[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 177 (Thursday, September 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43261-43262]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19477]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81555; File No. SR-ISE-2017-80]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Delay
Implementation of SR-ISE-2017-32

September 8, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 28, 2017, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to delay the implementation of SR-ISE-2017-
32, and to make non-substantive, technical amendments to the new By-
Laws filed as part of that rule change proposal.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.ise.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 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 proposal is to delay the implementation of SR-
ISE-2017-32 (hereinafter, ``Governance Proposal'') and to make non-
substantive, technical amendments to the new By-Laws filed as part of
that rule change. The changes are described in detail below.
    The Exchange received approval of its Governance Proposal on July
31, 2017.\3\ Within that rule change, the Exchange proposed to
implement the Governance Proposal no later than by the end of the third
quarter of 2017 (i.e., by September 30, 2017).\4\ The Exchange notes
that its affiliates, Nasdaq GEMX, LLC and Nasdaq MRX, LLC have
submitted or will submit nearly identical proposed rule changes, but
stated or will state in their proposals that they intend to implement
the proposed rule changes no later than by the end of the fourth
quarter of 2017 (i.e., by December 31, 2017).\5\ As such, the Exchange
proposes to delay the implementation of the Governance Proposal from a
date no later than September 30, 2017 to a date no later than December
31, 2017 in order to align the implementation of the Governance
Proposal with its affiliates. The Exchange will announce the specific
date in advance through a Regulatory Alert.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81263 (July 31,
2017), 82 FR 36497 (August 4, 2017) (SR-ISE-2017-32) (hereinafter,
``Governance Approval Order'').
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81422 (August 17,
2017), 82 FR 40026 (August 23, 2017) (SR-GEMX-2017-37) (Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change to Adopt New Corporate Governance).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to make minor clarifications to the
proposed By-Laws that were filed as part of the Governance Proposal.
First, the Exchange proposes to amend the last sentence in proposed By-
Law Article III, Section 5(c) by changing the current reference therein
to Rule 4200 of the Rules of the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC to Rule 5605.
The definition of ``independent director'' is set forth in Rule 5605 of
the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, and not Rule 4200, so the Exchange seeks
to correct this reference in its proposed By-Laws. The Exchange also
proposes to correct certain typos in the same sentence to indicate that
the portion therein that starts with ``the Regulatory Oversight
Committee shall consist of three members . . .'' is a separate, new
sentence.
    In addition, the Exchange proposes to replace the first sentence in
proposed By-Law Article VIII, Section 1 with the following: ``These By-
Laws may be altered, amended, or repealed, or new By-Laws may be
adopted, by a resolution adopted by the Board at any regular or special
meeting of the Board or a written agreement executed and delivered by
the Company Member.'' By-Law Article VIII, Section 1, which contains
By-Law amendment provisions, is intended to authorize amendments to the
By-Laws by either the Company Member (i.e., International Securities
Exchange Holdings, Inc.) or the majority of the Exchange's Board of
Directors.\6\ For one, Section 1's title itself states ``By the Company
Member or Board'' to indicate that either the Company Member or the
Board is authorized to amend the proposed By-

Laws in the manner set forth in Section 1. Furthermore, the Exchange
has always intended to allow amendments to the By-Laws by either the
Company Member or the Board, as evidenced by the discussions of this
provision in both the Governance Approval Order and Notice of
Filing.\7\ The existing language in Section 1 itself, however, provides
that the By-Laws may be amended by the Company Member and by the
majority of the Exchange's Board of Directors, so the Exchange is now
seeking to make the non-substantive change from ``and'' to ``or'' in
Section 1 to reflect the rule's original intent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Governance Approval Order at 36504 and accompanying
footnote 113. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80530
(April 26, 2017), 82 FR 20508 (May 2, 2017) (SR-ISE-2017-32)
(hereinafter, ``Notice of Filing'') at 20521. The Exchange states in
both the Governance Approval Order and Notice of Filing that
amendments to the proposed By-Laws may be enacted by ``either the
Sole LLC Member or the vote of a majority of the whole Board.''
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ 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 permitting the Exchange to align the implementation date of its
Governance Proposal with its affiliates Nasdaq GEMX, LLC and Nasdaq
MRX, LLC, and to make non-substantive corrections to the proposed By-
Laws. The Exchange's proposal does not significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest because this proposal
does not make any substantive changes to the Governance Proposal
itself; the only changes are to extend the implementation date and to
make non-substantive corrections to the proposed By-Laws, as discussed
above. As noted above, the Exchange will provide advance notice to
members with respect to the specific implementation date through a
Regulatory Alert. In addition, the Exchange believes that the non-
substantive amendments to the By-Laws proposed herein will alleviate
potential confusion as to the applicability of the Exchange's rules,
which will protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 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. The Exchange's proposal does
not impose any significant burden on competition because the Governance
Proposal and the proposed non-substantive changes to the By-Laws will
apply to all market participants in a uniform manner once implemented.

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: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \10\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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-ISE-2017-80 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-ISE-2017-80. 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-ISE-2017-80, and should be
submitted on or before October 5, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-19477 Filed 9-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9372-9373]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03205]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0063]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Lower Mississippi River, New Orleans LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone.
This security zone is necessary to provide security and protection for
visiting personnel during the events related to the Lundi Gras
celebrations. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited
unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port New Orleans
or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. on February
24, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2020-0063 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Commander Corinne Plummer, Sector
New Orleans, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port Sector New Orleans
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it would be impractical. We must
establish this security zone by February 24, 2020 in order to provide
proper security for these visiting personnel, and we do not have
sufficient time to request and respond to comments.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to the public interest because immediate
action is needed to provide adequate security to protect the public.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Sector New
Orleans (COTP) has determined that the increased number of personnel
anticipated to be visiting the city during the Lundi Gras celebration
requires certain security measures to ensure that the persons and
property are kept secure during the events. The Coast Guard determined
that a temporary security zone is needed for this and related events
that will be taking place adjacent to a portion of Lower Mississippi
River.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a security zone from 2 p.m. through 7 p.m. on
February 24, 2020. The security zone will cover all navigable waters
within 400-yards of the Left Descending Bank of the Lower Mississippi
River (LMR) MM 94.4 and MM 95.1, Above Head of Passes, New Orleans,
Louisiana. This zone is necessary in order to provide waterside
security for the protection of visitors attending the events related to
the Lundi Gras celebrations. No vessel or person will be permitted to
enter the security zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. A designated representative is a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector New
Orleans. They may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16 or 67 or by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Persons and vessels permitted to enter this security zone must
transit at their slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful
directions issued by the COTP or the designated representative.
    The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public of
the enforcement times and date for this regulated area through
Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs),
and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs), as appropriate.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the security zone. Vessel traffic will be
able to safely transit around this security zone which would impact a
small designated area of the Mississippi River near New Orleans, LA for
five hours, and will not overly impede vessel traffic during the period
in effect. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to
Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule
would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
security zone may be small entities, for the

reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves establishing a security zone to protect
the public in a small designated area of the Mississippi River near New
Orleans, LA for five hours on one day. It is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast
Guard Environmental Planning Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A Record
of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0063 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0063   Security Zone; Mississippi River, New Orleans, LA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary security zone: All
navigable waters of Mississippi River, New Orleans, LA within 400-yards
of the Left Descending Bank of the Lower Mississippi River (LMR)
between MM 94.4 and MM 95.1, above Head of Passes, New Orleans,
Louisiana.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 2 p.m. through
7 p.m. on February 24, 2020.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 2 p.m.
through 7 p.m. on February 24, 2020.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.33, entry into or remaining within this regulated area is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector New
Orleans (COTP) or designated representative. A designated
representative is a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard assigned to units under the operational control of USCG
Sector New Orleans.
    (2) Vessels requiring entry into this regulated area must request
permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They may be
contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16 or 67 or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Persons and vessels permitted to enter this security zone must
transit at their slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful
directions issued by the COTP or the designated representative.

    Dated: February 12, 2020.
K.M. Luttrell,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector New Orleans.
[FR Doc. 2020-03205 Filed 2-18-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37898-37899]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15350]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0114; FRL-9518-5]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Hazardous Remediation Waste
Management Requirements (HWIR-Media) (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an
existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below,
describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated
burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 25, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-
2012-0114, to (1) EPA, either online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
RCRA Docket (28221T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB, by mail to:
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Fitzpatrick, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On February 28, 2012 (77 FR 12046), EPA sought comments on
this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2012-0114, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC
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 Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the RCRA Docket is
(202) 566-0270.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at www.regulations.gov as EPA receives
them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted
material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information
whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further
information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.
    Title: Hazardous Remediation Waste Management Requirements (HWIR-
Media) (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1775.06, OMB Control No. 2050-0161.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2012. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
(RCRA), as amended, requires EPA to establish a national regulatory
program to ensure that hazardous wastes are managed in a manner
protective of human health and the environment. Under this program
(known as the RCRA Subtitle C program), EPA regulates newly generated
hazardous wastes, as well as hazardous remediation wastes (i.e.,
hazardous wastes managed during cleanup). To facilitate prompt and
protective treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous remediation
wastes, EPA established three requirements for remediation waste
management sites that are different from those for facilities managing
newly generated hazardous waste: (1) Performance standards for
remediation waste management sites (40 CFR 264.1(j)); (2) a provision
excluding remediation waste management sites from requirements for
facility-wide corrective action; and (3) a new form of RCRA permit for
treating, storing, and disposing of hazardous remediation wastes (40
CFR part 270, subpart H). The new permit, a Remedial Action Plan (RAP),
streamlines the permitting process for remediation waste management
sites to allow cleanups to take place more quickly.
    In addition, EPA created a new kind of unit called a ``staging
pile'' (40 CFR 264.554) that allows more flexibility in storing
remediation waste during cleanup. An agency may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB
control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR
part 9 and are identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 32
hours per response. For Respondents in Private entities, it is
estimated to average 28 hours per response. For Respondents in States,
it is estimated to average 51 hours per response. Burden means the
total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to
generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or
for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements which have
subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a
collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Businesses or other for-profit,
States.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 215.
    Frequency of Response: Once.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 6,953 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $397,489, which includes $371,571 in
annualized labor costs and $25,918 in annualized capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the total estimated
hour burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR
Burdens. There is an increase of $1,445 in O&M costs which is due to
updating estimates to current levels.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-15350 Filed 6-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 7, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 66)]
[Notices]
[Page 17827-17828]
[DOCID:fr07ap10-127]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0213; Notice 2]

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Goodyear), has determined that
certain passenger car tires manufactured during the period January 25,
2007, through July 24, 2008, do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5(e)
of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No. 139, New
Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Goodyear has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule
implementing those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556, Goodyear has
petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Notice of
receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment
period, on January 13, 2009, in the Federal Register (74 FR 1760). No
comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting
documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System Web site at:
http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov/ then follow the online search
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2008-0213.''
    For further information on this decision, contact Mr. George
Gillespie, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Affected are approximately 9,864 size 245/45R17 95H Fierce HP brand
passenger car tires manufactured during the period January 25, 2007,
through July 24, 2008.
    Paragraph S5.5(e) of FMVSS No. 139 requires in pertinent part:

    S5.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in paragraphs (a)
through (i) of S5.5, each tire must be marked on each sidewall with
the information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) and on one sidewall
with the information specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to
the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this standard. The markings
must be placed between the maximum section width and the bead on at
least one sidewall, unless the maximum section width of the tire is
located in an area that is not more than one-fourth of the distance
from the bead to the shoulder of the tire. If the maximum section
width falls within that area, those markings must appear between the
bead and a point one-half the distance from the bead to the shoulder
of the tire, on at least one sidewall. The markings must be in
letters and numerals not less than 0.078 inches high and raised
above or sunk below the tire surface not less than 0.015 inches * *
*
    (e) The generic name of each cord material used in the plies
(both sidewall and tread area) of the tire; * * *

    Goodyear explains that the noncompliance is that the sidewall
marking incorrectly identifies the generic material of the plies in the
body of the tire as Nylon when they are in fact polyester.
Specifically, the tires in question were inadvertently manufactured
with ``Tread: 1 Polyester + 2 Steel Cords + 1 Nylon Cord. The labeling
should have been ``Tread: 1 Polyester Cord + 2 Steel Cords + 1
Polyester Cord'' (emphasis added).
    Goodyear states that it discovered the mold labeling error that
caused the non-compliance during a routine quality audit.
    Goodyear argues that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety because the tires meet or exceed all applicable Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety performance standards. All of the markings related
to tire service (load capacity, corresponding inflation pressure, etc.)
are correct. The mislabeling of these tires creates no unsafe
condition.
    Goodyear states that the affected tire molds have been modified and
all future production will have the correct material information shown
on the sidewall.

    Goodyear also points out that NHTSA has previously granted
petitions for sidewall marking noncompliances that it believes are
similar to the present noncompliance.
    In summation, Goodyear states that it believes that because the
noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety that no
corrective action is warranted.

NHTSA Decision

    The agency agrees with Goodyear that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. The agency believes that the
true measure of inconsequentiality to motor vehicle safety in this case
is that there is no effect of the noncompliance on the operational
safety of vehicles on which these tires are mounted. The safety of
people working in the tire retread, repair, and recycling industries
must also be considered. Although tire construction affects the
strength and durability, neither the agency nor the tire industry
provides information relating tire strength and durability to the
number of plies and types of ply cord material in the tread and
sidewall. Therefore, tire dealers and customers should consider the
tire construction information along with other information such as the
load capacity, maximum inflation pressure, and tread wear, temperature,
and traction ratings, to assess performance capabilities of various
tires. In the agency's judgment, the incorrect labeling of the tire
construction information will have an inconsequential effect on motor
vehicle safety because most consumers do not base tire purchases or
vehicle operation parameters on the ply material in a tire.
    The agency also believes the noncompliance will have no measurable
effect on the safety of the tire retread, repair, and recycling
industries. The use of steel cord construction in the sidewall and
tread is the primary safety concern of these industries. In this case,
since the tire sidewalls are marked correctly for the number of steel
plies, this potential safety concern does not exist.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Goodyear
has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 139
labeling noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Goodyear's petition is granted and the petitioner is
exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy
for, the subject noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: April 1, 2010.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2010-7874 Filed 4-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: May 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 99)]
[Notices]
[Page 28801]
[DOCID:fr24my10-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1

May 7, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP10-684-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits
Third Revised Sheet No. 573 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth
Revised Volume No. 1, to be effective 5/31/10.
    Filed Date: 04/30/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100430-0257.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, May 12, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-713-000.
    Applicants: Enbridge Offshore Pipelines (UTOS) LLC.
    Description: Enbridge Offshore Pipelines (UTOS) LLC submits tariff
filing per 154.203: Baseline Filing to be effective 6/5/2010.
    Filed Date: 05/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100505-5042.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 17, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-714-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits an
amendment to an existing Transportation Rate Schedule FTS Agreement
with a negotiated rate exhibit Natural and CenterPoint Energy Services,
Inc.
    Filed Date: 05/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100505-0212.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 17, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-715-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits a capacity
release agreement containing negotiated rate provision.
    Filed Date: 05/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100506-0210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 17, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-716-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits a capacity
release agreement containing negotiated rate provisions.
    Filed Date: 05/05/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100506-0209.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 17, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-717-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits the Negotiated
Rate Capacity Release Agreement with Texla Energy Management, Inc.
    Filed Date: 05/06/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100506-0234.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 18, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-718-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC submits an amendment to a
negotiated rate letter agreement with Northern Illinois Gas Co.
    Filed Date: 05/06/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100506-0235.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 18, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-12391 Filed 5-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12540-12541]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04799]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71631; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2014-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Granting
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Amending Its Rules in Order To Clarify
the Applicability and Functionality of Certain Order Types on the
Exchange

February 27, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On January 8, 2014, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE Arca'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
amend its rules in order to clarify the applicability and functionality
of certain option order types on the Exchange. The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on January 21,
2014.\3\ The Commission received no comment letters regarding the
proposed rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71293 (January 14,
2014), 79 FR 3429 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange has proposed to amend Rule 6.62 in order to clarify
the applicability and functionality of certain option order types. The
Exchange states that it is not proposing to change or alter any
obligations, rights, policies or practices enumerated within its rules.
Rather, according to the Exchange, this proposal is designed to reduce
the potential for investor confusion as to the functionality and
applicability of certain option order types presently available on the
Exchange.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Notice, 79 FR at 3429.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposed revisions to Rule 6.62 would provide
greater detail as to the existing functionality of certain order types,
including:
     Rule 6.62(a)--Market Order. The Exchange has proposed to
amend Rule 6.62(a) to specify that: (1) Market Orders entered before
the opening of trading will be eligible for trading during the Opening
Auction Process; (2) Market Orders entered during Core Trading Hours
will be rejected if, at the time the order is received, there is no
National Best Bid (``NBB'') and no National Best Offer (``NBO'')
(collectively, ``NBBO'') disseminated by the Options Pricing Reporting
Authority (``OPRA'') for the relevant option series; and (3) if at the
time the Exchange receives a Market Order to buy (sell) there is an NBB
(NBO) but no NBO (NBB) being disseminated, the Market Order will be
processed pursuant to Rule 6.60(a).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See proposed Rule 6.62(a); see also Notice, 79 FR at 3430.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 6.62(d)(1)-(2)--Stop Orders and Stop Limit Orders.
The Exchange has proposed to amend Rule 6.62(d)(1)-(2) to specify that
it will reject Stop Orders and Stop Limit Orders to buy entered with a
stop price below the bid at the time the order is entered and Stop
Orders and Stop Limit Orders to sell entered with a stop price above
the offer at the time the order is entered.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See proposed Rules 6.62(d)(1)-(2); see also Notice, 79 FR at
3430. The Commission notes that proposed Rule 6.62(d)(1)-(2)
accurately sets forth this additional specification, but the
Exchange's description of this rule change in the purpose section of
its filing refers to stop prices above the bid or below the offer
(instead of below the bid or above the offer) triggering rejection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 6.62(o)--NOW Order. The Exchange has proposed to
clarify that a NOW Order that is not marketable against the NBBO when
submitted to the Exchange will be rejected.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See proposed Rule 6.62(o); see also Notice, 79 FR at 3430.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 6.62(t)--Liquidity Adding Order. The Exchange has
proposed to clarify that this order type may only be entered with a Day
time-in-force modifier.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See proposed Rule 6.62(t); see also Notice, 79 FR at 3430.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's additional proposed revisions to Rule 6.62 would be
three-fold. First, the Exchange has proposed to specify in Rules
6.62(d)(5), 6.62(g) and 6.62(i) that Stock Contingency Orders, One-
cancels-the-other Orders, and Single Stock Future/Option Orders,
respectively, are only eligible for open outcry trading.\9\ Second, the
Exchange has proposed to decommission the functionality supporting the
Inside Limit Order defined in Rule 6.62(c) and the Tracking Order
defined in Rule 6.62(d)(6) due to a lack of demand for these order
types. The Exchange states that it does not intend to re-introduce
these order types in the future, and thus proposes to delete the text
of these

rules.\10\ Third, the Exchange has proposed to correct typographical
errors in Rules 6.62(r) and 6.62(t), which define the Opening Only
Order and Liquidity Adding Order, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See proposed Rules 6.62(d)(5), 6.62(g) and 6.62(i); see also
Notice, 79 FR at 3430.
    \10\ See Notice, 79 FR at 3430.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has stated that it plans to issue a Trader Update
announcing the changes proposed by this rule filing upon approval of
the filing.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id. at 3431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\12\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, 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; and are not designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with, and would further the objectives of, Section 6(b)(5) of the Act
because it would add transparency and clarity to the Exchange's rules
by enhancing the descriptions of certain order type functionality,
deleting obsolete or outdated rules, and correcting inaccurate
language. The Exchange also believes that the proposal removes
impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market by
ensuring that members, regulators and the public can more easily
navigate the Exchange's rulebook and better understand the order types
available for trading on the Exchange.
    Specifically, the Exchange believes that clarifying the definitions
of Market Orders, Stop Orders, NOW Orders and Liquidity Adding Orders
removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open
market by helping to ensure that investors better understand the
functionality of these order types. Additionally, the Exchange believes
that specifying that Stock Contingency Orders, Single Stock Future/
Option Orders and One-cancels-the-other Orders are only for trading in
open outcry will help to protect investors and the public interest by
reducing the potential for confusion when routing orders to NYSE Arca.
Lastly, the Exchange believes that deleting the definitions applicable
to Inside Limit Orders and Tracking Orders provides clarity to Exchange
rules by eliminating outdated and obsolete functionality.
    The Commission notes that the instant proposal does not add any new
functionality but instead enhances and clarifies the descriptions of
the option order type functionality currently available on the
Exchange. The Exchange's proposed revisions would provide greater
detail as to the operation of certain option order types, including the
circumstances in which certain order types are rejected, order types
and modifiers that are compatible or incompatible with each other, and
the eligibility of certain order types for only open outcry trading.
Further, the Exchange proposes to update its rules by deleting obsolete
order type provisions. The Commission believes that these proposed
changes are reasonably designed to provide greater specificity, clarity
and transparency with respect to the order type functionality available
on the Exchange, and therefore should help to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, promote just and equitable principles
of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect
investors and the public interest.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2014-02) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-04799 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 27, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41518-41522]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13566]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1221; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00070-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2020-06-10, which applies to certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series
airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and
-232 airplanes. AD 2020-06-10 requires repetitive inspections for
cracking of the vertical stiffeners of the left- and right-hand sides
of the window frames and corrective actions if necessary. Since the FAA
issued AD 2020-06-10, it was determined that certain compliance times
need to be reduced. This proposed AD would retain the requirements of
AD 2020-06-10, with amended compliance times, as specified in a
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for
incorporation by reference (IBR). The FAA is proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 11,
2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-1221; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For the EASA AD identified in this NPRM, you may contact
EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may
find this material on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu. It is also
available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1221.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy Dowling, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-1221; Project Identifier
MCAI-2023-00070-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Timothy Dowling, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA receives which
is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public
docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2020-06-10, Amendment 39-19879 (85 FR 17490,
March 30, 2020) (AD 2020-06-10), for certain Airbus SAS Model A318
series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132,
and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -
233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231,
and -232 airplanes. AD 2020-06-10 was prompted by an MCAI originated by
EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union. EASA issued AD 2019-0173, dated July 18, 2019, to
correct an unsafe condition.
    AD 2020-06-10 requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the
vertical stiffeners of the left- and right-hand sides of the window
frames and corrective actions if necessary. The FAA issued AD 2020-06-
10 to address cracking of the vertical stiffeners of the left- and
right-hand sides of the window frames, which could affect the
structural integrity of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2020-06-10 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-06-10, it was determined that certain
compliance times need to be reduced, based on further analysis. EASA
superseded EASA AD 2019-0173, dated July 18, 2019, and issued EASA AD
2023-0009, dated January 16, 2023 (EASA AD 2023-0009) (also referred to
as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus SAS
Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -
131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216,
-231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -
212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. Model A320-215 airplanes are not
certificated by the FAA and are not included on the U.S. type
certificate data sheet; this proposed AD therefore does not include
those airplanes in the applicability. The MCAI states that, during an
inspection, cracking was found on the frame of the right-hand side
sliding window in the flight deck. This condition, if not corrected,
could lead to reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
    The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1221.

Explanation of Retained Requirements

    Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the
requirements of AD 2020-06-10, this proposed AD would retain the
requirements of AD 2020-06-10. Those requirements are referenced in
EASA AD 2023-0009, which, in turn, is referenced in paragraph (g) of
this proposed AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2023-0009 specifies procedures for repetitive inspections
for cracking of the vertical stiffeners of the left- and right-hand
sides of the window frame and corrective actions if necessary.
Corrective actions include modification, rework, and repair. 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.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop

in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2023-0009 described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2023-0009 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2023-0009 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading
of a particular section in EASA AD 2023-0009 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2023-
0009. Service information required by EASA AD 2023-0009 for compliance
will be available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1221
after the FAA final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 1,525 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the
following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Cost per         Cost on U.S.
              Action                     Labor cost          Parts cost        product            operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained actions from AD 2020-06-   11 work-hours x $85               $0             $935   $1,425,875 per
 10.                                 per hour = $935.                                        inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the proposed reporting requirement in this proposed AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, The FAA
estimates the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S.
operators to be $129,625, or $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition modifications that would be required based on the results of
any required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need this on-condition modification:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 work-hours x $85 per hour = $425....             (*)           * $425
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the parts
  cost estimates for the on-condition modification specified in this
  proposed AD.

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates for the other on-condition actions
specified in this proposed AD.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB
Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public
reporting for this collection of information is estimated to take
approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate
or any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

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

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the

national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-06-10, Amendment 39-19879
(85 FR 17490, March 30, 2020); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2023-1221; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-
00070-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by August 11, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2020-06-10, Amendment 39-19879 (85 FR 17490,
March 30, 2020) (AD 2020-06-10).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any
category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2023-0009, dated January 16, 2023 (EASA AD 2023-0009).
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233
airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracking found on the frame
of the right-hand side sliding window in the flight deck, and a
determination that certain compliance times need to be reduced. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address cracking of the vertical
stiffeners of the left- and right-hand sides of the window frames,
which could affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

(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 2023-0009.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2023-0009

    (1) Where EASA AD 2023-0009 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where EASA AD 2023-0009 refers to August 1, 2019 (the
effective date of EASA AD 2019-0173), this AD requires using May 4,
2020 (the effective date of AD 2020-06-10).
    (3) This AD does not adopt the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2023-0009.
    (4) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2023-0009 specifies to report
inspection results to Airbus within a certain compliance time. For
this AD, report inspection results (in case of findings only) at the
applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(4)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date
of this AD.
    (5) Where paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2023-0009 specifies credit
for certain actions, this AD provides credit for using the torque
values specified in Section 13 of the Airbus technical adaptations
(TAs) identified in paragraphs (h)(5)(i) through (vi) of this AD,
when installing a certain eccentric referenced in ``Airbus SB A320-
53-1402 original issue'' or ``Airbus SB A320-53-1403 original
issue,'' as specified in the applicable TA, before the effective
date of this AD.
    (i) Airbus TA 80662272/007/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29, 2019.
    (ii) Airbus TA 80662272/008/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
    (iii) Airbus TA 80662272/009/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
    (iv) Airbus TA 80662272/010/2019, Issue 1, dated August 29,
2019.
    (v) Airbus TA 80696258/006/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29,
2019.
    (vi) Airbus TA 80696258/007/2019, Issue 1, dated October 29,
2019.
    (6) Where Table 1 of EASA AD 2023-0009 specifies configurations,
replace the text ``post SB'' with ``post embodiment of SB'' and
replace the text ``pre SB'' with ``pre embodiment of SB.''

(i) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits, as described in 14 CFR 21.197 and
21.199, may be issued to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished, but concurrence by
the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, is required
before issuance of the special flight permit.

(j) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified
in paragraph (k) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (i) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2020-06-10 are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of EASA AD 2023-0009 that are
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (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, 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 (j)(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.

(k) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Timothy Dowling,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

(l) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2023-0009,
dated January 16, 2023.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2023-0009, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA
AD on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on June 21, 2023.
Michael Linegang,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-13566 Filed 6-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


   50 % difference    Wickman, Trent R -FS    to:  Randall Robinson                                                             11/27/2012 01:29 PM

  Cc:  Steven Rosenthal

 From: "Wickman, Trent R -FS"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

 To: Randall Robinson/R5/USEPA/US@EPA,

 Cc: Steven Rosenthal/R5/USEPA/US@EPA

Randy - I copied the following out of the "UTac" tab of the "modeled limits" spreadsheet steve has on your network in the "Trent" folder.  You'll see at the bottom how I came up with a combined 50% less NOx and SO2 reductions modeled by cliffs than what the FIP called for                   LINE 1 - Emission reductions modeled by Cliffs (2012)

  base*   FIP

  NOx SO2 NOx SO2

                                                                             43.6                                                                            37.2                                                                            23.1                                                                             2.3 g/s                                                                               346                                                                             295                                                                             183                                                                              18 lb/hr                                                                              1519                                                                            1296                                                                             805                                                                              80 tpy @ 8760                                                                             714                                                                            1216     difference

LINE 1 - FIP numbers                                                                                1643                                                                            1293                                                                             493                                                                             129 70% and 90% CE                                                                            1150                                                                            1164     difference

LINE 2 - Emission reductions modeled by Cliffs (2012)         base*   FIP

  NOx SO2 NOx SO2

                                                                            25.11                                                                           31.91                                                                           25.44                                                                            2.38 g/s - SV48                                                                            21.4                                                                           27.18                                                                           21.67                                                                            2.03 g/s - SV49                                                                             199                                                                             253                                                                             202                                                                              19 lb/hr - SV48                                                                             170                                                                             216                                                                             172                                                                              16 lb/hr - SV49                                                                             369                                                                             469                                                                             374                                                                              35 lb/hr - total                                                                            1621                                                                            2059                                                                            1641                                                                             154 tpy - total                                                                             -21                                                                            1905     difference

LINE 2 - FIP numbers                                                                                3687                                                                            2750                                                                            1106                                                                             248 70% and 90% CE                                                                            2581                                                                            2475     difference

Facility Total                                                                                3140                                                                            3355 base Cliffs 2012 Modeling                                                                             693                                                                            3121 difs                                                                                5330                                                                            4043 base FIP

                                                                             3731                                                                            3639 difs                                                                              0.185844                                                                        0.857729                                                                        0.517593

total

      Trent Wickman, P.E. Air Resource Management Great Lakes National Forests - Eastern Region USDA Forest Service stationed on the - Superior National Forest 8901 Grand Avenue Place Duluth, MN  55808 ph#<PHONE_NUMBER> cell#<PHONE_NUMBER> fx#<PHONE_NUMBER> <EMAIL_ADDRESS>