permits, the various
aspects of the acute toxicity and the development of Acute Exposure
Guideline Levels (AEGLs) for the following chemicals: 1,1,1-
trichloroethane; 1,2-butylene oxide; cyanogen; ethyl benzene; ethyl
isocyanate; ethylphosphonothioic dichloride;
ethylphosphonodichloridate; germane; isobutyl isocyanate; isopropyl
isocyanate; methoxymethyl isocyanate; methyl iodide; methyl
isothiocyanate; n-butyl isocyanate; t-butyl isocyanate; nitrogen
tetroxide; nitrogen trioxide; n-propyl isocyanate; phenyl isocyanate;
and tetrachloroethylene.

DATES: A meeting of the NAC/AEGL Committee will be held from 10 a.m. to
5:30 p.m. on March 3, 2008; 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on March 4, 2008; and 8
a.m. to noon on March 5, 2008.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Hilton Alexandria Old Town,
1767 King Street, Alexandria, VA. (King Street Metro stop).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address: TSCA-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For technical information contact: Paul S. Tobin, Designated
Federal Officer (DFO), Economics, Exposure, and Technology Division
(7403M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    To request accommodation of a disability, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, preferably at least 10
days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to
process your request.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may
be of particular interest to anyone who may be affected if the AEGL
values are adopted by government agencies for emergency planning,
prevention, or response programs, such as EPA's Risk Management Program
under the Clean Air Act and Amendments section 112r. It is possible
that other Federal agencies besides EPA, as well as State agencies and
private organizations, may adopt the AEGL values for their programs. As
such, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0025. All documents in the docket are
listed in the docket's index available at http://www.regulations.gov.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only
in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in
hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of
operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is
(202) 566-0280. Docket visitors are required to show photographic
identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign the EPA visitor
log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray machine and
subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must
be

visible at all times in the building and returned upon departure.
    2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.

II. Meeting Procedures

    For additional information on the scheduled meeting, the agenda of
the NAC/AEGL Committee, or the submission of information on chemicals
to be discussed at the meeting, contact the DFO listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    The meeting of the NAC/AEGL Committee will be open to the public.
Oral presentations or statements by interested parties will be limited
to 10 minutes. Interested parties are encouraged to contact the DFO to
schedule presentations before the NAC/AEGL Committee. Since seating for
outside observers may be limited, those wishing to attend the meeting
as observers are also encouraged to contact the DFO at the earliest
possible date to ensure adequate seating arrangements. Inquiries
regarding oral presentations and the submission of written statements
or chemical-specific information should be directed to the DFO.

III. Future Meetings

    Another meeting of the NAC/AEGL Committee is scheduled for June
2008.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Health.

    Dated: February 7, 2008.
Charles M. Auer,
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
[FR Doc. E8-3400 Filed 2-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8945-8946]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02986]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Delayed Applications

AGENCY: Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.

ACTION: List of application delayed more than 180 days.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5117(c),
PHMSA is publishing the following list of special permit applications
that have been in process for 180 days or more. The reason(s) for delay
and the expected completion date for action on each application is
provided in association with each identified application.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Paquet, Director, Office of
Hazardous Materials Special Permits and Approvals, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, East Building, PHH-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Key to ``Reason for Delay''

    1. Awaiting additional information from applicant.
    2. Extensive public comment under review.
    3. Application is technically complex and is of significant impact
or precedent-setting and requires extensive analysis.
    4. Staff review delayed by other priority issues or volume of
special permit applications.

Meaning of Application Number Suffixes

N--New application
M--Modification request
R--Renewal Request
P--Party To Exemption Request

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 3, 2015.
Donald Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Reason for    Estimated date
  Applicaton No.         Applicant             delay       of completion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Modification to Special Permits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15642-M..........  Praxair Distribution,               4      02-28-2015
                    Inc., Danbury, CT.
11903-M..........  Comptank Corporation,               4      03-31-2015
                    Bothwell, ON.
8451-M...........  Special Devices,                    4      03-31-2015
                    Inc., Mesa, AR.
15552-M..........  Poly-Coat Systems,                  4      03-15-2015
                    Inc., Liverpool, TX.
12116-M..........  Proserv UK Ltd, East                4      02-28-2015
                    Tullos Aberdeen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     New Special Permit Applications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15767-N..........  Union Pacific                       1      02-28-2015
                    Railroad Company,
                    Omaha, NE.
16001-N..........  VELTEK, Malvern, PA..               4      03-31-2015
16061-N..........  Battery Solutions,                  4      02-28-2015
                    LLC, Howell, MI.
16154-N..........  Patriot Fireworks,                  4      03-31-2015
                    LLC, Ann Arbor, MI.
16189-N..........  Coffeyville Resources               4      02-28-2015
                    Nitrogen
                    Fertilizers, LLC,
                    Kansas City, KS.
16190-N..........  Digital Wave                        4      02-28-2015
                    Corporation,
                    Centennial, CO.
16217-N..........  Fuji Electric Co.,                  4      04-30-2015
                    Ltd., Shinagawa-ku,
                    To.
16198-N..........  Fleischmann's Vinegar               4      02-28-2015
                    Company, Inc.,
                    Cerritos, CA.
16181-N..........  Arc Process, Inc.,                  4      03-31-2015
                    Pflugerville, TX.
16212-N..........  Entegris, Inc.,                     4      04-30-2015
                    Billerica, MA.
16220-N..........  Americase, Waxahache,               4      02-28-2015
                    TX.
16193-N..........  CH&I Technologies,                  4      03-31-2015
                    Inc., Santa Paula,
                    CA.
16199-N..........  Rosharon Testing and                4      02-28-2015
                    Subsea Center, A
                    Division of
                    Schlumberger
                    Technology
                    Corporation,
                    Rosharon, TX.
15991-N..........  Dockweiler, Neustadt-               4      03-31-2015
                    Glewe, Germany.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Renewal Special Permits Applications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
11602-R..........  East Tennessee Iron &               4      03-31-2015
                    Metal, Inc.,
                    Rogersville, TN.

11860-R..........  GATX Corporation,                   4      02-28-2015
                    Chicago, IL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-02986 Filed 2-18-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-M


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 3, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5-7]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29678]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 1 / Tuesday, January 3, 2017 / Rules
and Regulations

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-3698; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-138-AD;
Amendment 39-18733; AD 2016-25-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH)
indicating that the aft pressure bulkhead is subject to widespread
fatigue damage (WFD). This AD requires replacing the aft pressure
bulkhead with a new, improved aft pressure bulkhead, and doing related
investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this
AD to prevent the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective February 7, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 7,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It
is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3698.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
3698; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6447; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company
Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on February 22, 2016 (81 FR 8668) (``the NPRM''). The
NPRM was prompted by an evaluation by the DAH indicating that the aft
pressure bulkhead at Station 1582 is subject to WFD. The NPRM proposed
to require replacing the aft pressure bulkhead with a new, improved aft
pressure bulkhead, and doing related investigative and corrective
actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue
cracking in the radial web lap splices of the aft pressure bulkhead.
Such cracking could result in rapid decompression and consequent
reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comments received. Boeing and United
Airlines supported the NPRM.

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the supplemental
type certificate (STC) ST01920SE does not affect compliance with the
actions specified in the NPRM.
    We agree with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of
the proposed AD as (c)(1) and added paragraph (c)(2) to this AD to
state that installation of STC ST01920SE does not affect the ability to
accomplish the actions required by this final rule. Therefore, for
airplanes on which STC ST01920SE is installed, a ``change in product''
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not
necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

Changes To This AD

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267,
Revision 1, dated August 4, 2016, and there are no substantial changes.
Therefore, we have included Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267,
Revision 1, dated August 4, 2016, in paragraphs (c), (g), (h), and (i)
of this AD. We have also provided credit in paragraph (j) of this AD
for actions done prior to the effective date of this AD using Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267, dated August 13, 2015.
    We have also revised paragraph (g) of this AD to clarify certain
terminating actions.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic

burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267, Revision 1,
dated August 4, 2016. The service information describes procedures for
replacing the aft pressure bulkhead at Station 1582 of Section 48 with
a new, improved aft pressure bulkhead, including all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 86 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on  U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement........................  1,541 work-hours x $85 per         $646,889        $777,874     $66,897,164
                                      hour = $130,985.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that enables us to provide cost
estimates for the on-condition investigative and corrective actions
specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2016-25-07 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18733; Docket No. FAA-
2016-3698; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-138-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 7, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects the ADs specified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2),
and (b)(3) of this AD.
    (1) AD 2004-05-16, Amendment 39-13511 (69 FR 10917, March 9,
2004).
    (2) AD 2004-14-19, Amendment 39-13728 (69 FR 42549, July 16,
2004).
    (3) AD 2009-06-19, Amendment 39-15856 (74 FR 12243, March 24,
2009).

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-200 and -300
series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267, Revision 1, dated August
4, 2016.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSTC.nsf/0/38B606833BBD98B386257FAA00602538?OpenDocument&Highlight=st01920se)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01920SE is
installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval
holder (DAH) indicating that the aft pressure bulkhead at Station
1582 is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing
this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in the radial web lap splices of
the aft pressure bulkhead. Such cracking could result in rapid
decompression and consequent reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Replacement, Related Investigative and Corrective Actions, and
Terminating Actions

    Before the accumulation of 60,000 total flight cycles, or within
36 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later, but not earlier than 37,500 total accumulated flight cycles:
Replace the aft pressure bulkhead at Station 1582 of Section 48 with
a new, improved aft pressure bulkhead, and perform all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
53A0267, Revision 1, dated August 4, 2016; except as required by
paragraph (h) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions before further flight. Accomplishing the
replacement in this paragraph terminates all requirements of the ADs
identified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD.
    (1) AD 2004-05-16, Amendment 39-13511 (69 FR 10917, March 9,
2004).
    (2) AD 2004-14-19, Amendment 39-13728 (69 FR 42549, July 16,
2004).
    (3) AD 2009-06-19, Amendment 39-15856 (74 FR 12243, March 24,
2009).

(h) Corrective Actions

    If any defect (e.g., rifling, gouging, nicks, or burrs, or
excessive surface roughness) is found in any fastener hole (other
than normally produced during a typical reaming operation), during
accomplishment of any inspection (related investigative actions)
required by this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267,
Revision 1, dated August 4, 2016, specifies to contact Boeing for
repair instructions: Before further flight, repair in accordance
with the procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.

(i) Exception to the Service Information

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267, Revision 1,
dated August 4, 2016, specifies a compliance time ``after the
original issue date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the specified time after the effective date of
this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-53A0267, dated August 13, 2015; which is not
incorporated by reference in this AD.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the 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, 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, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. To be approved, the
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: For service
information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (k)(4)(i) and
(k)(4)(ii) apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or sub-step is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then
the RC requirement is removed from that step or sub-step. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0267, Revision 1, dated
August 4, 2016.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 25, 2016.
John P. Piccola, Jr.,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-29678 Filed 12-30-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 3, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 148)]
[Notices]
[Page 45696-45697]
[DOCID:fr03au10-140]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2010-0194]

Pipeline Safety: Personal Electronic Device Related Distractions

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
DOT.

ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory Bulletin.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an Advisory Bulletin to remind owners and
operators of natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline facilities of
the risks associated with the use of personal electronic devices (PEDs)
by individuals performing operations and maintenance activities on a
pipeline facility.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cameron Satterthwaite by phone at 202-
366-1319 or by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>General
information about the Department of Transportation initiative on
distracted driving may be found at http://www.distractions.gov.
Information about PHMSA may be found at http://phmsa.dot.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The U.S. Department of Transportation is leading the effort to end
the dangerous practice of distracted driving on our nation's roadways
and in other modes of transportation. The use of PEDs, such as cellular
telephones and mobile computers, while operating motor vehicles has
been the subject of recent Departmental regulations and guidance.
(e.g., Restrictions on Railroad Operating Employees' Use of Cellular
Telephones and Other Electronic Devices, 75 FR 9754, May 18, 2010;
Limiting the Use of Wireless Communication Devices, 75 FR 16391, April
1, 2010.) In furtherance of this effort, PHMSA recognizes that the use
of PEDs by pipeline employees who are performing operations and
maintenance activities may pose a similar risk to safety if those
individuals are distracted, especially when such use is for personal
business.
    The Federal pipeline safety regulations in 49 CFR Parts 190 through
199 prescribe minimum safety standards for pipeline transportation and
for pipeline facilities. Owners and operators of natural gas and
hazardous liquid pipeline facilities are required to have and follow
written procedures for safely conducting operations and maintenance
tasks. (49 CFR 192.605, 193.2503, and 195.402) Individuals performing
those tasks, particularly activities that affect the operation or
integrity of the pipeline facility, must be qualified under a program
developed by each operator that ensures individuals are trained and
have the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary to perform the tasks
safely and to recognize and react to abnormal conditions. (49 CFR
192.805, 193.2707, and 195.505.)
    There may be increased risks associated with the use of PEDs by
personnel performing pipeline activities affecting operation or
integrity. Pipeline operations and maintenance tasks require a critical
level of attention and skill, which may be compromised by visual,
manual, or cognitive distractions caused by the use of PEDs. Such
distractions may also hinder their prompt recognition and reaction to
abnormal operating conditions and emergencies.
    PHMSA recommends that operators integrate into their written
procedures for operations and maintenance appropriate controls
regarding the use of PEDs by individuals performing pipeline tasks that
may affect pipeline operation or integrity. PHMSA is not discouraging
the use of PEDs as a part of normal business operations. PHMSA

also recommends that operators provide guidance and training for all
personnel about the risks associated with the use of PEDs while
driving, and while performing activities on behalf of the company if
that use poses a risk to safety.

Advisory Bulletin (ADB-10-06)

    To: Owners and Operators of Hazardous Liquid and Natural Gas
Pipeline Systems.
    Subject: Personal Electronic Device (PED) Related Distractions.
    Advisory: As with other modes of transportation, PHMSA recognizes
the use of PEDs by pipeline employees who are performing operations and
maintenance activities may increase safety risks if those individuals
become distracted. In furtherance of the Department's effort to end the
dangerous practice of distractions caused by PEDs throughout the
various modes of transportation, PHMSA is issuing this Advisory
Bulletin about the potential for distractions affecting pipeline
safety.
    PHMSA reminds owners and operators of natural gas and hazardous
liquid pipeline facilities that there may be increased risks associated
with the use of PEDs by individuals performing activities that affect
pipeline operation or integrity. Pipeline operations and maintenance
tasks require a critical level of attention and skill, which may be
compromised by visual, manual, and cognitive distractions caused by the
use of PEDs. Such distractions may also hinder their prompt recognition
and reaction to abnormal operating conditions and emergencies.
    Owners and operators of natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline
facilities should integrate into their written procedures for
operations and maintenance appropriate controls regarding the personal
use of PEDs by individuals performing pipeline tasks that may affect
the operation or integrity of a pipeline. PHMSA is not discouraging the
use of PEDs as a part of normal business operations. Owners and
operators should also provide guidance and training for all personnel
about the risks associated with the use of PEDs while driving and while
performing activities on behalf of the company if that use poses a risk
to safety.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2010.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2010-18947 Filed 8-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: May 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 103)]
[Notices]
[Page 30081-30082]
[DOCID:fr28my10-144]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62155; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-67]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
to the Risk Management Interface

May 24, 2010.
    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 May 17, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to effect an information-related enhancement
to the current Risk Management Feed Interface in Phlx XL II. The
Exchange is not proposing any rule changes.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the
principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and on the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to propose a series of
enhancements to the interface for receiving real-time clearing trade
updates. A real-time clearing trade update is a message that is sent to
a member after an execution has occurred and contains trade details.
The message containing the trade details is also simultaneously sent to
the The Options Clearing Corporation.
    The Exchange currently provides Exchange members with real-time
clearing trade updates through a Risk Management Feed known as the
``RMP''.\3\ The updates include the members clearing trade messages on
a low latency, real-time basis. The trade messages are routed to a
member's connection containing certain information.\4\ The
administrative and market event messages include, but are not limited
to: System event messages to communicate operational-related events;
options directory messages to relay basic option symbol and contract
information for options traded on the Exchange; complex strategy
messages to relay information for those strategies traded on the
Exchange;\5\ and trading action messages to inform market participants
when a specific option or strategy is halted or released for trading on
the Exchange. This existing RMP interface will be retired in September
2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange assesses its members a Real-time Risk
Management Fee of $.003 per contract for receiving this information.
The Exchange is not proposing to amend this fee.
    \4\ The information includes, among other things, the following:
(i) The Clearing Member Trade Agreement or ``CMTA'' or The Options
Clearing Corporation or ``OCC'' number; (ii) Exchange badge or house
number; and (iii) the Exchange internal firm identifier.
    \5\ The information related to complex order strategy messages
includes information that lists the legs and the leg ratios, which
uniquely defines this strategy for an underlying.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with these enhancements, the Exchange proposes to
rename the RMP interface as the Clearing Trade Interface (``CTI'').
This proposed interface will provide increased throughput and
significantly lower latency for clearing trade updates.\6\ In addition,
the new interface will contain an indicator which will distinguish
electronic \7\ and non-electronically \8\ delivered orders.\9\ This
information will be available to members on a real-time basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange will post the technical specifications on its
Web site and testing will be available. The Exchange intends to send
an Options Technical Update to notify members of the new interface
and testing availability.
    \7\ Electronically delivered orders do not include orders
delivered through the Floor Broker Management System, but rather are
delivered utilizing PHLX XL II.
    \8\ An order that is represented on the trading floor by a floor
broker. See Exchange Rule 1063.
    \9\ Members that apply for this interface will continue to
receive only their own trade data and data for their customers.
Members utilizing RMP only receive their own trade data and data for
their customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to continue to provide real-time clearing
trade updates, referred to as CTI, with significantly lower latency as
well as additional information, such as trade detail information that
distinguishes electronically and non-electronically delivered orders.
This new CTI will be made available to users promptly after successful
testing with the Exchange. CTI will be available to all members.\10\
The Exchange is not proposing any rule changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange assesses a Real-Time Risk Management Fee of
$.003 per contract to receive this information. Currently RMP is
available to all members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \12\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by providing members more efficient real-time clearing trade
updates. This proposal is not a burden on competition and serves to
protect investors and the public interest, in that CTI is a tool for
members to receive real-time trade details and utilize that information
to

capture fees on a real-time basis and also receive information on
whether the orders were electronically or non-electronically delivered.
This information will provide members more transparency on the fees
assessed on transactions. The clearing trade updates are and will
continue to be available to all members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (1)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) impose any significant burden on competition; and (3)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). When filing a proposed rule change
pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act, an Exchange is required
to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the
proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the
proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date
of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as
designated by the Commission. The Exchange has met this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Phlx has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative
delay. The Commission hereby grants that request.\15\ The Commission
believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Commission notes
that the Exchange proposes to allow members to test the CTI
immediately, and to migrate to the CTI upon successful testing. The
Exchange proposes to retire the RMP in September 2010. Waiving the
operative delay will thus allow the Exchange to provide members an
increased period of time to test and migrate to the CTI before the
retirement of the RMP in September 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2010-67 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-67. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-67 and should be
submitted on or before June 18, 2010.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-12873 Filed 5-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 71595]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28546]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2210-238]

Appalachian Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, Protests, and
Recommendations

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) and is
available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Application for non-project use of project
lands and waters to increase water withdrawal and construct facilities.
    b. Project No: 2210-238.
    c. Date Filed: October 10, 2013.
    d. Applicant: Appalachian Power Company (licensee).
    e. Name of Project: Smith Mountain Pumped Storage Project.
    f. Location: The Smith Mountain Project is located on the Roanoke
River in Bedford, Campbell, Franklin, and Pittsylvania Counties,
Virginia. The project does not occupy any federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Frank M. Simms, Hydro Supervisor--Plant
Manager II, Appalachian Power Company, 40 Franklin Road, Roanoke, VA
24011. Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Rachel Price at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, protests,
and recommendations: December 19, 2013. The Commission strongly
encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene,
protests, comments, or recommendations using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-
2210-238) on any comments, motions to intervene, protests, or
recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: Appalachian Power Company, licensee for
the Smith Mountain Pumped Storage Project, requests an amendment of the
Order Approving Non-Project Use of Project Lands and Waters--Water
Withdrawal Increase issued October 10, 2008. The amendment would allow
the Bedford Regional Water Authority to increase its current water
withdrawal from 2.999 million gallons per day (MGD) to maximum daily
rate of 12 MGD. The licensee is requesting the Commission grant it non-
project use of project lands and waters for the Bedford Regional Water
Authority to construct and operate permanent water withdrawal
facilities within the project boundary.
    l. Locations of the Application: The application may be viewed on
the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above and in the Commission's Public Reference Room located at 888
First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202)
502-8371.
    m. Individuals who would like to be electronically notified of
issuances and filings related to this application should eSubscribe to
docket P-2210 at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp. In
lieu of eSubscription, individuals can be added to the Commission's
mailing list by writing to the Secretary.
    n. Comments, Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Recommendations:
Anyone may submit comments, motion to intervene, protests, or
recommendations in accordance with the requirements of Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the
appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all comments,
protests, or recommendations filed, but only those who file a motion to
intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party
to the proceeding. Any comments, motions to intervene, protests, or
recommendations must be received on or before the specified comment
date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTESTS'',
``RECOMMENDATIONS'', or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set
forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number
of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name,
address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening;
and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001
through 385.2005. All comments, protests, recommendations, or motions
to intervene must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain
copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any
protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative
of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to
this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: November 20, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-28546 Filed 11-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P