[Federal Register: February 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 25)]
[Notices]
[Page 6954]
[DOCID:fr06fe08-42]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL00-95-204, EL00-98-189]

San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Sellers of Energy and
Ancillary Services; Investigation of Practices of the California
Independent System Operator and the California Power Exchange; Notice
of Filing

January 30, 2008.
    Take notice that on January 29, 2008, Conectiv Energy Supply, Inc.
and the California Parties filed a joint compliance filing in response
to the Commission's January 4, 2008 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 February 19, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-2114 Filed 2-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 44 (Monday, March 7, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12569-12571]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04666]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-1059; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00797-T;
Amendment 39-21958; AD 2022-05-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. This AD was prompted by
a report that in the event of a specific discrete wire failure, the
landing gear extension and retraction system (LGERS) may not be able to
complete landing gear retraction when commanded by moving the landing
gear lever to the UP position. This AD requires revising the operator's
existing FAA-approved minimum equipment list (MEL) for the LGERS, as
specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which
is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 11, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 11,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone
+49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-1059; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations is
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large
Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0161, dated July 6, 2021 (EASA
AD 2021-0161) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model
A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. The NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on December 17, 2021 (86 FR 71587). The NPRM was prompted by a
report that in the event of a specific discrete wire failure, the LGERS
may not be able to complete landing gear retraction when commanded by
moving the landing gear lever to the UP position. The NPRM proposed to
require revising the operator's existing FAA-approved MEL for the
LGERS, as specified in EASA AD 2021-0161.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received a comment from The Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA), who supported the NPRM without change.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment
received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as
proposed. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as
proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic
burden on any operator. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0161 describes procedures for revising the LGERS for
master minimum equipment list

(MMEL) item 32-31-01. This material is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 19 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170...........................              $0             $170           $3,230
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2022-05-07 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-21958; Docket No. FAA-2021-1059;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00797-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective April 11, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that in the event of a specific
discrete wire failure, the landing gear extension and retraction
system (LGERS) may not be able to complete landing gear retraction
when commanded by moving the landing gear lever to the UP position.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address this condition, which, if one
engine is inoperative at takeoff, could lead to a reduction of the
flight path clearance and possibly result in damage to the airplane
and injury to occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2021-0161, dated July 6, 2021 (EASA AD
2021-0161).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0161

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0161 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Whereas paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2021-0161 specifies to
``inform all flight crews, and, thereafter, operate the aeroplane
accordingly,'' this AD does not require those actions as those
actions are already required by existing FAA operating regulations.
    (3) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0161 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this
AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests that are not identified 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 procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or

changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of
an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0161,
dated July 6, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2021-0161, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on February 17, 2022.
Derek Morgan,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-04666 Filed 3-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on June 11, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2003-15313

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

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

Applicant:  CONSORCIO AVIACSA, S.A. de C.V.
                       Date Filed:  June 2, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to conduct scheduled, combination services between Mexico
City, Mexico, and Las Vegas, Nevada.

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

Applicant representative(s):  Jim J. Marquez,<PHONE_NUMBER>        DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved.			       			                        Action date:
June 11, 2003

Effective dates of authority granted:  June 11, 2003, through June 11,
2004.

Basis for approval:  United States-Mexico Air Transport Services
Agreement

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

Special conditions/Remarks:

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

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

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

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_avia楴湯愮灳

*


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5612]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01656]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Application of Aerodynamics Incorporated for Certificate
Authority

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2015-1-16) Docket DOT-OST-
2014-0114.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is directing all interested
persons to show cause why it should not deny the application for a
certificate of public convenience and necessity to engage in interstate
scheduled air transportation of persons, property, and mail to
Aerodynamics Incorporated, and revoke its certificates to conduct
interstate and foreign charter air transportation of persons, property,
and mail.

DATES: Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than
February 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections should be filed in
Docket DOT-OST-2014-0114 and addressed to the Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC and should be
served upon the parties listed in Attachment A to the order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine O'Toole, Air Carrier Fitness
Division, (X-56, Office W86-469), U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 16, 2015.
Brandon M. Belford,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2015-01656 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 198 (Wednesday, October 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61865-61866]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26035]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76094; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2015-90]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 6.89
To Update a Cross-Reference to Exchange's Recently Revised Rule
Regarding Obvious Errors

October 7, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on October 1, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.89 to update a cross-
reference to Exchange's recently revised rule regarding Obvious Errors.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 6.89 (Erroneous Trades
due to System Disruptions and Malfunctions) to update a cross-reference
to Exchange's recently revised rule regarding Obvious Errors.
Specifically, in coordination with other options exchanges, the
Exchange recently revised Rule 6.87 (Nullification and Adjustment of
Options Transactions including Obvious Errors) (the ``O/E Rule'') to
harmonize substantial portions of the Rule with recently adopted, and
proposed rules of other options Exchanges.\4\ In connection with that
revision, the Exchange reorganized and re-numbered certain sections of
the O/E Rule, but inadvertently failed to update a cross-reference to
the O/E Rule that is contained in Rule 6.89. Specifically, Rule 6.89
incorrectly refers to guidelines contained in paragraphs
(a)(3)(C)(A)(i)-(ii) of Rule 6.87, and should refer to paragraph (b) of
Rule 6.87, in regards to the potential adjustment of ``[e]lectronic or
open outcry transactions arising out of a `verifiable disruption or
malfunction' in the use or operation of any Exchange dissemination,
execution, or communication system.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 74921 (May 8, 2015), 80
FR 27747 (May 14, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-41).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule filing is intended to replace the incorrect reference to
the O/E Rule with the correct, updated reference, which will clarify
Exchange rules and alleviate any investor confusion. The proposed
change will further harmonize the Exchange's rules with those of other
option exchanges that also reference paragraph (b) in their respective
rules governing System Disruptions and Malfunctions.\5\ In addition,
the proposed change would ensure that the Exchange would not be
prevented from adjusting a trade in the event of a systems disruption,
which would protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See MKT Rule 975NY(l). See also Chicago Board Options
Exchange Rule 6.25, Commentary .05.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5),\7\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitation transactions
in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirement that the
rules of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
will remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and
open market by making cross-references contained in Rule 6.89
consistent with the updated O/E Rule text.\9\ In addition, the proposed
change would ensure that the Exchange would not be prevented from
adjusting a trade in the event of a systems disruption, which would
protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change would provide transparency, internal
consistency, and operational certainty and may reduce potential
investor confusion. The Exchange believes additional transparency and
clarity removes a potential impediment to, and would contribute to
perfecting, the mechanism for a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, would protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra n. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that this proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not
designed to address any competitive issue but rather to update cross
references to the O/E Rule, thereby reducing confusion and making the
Exchange's rules easier to understand and navigate. The Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will serve to promote regulatory
clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on the marketplace
and facilitating investor protection.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the 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 asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon
filing. The Exchange stated that waiver of the operative delay will
permit the Exchange to correct outmoded references without delay,
thereby promoting clarity in the Exchange rules and reducing potential
investor confusion. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative
delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon
filing.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2015-90 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2015-90. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of 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 available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2015-90, and should
be submitted on or before November 4, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-26035 Filed 10-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 90 (Thursday, May 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22053-22055]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09513]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; Toyota Motor North America, Inc.

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Toyota Motor North America,
Inc.'s (Toyota) petition for an exemption of the Lexus NX vehicle line
in accordance with the Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has determined
that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard
equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor
vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard (Theft Prevention
Standard).

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2018 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, W43-439, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's phone number is
(202) 366-4139. Her fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated December 7, 2016, Toyota
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard for the Lexus NX vehicle line beginning with MY
2018. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking pursuant
to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard,
based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard equipment
for the entire vehicle line.
    Under 49 CFR 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant
an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition,
Toyota provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity,
design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the
Lexus NX vehicle line. Toyota stated that its MY 2018 Lexus NX vehicle
line and NX hybrid vehicle (HV) model will be installed with a ``smart
entry and start'' system and an engine immobilizer device as standard
equipment. Toyota further explained that the ``smart entry and start''
system on its Lexus NX vehicle line will have slightly different
components than those on its NX HV model. Key components of the ``smart
entry and start'' system on the Lexus NX vehicle line will include an
engine immobilizer, a certification electronic control unit (ECU),
engine switch, steering lock ECU, security indicator, door control
receiver, electrical key, an electronic control module (ECM) and an ID
code box. The key components installed on its NX HV model will also
include a power switch and a power source HV-ECU. Toyota stated that it
will also install an audible and visual alarm system on its Lexus NX
vehicle line as standard equipment and that there will be position
switches installed on the vehicle to protect the hood and doors from
unauthorized tampering/opening. Toyota further explained locking of the
doors can be accomplished through use of a conventional key, wireless
switch incorporated within the key fob or its smart entry system, and
that unauthorized tampering with the hood or door without using one of
these methods will cause the position switches to trigger its alarm
system.
    Toyota's submission is considered a complete petition as required
by 49 CFR 543.7 in that it meets the general requirements contained in
Sec.  543.5 and the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6,
Toyota provided information on the reliability and durability of its
proposed device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device,
Toyota conducted tests based on its own specified standards.

Toyota provided a detailed list of the tests conducted (i.e., high and
low temperature, strength, impact, vibration, electro-magnetic
interference, etc.). Toyota stated that it believes that its device is
reliable and durable because it complied with its own specific design
standards and the antitheft device is installed on other vehicle lines
for which the agency has granted a parts-marking exemption. As an
additional measure of reliability and durability, Toyota stated that
its vehicle key cylinders are covered with casting cases to prevent the
key cylinder from easily being broken. Toyota further explained that
the numerous key cylinder combinations and key plates it uses for its
inner gutter keys would make it difficult to unlock the doors without
using a valid key because the key cylinders would spin out and cause
the locks to not work.
    Deactivation of its smart key-installed system occurs when the
doors are unlocked and the device recognizes the key code.
Specifically, once the driver pushes the engine switch button located
on the instrument panel to start the vehicle, the certification ECU
verifies the electrical key. When the key is verified, the
certification ECU, ID code box and steering lock ECU receive
confirmation of the valid key, and the certification ECU allows the ECM
to start the engine. With the NX HV model ``smart entry and start''
system, once the driver pushes the power switch button, the
certification ECU verifies the key, the certification ECU, ID code box
and steering lock ECU receive confirmation of a valid key, and then the
certification ECU will allow the ECM to start the vehicle.
    Toyota stated that its ``smart entry and start'' system is
activated when the engine switch is pushed from the ``ON'' ignition
status to any other ignition status, the certification ECU performs the
calculation of the immobilizer and the immobilizer signals the ECM to
activate the device. On the NX HV model, the ``smart entry and start''
system is activated when the power switch is pushed from the ``ON''
ignition status to any other ignition status, the certification ECU
performs the calculation of the immobilizer and the immobilizer signals
the HV-ECU to activate the device.
    Toyota stated that the antitheft device has been installed as
standard equipment beginning with its MY 2015 Lexus NX vehicle line,
including its NX HV model. The theft rate for the Toyota Lexus NX
vehicle line is not available. Toyota also compared its proposed device
to other devices NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing
and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-
marking requirements (i.e., Toyota Camry, Corolla, Prius, RAV4,
Highlander, Sienna, Lexus LS, and Lexus GS vehicle lines) which have
all been granted parts-marking exemptions by the agency. The theft
rates for the Toyota Camry, Corolla, Prius, RAV4, Highlander, Sienna,
Lexus LS, and Lexus RX vehicle lines using an average of three model
years' data (2012-Preliminary 2014) are 1.2975, 1.5408, 0.3164, 0.3455,
0.4711, 0.5133, 0.5605 and 0.4574 respectively. Additionally, Toyota
compared the theft rate of its MY 2013 Lexus RX (0.4110) to the overall
final theft rate (1.1562 per thousand vehicles produced) for MY 2013
passenger vehicles stolen in calendar year 2013 (published in the
Federal Register on November 23, 2015). Therefore, Toyota has concluded
that the antitheft device proposed for its Lexus NX vehicle line is no
less effective than those devices on the lines for which NHTSA has
already granted full exemption from the parts-marking requirements.
Toyota stated that it believes that installing the immobilizer as
standard equipment reduces the theft rate and expects the Lexus NX
vehicle line to experience comparable effectiveness, and ultimately be
more effective than parts-marking labels.
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Toyota on its device,
the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Lexus NX vehicle
line is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor
vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). The agency concludes that
the device will provide the five types of performance listed in Sec.
543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts
of unauthorized persons to enter or operate a vehicle by means other
than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by
unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and durability of
the device.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541, either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Toyota has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Toyota Lexus NX vehicle line is likely to be
as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard (49 CFR part 541). This conclusion is based on the information
Toyota provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Toyota's petition for exemption for the Lexus NX vehicle line from the
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49
CFR part 541, Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted
from the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR
543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the disposition
of all part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of
future product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the
petition is granted and a general description of the antitheft device
is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle
lines exempted from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard.
    If Toyota decides not to use the exemption for this line, it should
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5 and
Sec.  541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Toyota wishes in the future to modify the
device on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit
a petition to modify the exemption. Section 543.7(d) states that a part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, Sec.  543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Sec.
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should

consult the agency before preparing and submitting a petition to
modify.

    Authority:  49 CFR 1.95.

Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-09513 Filed 5-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: November 25, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 226)]
[Notices]
[Page 61671-61673]
[DOCID:fr25no09-60]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8977-7; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2009-0816]

A Framework for Categorizing the Relative Vulnerability of
Threatened and Endangered Species to Climate Change

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a 30-day public comment period for the draft
document titled, ``A Framework for Categorizing the Relative
Vulnerability of Threatened and Endangered Species to Climate Change''
(EPA/600/R-09/011). The document was prepared by the National Center
for Environmental Assessment within EPA's Office of Research and
Development. This draft document describes an evaluative framework that
may be used to categorize the relative vulnerability of species to
climate change. To illustrate the use of this framework, it was applied
to five U.S. threatened and endangered species: The golden-cheeked
warbler, the salt marsh harvest mouse, the Mount Graham red squirrel,
the Lahontan cutthroat trout, and the desert tortoise. A sixth species,
the bald eagle which is no longer listed as threatened or endangered,
except for the southwest population, was also evaluated.
    An external peer review of this report has been completed. The
public comment period and the external peer review are separate
processes. The public comment period provides an opportunity for all
interested parties to comment on the document. When finalizing the
draft document, EPA will consider any public comments received in
accordance with this notice.
    EPA is releasing this draft document solely for the purpose of pre-
dissemination review and comment under applicable information quality
guidelines. This document has not been formally disseminated by EPA and
does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency
policy or determination. The first draft of this report was reviewed in
2002 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service within the Department of the
Interior. This final draft is being released to the public as well as
to other federal agencies who may wish to comment.

DATES: The 30-day public comment period begins November 25, 2009, and
ends December 28, 2009. Technical comments should be in writing and
must be received by EPA by December 28, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The draft ``A Framework for Categorizing the Relative
Vulnerability of Threatened and Endangered Species to Climate Change''
is available primarily via the Internet on the National Center for
Environmental Assessment's home page under the Recent Additions and the
Data and Publications menus at http://www.epa.gov/ncea. A limited
number of paper copies are available from the Information Management
Team, NCEA; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you
are requesting a paper copy, please provide your name, your mailing
address, and the document title, ``A Framework for Categorizing the
Relative Vulnerability of Threatened and Endangered Species to Climate
Change.''

    Comments may be submitted electronically via http://
www.regulations.gov, by mail, by facsimile, or by hand delivery/
courier. Please follow the detailed instructions provided in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the public comment
period, contact the Office of Environmental Information Docket;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For technical information, contact Susan Julius, NCEA; telephone:
703-347-8619; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information About the Project/Document

    The document, ``A Framework for Categorizing the Relative
Vulnerability of Threatened and Endangered Species to Climate Change''
describes an evaluative framework that may be used to categorize the
relative vulnerability of species to climate change. It is intended
that the results of applying the framework be regarded as indications
of the comparative vulnerabilities of species, not estimates of a
species' absolute vulnerability to climate change. Four modules compose
this framework: Module 1 categorizes baseline vulnerability to
extinction or major population reduction by scoring those elements of
the species' life history, demographics, and conservation status that
influence the likelihood of its survival or extinction (excluding
climatic changes); Module 2 scores the likely vulnerability of a
species to future climate change, including the species' potential
physiological, behavioral, demographic, and ecological response to
climate change; Module 3 combines the results of Modules 1 and 2 into a
matrix to produce an overall score of the species' vulnerability to
climate change, which maps to an adjectival category, such as
``critically vulnerable,'' ``highly vulnerable,'' ``less vulnerable,''
and ``least vulnerable;'' Module 4 is a qualitative determination of
uncertainty of overall vulnerability (high, medium, and low) based on
evaluations of uncertainty done in each of the first 3 modules.
    To illustrate the use of this framework, it was applied to six U.S.
species that were listed as threatened or endangered at the time the
framework was developed. Based on the framework, four of those species
were categorized as ``critically vulnerable'' to climate change: The
golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia), the salt marsh harvest
mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris), the Mount Graham red squirrel
(Tamiasciurus hudsonicus grahamensis), and the Lahontan cutthroat trout
(Oncorhyncus clarki henshawi). The desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii)
was characterized as ``highly vulnerable'' and the bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) was categorized as ``less vulnerable.''
Certainty scores in Module 4 ranged between medium and high and reflect
the amount and quality of information available.
    This framework was developed by EPA's Global Change Research
Program and is offered as one of a number of potential approaches for
prioritizing those species most vulnerable to climate change. It is not
intended to serve as a tool for determining whether a species is
endangered or threatened under the Section 4 listing process of the
Endangered Species Act.
    EPA's Global Change Research is an assessment-oriented program
committed to developing frameworks and tools to assist decision-makers
in evaluating the impacts of climate change to air quality, water
quality and ecosystems.

II. How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at http://
www.regulations.gov.

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD 2009-
0816, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket
(Mail Code: 2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-
566-1752.
     Hand Delivery: The OEI Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, Room 3334 EPA West Building, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center's Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only accepted during
the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    If you provide comments by mail or hand delivery, please submit
three copies of the comments. For attachments, provide an index, number
pages consecutively with the comments, and submit an unbound original
and three copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2009-0816. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will
be marked ``late,'' and may only be considered if time permits. It is
EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket
without change and to make the comments available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-
mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials,
such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the
EPA Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: October 21, 2009.
Rebecca Clark,
Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. E9-28294 Filed 11-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P