[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65148-65150]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26266]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1107; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-216-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Intertechnique Aircraft Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
applies to certain Intertechnique Aircraft Systems oxygen mask
regulators. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of a
malfunctioning mask having an inflatable harness with a high premature
rupture rate due to defective silicon. This proposed AD would require
inspecting and replacing defective harnesses with new or modified
serviceable units. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct
defective harnesses which could lead, in case of a sudden
depressurization event, to a harness rupture, thereby providing
inadequate protection against hypoxia and possibly resulting in
unconsciousness of the affected flightcrew member and consequent
reduced control of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 10,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Intertechnique Aircraft Systems, 61 Rue Pierre Curie BP 1, 78373
Plaisir Cedex--France; telephone: (33) 1 61 34 12 32; fax: (33) 1 64 86
69 84; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet:
www.zodiacaerospace.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caspar Wang, Aerospace Engineer,
Boston Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) ANE-150, FAA, Engine and
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-1107;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-216-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2011-0090R1, dated July 13, 2011 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    A malfunction of a quick donning mask was reported to
Intertechnique, who initiated

an investigation in order to detect the root cause and the failure
mode. Despite the fact that the analysis did not lead to any final
conclusion, discrete suspected silicon batches have been identified
which have shown an unusually high premature rupture rate.
    Some of the affected harnesses are known to have been delivered
as spares. Consequently, an inflatable harness belonging to one of
the suspect batches may have become installed on an Oxygen Mask
Regulator, the serial number (s/n) or [part number] P/N of which is
not identified in Appendix II of Intertechnique Service Bulletin
(SB) MXH-35-240.
    This fact widens the Applicability of this [EASA] AD to extend
beyond the individual Oxygen Mask Regulators identified by s/n and
P/N in Appendix II of the SB.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead, in
case of a sudden depressurization event, to a harness rupture,
thereby providing inadequate protection against hypoxia of the
affected flight crew member, possibly resulting in unconsciousness
and consequent reduced control of the aeroplane.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires the
identification and replacement of all potentially defective
harnesses with serviceable units.
    Note 1: The affected batches were installed on harnesses
manufactured between December 2008 and August 2010, having dates
codes 0850S (week 50 of 2008) through 1031S (week 31 of 2010).
    Note 2: Harness assemblies that do not have a batch code were
manufactured before week 33 of 2008 and are not affected by this
unsafe condition.
    This [EASA] AD has been revised to correct a typographical error
in the Applicability, which inadvertently referred to P/N MA10-12
masks, whereas in fact, all P/N MA10 series could have an affected
harness installed. In addition, this revised AD corrects Note 2
(above), which confused harness manufacturing date codes with the
affected harnesses batch codes.
    This [EASA] AD is also revised to make reference to the latest
revisions of the referenced Intertechnique service publications
which identify by s/n and P/N, in Appendix II of the SB, more oxygen
mask regulators that are known or suspected to have an affected
harness installed. Finally, this AD is revised to add a Note to the
Required Actions section, to stress the fact that other oxygen mask
regulators could be affected, in addition to those listed in
Appendix II of the SB.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Zodiac Aerospace Intertechnique has issued the following service
bulletins:
     Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 7,
dated September 1, 2011 (for all airplanes other than Bombardier
airplanes).
     Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-241, Revision 2,
dated May 19, 2011 (for Bombardier airplanes).
    The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect up to 5,500 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate
that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the
basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $0 per product. Where
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these
parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties,
some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators up
to $467,500, or $85 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Intertechnique Aircraft Systems: Docket No. FAA-2012-1107;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-216-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 10, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Intertechnique Aircraft Systems flight crew
oxygen mask regulators, all part number (P/N) MA10, MC10, MC20,
MF10, MF20, MLC20, MLD20, MRA005, MRA022, and MRA023 series;
certificated in

any category; installed on, but not limited to, airplanes
manufactured by Airbus, ATR, BAE Systems (Type Certificate
previously held by British Aerospace), Boeing, Bombardier (Type
Certificate previously held by Canadair, De Havilland Canada),
Cessna, Dassault, EADS CASA, EMBRAER, Gulfstream, Hawker Beechcraft
(Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon, Beech), Israel
Aircraft Industries (IAI), McDonnell Douglas, Piaggio, Pilatus,
Piper and SOCATA.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35: Oxygen.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of a malfunctioning mask having
an inflatable harness with a high premature rupture rate due to
defective silicon. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
defective harnesses which could lead, in case of a sudden
depressurization event, to a harness rupture, thereby providing
inadequate protection against hypoxia and possibly resulting in
unconsciousness of the affected flightcrew member and consequent
reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection

    (1) Except as provided by paragraph (i) of this AD: Within 24
months after the effective date of this AD, inspect the inflatable
harness fitted to each flight crew oxygen mask regulator to
determine if the inflatable harness is installed with a part number
(P[sol]N) and a batch number identified in Appendix I of
Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 7, dated
September 1, 2011 (for all airplanes other than Bombardier
airplanes); or Appendix I of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-
241, Revision 2, dated May 19, 2011 (for Bombardier airplanes).
    (2) Referring only to Appendix II of Intertechnique Service
Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 7, dated September 1, 2011 (for all
airplanes other than Bombardier airplanes); or Appendix II of
Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-241, Revision 2, dated May
19, 2011 (for Bombardier airplanes); to identify a specific oxygen
mask regulator is insufficient to demonstrate that the inflatable
harness fitted to that oxygen mask regulator is not listed in
Appendix I of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision
7, dated September 1, 2011; or Appendix I of Intertechnique Service
Bulletin MXH-35-241, Revision 2, dated May 19, 2011.

(h) Replacement

    If during the inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD, an inflatable harness has a part number and batch number
identified in Appendix I of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-
240, Revision 7, dated September 1, 2011 (for all airplanes other
than Bombardier airplanes); or Appendix I of Intertechnique Service
Bulletin MXH-35-241, Revision 2, dated May 19, 2011 (for Bombardier
airplanes): Before further flight, replace the inflatable harness
with a new or re-identified harness, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-
35-240, Revision 7, dated September 1, 2011 (for all airplanes other
than Bombardier airplanes); or Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-
35-241, Revision 2, dated May 19, 2011 (for Bombardier airplanes).

(i) Exception

    Oxygen mask regulators having a date of manufacturing (DMF) code
of November 2008 (112008 or 11-08) or earlier, and those with a DMF
of January 2011 (012011 or 01-11) or later, are excluded from the
inspection and replacement requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h) of
this AD, provided it can be demonstrated that the inflatable harness
has not been replaced on those masks. A review of airplane delivery
or maintenance records is acceptable to make the determination as
specified in this paragraph if the part number, batch number, and
DMF can be conclusively determined from that review.

(j) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, Bombardier airplanes include
airplanes previously manufactured by Canadair or by De Havilland
Canada.

(k) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
flight crew oxygen mask regulator having a part number and batch
number on the inflatable harness that is found in Appendix I of
Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 7, dated
September 1, 2011 (for all airplanes other than Bombardier
airplanes); or Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-241, Revision
2, dated May 19, 2011 (for Bombardier airplanes) on any airplane.

(l) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using a service bulletin specified in paragraph
(l)(1), (l)(2), or (l)(3) of this AD:
    (1) Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 6,
dated August 16, 2011.
    (2) Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 5,
dated July 26, 2011.
    (3) Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 4,
dated June 10, 2011.

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Boston Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) ANE-150, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the ACO, send it to ATTN: Caspar Wang, Aerospace
Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) ANE-150, FAA,
Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(n) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2011-0090R1,
dated July 13, 2011, and the service information specified in
paragraphs (n)(1)(i) and (n)(1)(ii) of this AD, for related
information.
    (i) Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-240, Revision 7,
dated September 1, 2011.
    (ii) Intertechnique Service Bulletin MXH-35-241, Revision 2,
dated May 19, 2011.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Intertechnique Aircraft Systems, 61 Rue Pierre Curie BP 1, 78373
Plaisir Cedex--France; telephone: (33) 1 61 34 12 32; fax: (33) 1 64
86 69 84; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet:
www.zodiacaerospace.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 15, 2012.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-26266 Filed 10-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18567-18568]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06484]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0242]

National Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee; April 2023
Meetings

AGENCY:  U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice of federal advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee
(Committee) will conduct a series of meetings over two days in Piney
Point, MD to discuss issues relating to medical certification
determinations for issuance of licenses, certificates of registry,
merchant mariners' documents, and merchant mariner credentials; medical
standards and guidelines for the physical qualifications of operators
of commercial vessels; medical examiner education; and medical
research.

DATES: Meetings: The National Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory
Committee is scheduled to meet on Tuesday, April 25, 2023, from 9 a.m.
until 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time Zone (EDT) and Wednesday, April
26, 2023, from 9 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. (EDT). Committee meetings on
Tuesday, April 25 and Wednesday, April 26, will include periods during
which the Committee will break into subcommittees (open to public).
These meetings may adjourn early if the Committee has completed its
business.
    Comments and supporting documentation: To ensure your comments are
received by Committee members before the meeting, submit your written
comments no later than April 18, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Paul Hall Media Center in
Piney Point, MD. Additional information about the facility can be found
at: https://www.seafarers.org/training-and-careers/paul-hall-center/driving-directions/.
    Pre-registration Information: Pre-registration is required for in-
person access to the meeting. If you are not a member of the Committee
and do not represent the Coast Guard, you must request in-person
attendance by contacting the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice to be allowed entry to the
meeting.
    The National Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee is
committed to ensuring all participants have equal access regardless of
disability status. If you require reasonable accommodation due to a
disability to fully participate, please email Ms. Pamela Moore at
[email protected] or call at<PHONE_NUMBER> as soon as possible.
    Instructions: You are free to submit comments at any time,
including orally at the meetings as time permits, but if you want
Committee members to review your comment before the meeting, please
submit your comments no later than April 18, 2023. We are particularly
interested in comments regarding the topics in the ``Agenda'' section
below. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email
the individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document for alternate instructions. You must include the docket number
USCG-2023-0242. Comments received will be posted without alteration at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. You may wish to review the Privacy and Security notice
available on the homepage https://www.regulations.gov, and DHS's
eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). If
you encounter technical difficulties with comment submission, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this notice.
    Docket Search: Documents mentioned in this notice as being
available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following
that website's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online
docket and sign-up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments
are posted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Pamela Moore, Alternate Designated
Federal Officer of the National Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory
Committee, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of these meetings is in compliance
with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 117-286, 5 U.S.C., ch.
10). The Committee is authorized by section 601

of the Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2018, (Pub. L.
115-282, 132 Stat. 4190), and is codified in 46 U.S.C. 15104. The
Committee operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, and 46 U.S.C. 15109. The Committee provides advice and
recommendation to the Secretary of Homeland Security through the
Commandant of the United States Coast Guard on matters relating to: (a)
medical certification determinations for issuance of licenses,
certificates of registry, and merchant mariners' documents; (b) medical
standards and guidelines for the physical qualifications of operators
of commercial vessels; (c) medical examiner education; and (d) medical
research.
    Agenda: The National Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee
will meet on Tuesday, April 25, 2023, and Wednesday, April 26, 2023, to
review, discuss, deliberate, and formulate recommendations, as
appropriate on the following topics:

Day 1

    The agenda for the April 25, 2023 meeting is as follows:
    (1) The full Committee will meet briefly to discuss the
subcommittees' business/task statements, which are listed under
paragraph (10) under Day 2 below.
    (2) Introduction of members and discussion of committee business.
    (3) During the morning session of the meeting, subcommittees will
separately address and work on the following task statements, which are
available for viewing at https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-merchant-mariner-medical-advisory-committee-(nmedmac)/task-statements:
    (a.) Task Statement 21-02, Communication Between External
Stakeholders and the Mariner Credentialing Program;
    (b.) Task Statement 22-01, Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment
Prevention and Culture Change in the Merchant Marine; and
    (c.) Task Statement 21-04, Recommendations on Appropriate Diets and
Wellness for Mariners While Onboard Merchant Vessels.
    (4) During the afternoon session of the meeting, subcommittees will
separately address and work on the following task statements, which are
available for viewing at https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-merchant-mariner-medical-advisory-committee-(nmedmac)/task-statements:
    (a.) Task Statement 21-02, Communication Between External
Stakeholders and the Mariner Credentialing Program;
    (b.) Task Statement 22-01, Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment
Prevention and Culture Change in the Merchant Marine; and
    (c.) Task Statement 21-01, Recommendations on Mariner Mental
Health.
    (5) Report of subcommittees. At end of the day, the Chair or Co-
Chairs of the subcommittees will report to the full Committee on what
was accomplished. The full Committee will not take action on this date
and the Chair or Co-Chairs of the subcommittees will present a full
report to the Committee on Day 2 of the meeting.
    (6) Adjournment of meeting.

Day 2

    The agenda for the April 26, 2023 meeting is as follows:
    (1) Introduction.
    (2) Designated Federal Officer remarks.
    (3) Roll call of Committee members and determination of a quorum.
    (4) Adoption of the agenda.
    (5) Acceptance of Minutes from Committee Meeting Three.
    (6) Remarks from U.S. Coast Guard Leadership.
    (7) Office of Merchant Mariner Credentialing presentation.
    (8) Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Prevention update.
    (9) National Maritime Center presentation.
    (10) Reports from the subcommittee Chair or Co-Chairs. The
Committee will review the information presented on the following Task
Statements and deliberate on any recommendations presented by the
subcommittees; recommendations may be approved and completed tasks may
be closed. Official action on these topics may be taken:
    (a) Task Statement 21-01, Recommendations on Mariner Mental Health;
    (b) Task Statement 21-02, Communication Between External
Stakeholders and the Mariner Credentialing Program;
    (c) Task Statement 21-03, Medical Certification for Military to
Mariner Applicants;
    (d) Task Statement 21-04, Recommendations on Appropriate Diets and
Wellness for Mariners While Onboard Merchant Vessels;
    (e) Task Statement 21-06, Review of Medical Regulations and Policy
to Identify Potential Barriers to Women in the U.S. Maritime Workforce;
and
    (f) Task Statement 22-01, Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment
Prevention and Culture Change in the Merchant Marine.
    (11) Public comment period.
    (12) Closing remarks.
    (13) Adjournment of meeting.
    A copy of all meeting documentation will be available at https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-merchant-mariner-medical-advisory-committee-(nmedmac) by April 18,
2023. Alternatively, you may contact the individual noted in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.
    Public comments or questions will be taken throughout the meetings
as the Committee discusses the issues, and prior to deliberations and
voting. There will also be a public comment period during the meeting
on April 26, 2023, after reports of the subcommittees, at approximately
4:15 p.m. (EDT). Public comments will be limited to 3 minutes per
speaker. Please note that the public comments period will end following
the last call for comments. Please contact the individual listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to register as a speaker.

    Dated: March 23, 2023.
Jeffrey G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2023-06484 Filed 3-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 129 (Thursday, July 5, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31334-31336]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14444]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0223; FRL-9980-48--Region 9]

Air Plan Approval; California; Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control
District; Reclassification

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) is granting a request by the State of California to reclassify
the Eastern Kern County (``Eastern Kern'') nonattainment area from
``Moderate'' to ``Serious'' for the 2008 ozone national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). In connection with the reclassification, the
EPA is establishing a deadline of no later than 12 months from the
effective date of reclassification for submittal of revisions to the
Eastern Kern portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP)
to meet certain additional requirements for Serious ozone nonattainment
areas. The EPA has already received SIP revision submittals addressing
most of the additional SIP requirements.

DATES: This rule is effective on August 6, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0223. All documents in the docket are
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3848, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Action

    On May 14, 2018 (83 FR 22235), the EPA proposed to grant a request
by the State of California to reclassify the Eastern Kern nonattainment
area from Moderate to Serious for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Our May 14,
2018 proposed rule provides: Background information concerning the
Clean Air Act (CAA); the EPA's promulgation of the NAAQS; SIPs to
implement, maintain, and enforce the NAAQS within each state; ozone and
its precursors (volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen
(NOX)); the 2008 ozone NAAQS; area designations,
classifications and reclassifications for the 2008 ozone NAAQS; and SIP
revisions required to address CAA ozone nonattainment area plan
requirements based on classification.
    Our proposed rule also describes the California Air Resources
Board's (CARB) request for reclassification of the Eastern Kern 2008
ozone nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious, our evaluation of
the request, and the basis for our proposed approval of the request.
Lastly, our proposed rule describes the SIP revisions that CARB has
already submitted to the EPA for the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment
area and finds that all the SIP elements that apply to Eastern Kern as
a Serious ozone nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS have been
addressed except for new source review (NSR) and reasonably available
control technology (RACT) for major sources of NOX. Today,
we are taking final action to grant CARB's reclassification request for
the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area and to establish a 12-month
deadline (from the effective date of this final rule) for submittal of
the two remaining SIP elements for this area. Please see our May 14,
2018 proposed rule for further detail concerning these topics.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period.
During this period, we received four comments that were submitted
anonymously. The commenters raised issues that are outside of the scope
of this rulemaking, including foreign policy, wildfire suppression,
dams, wind turbines, air quality in China and India, water quality in
China, and climate change. The comment letters are available in the
docket for this rulemaking.

III. EPA Action

    Pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1103(b), the EPA is
granting a request by the State of California to reclassify the Eastern
Kern nonattainment area from Moderate to Serious for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. In connection with the reclassification, the EPA is establishing
a deadline of no later than 12 months from the effective date of
reclassification for submittal of the two remaining SIP elements (i.e.,
NSR and RACT for major sources of NOX) for Serious ozone
nonattainment areas that have not already been submitted for the
Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment area.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Upon the effective date of reclassification, we note that
certain regulatory changes would occur automatically and do not
require a SIP revision. For example, upon reclassification from
Moderate to Serious, the applicability (or ``de minimis'')
thresholds under our General Conformity rule (see 40 CFR part 93)
would drop from 100 tons per year to 50 tons per year for VOC or
NOX. See 40 CFR 93.153(b)(1). Under the General
Conformity rule, federal agencies bear the responsibility of
determining conformity of actions in nonattainment and maintenance
areas that require Federal permits, approvals, or funding.

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

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this final action is not a
``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget. Voluntary
reclassifications under section 181(b)(3) of the CAA are based solely
upon requests by the state, and the EPA is required under the CAA to
grant them. This final action does not, in and of itself, impose any
new requirements on any sector of the economy. In addition, because the
statutory requirements are clearly defined with respect to the
differently classified areas, and because those requirements are
automatically triggered by classification, reclassification does not
impose a materially adverse impact under Executive Order 12866. For
these reasons, this final action is also not subject to Executive Order
13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
Furthermore, this final action is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR
9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because actions such as
reclassifications made at the request of a state are exempt under
Executive Order 12866.
    In addition, I certify that this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This final
action does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), because the EPA is
required to grant requests by states for voluntary reclassifications
and such reclassifications in and of themselves do not impose any
federal intergovernmental mandate.
    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires the
EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' There are no Indian reservation lands
or other areas where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction within the Eastern Kern ozone nonattainment
area, and thus, this final rule does not have tribal implications and
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175.
    This final action also does not have Federalism implications
because it does not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This final action does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act.
    This final rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045,
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because the EPA interprets
Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that
concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under
section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the
regulation.
    Reclassification actions do not involve technical standards and
thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
This final rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States. This final reclassification action
relates to ozone, a pollutant that is regional in nature, and is not
the type of action that could result in the types of local impacts
addressed in Executive Order 12898.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 4, 2018. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, National parks, Ozone, Wilderness areas.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: June 26, 2018.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
2. Section 81.305 is amended in the table for ``California-2008 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' by revising the entry for ``Kern
County (Eastern Kern), CA'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.305   California

* * * * *

                                       California--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Designation                             Classification
       Designated Area        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Date \1\               Type               Date \1\               Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Kern County (Eastern Kern),    ..............  Nonattainment...........        8/6/2018  Serious.
 CA: \2\.
    Kern County (part):
        That portion of Kern
         County (with the
         exception of that
         portion in
         Hydrologic Unit
         Number 18090205--the
         Indian Wells Valley)
         east and south of a
         line described as
         follows: Beginning
         at the Kern-Los
         Angeles County
         boundary and running
         north and east along
         the northwest
         boundary of the
         Rancho La Liebre
         Land Grant to the
         point of
         intersection with
         the range line
         common to Range 16
         West and Range 17
         West, San Bernardino
         Base and Meridian;
         north along the
         range line to the
         point of
         intersection with
         the Rancho El Tejon
         Land Grant boundary;
         then southeast,
         northeast, and
         northwest along the
         boundary of the
         Rancho El Tejon
         Grant to the
         northwest corner of
         Section 3, Township
         11 North, Range 17
         West; then west 1.2
         miles; then north to
         the Rancho El Tejon
         Land Grant boundary;
         then northwest along
         the Rancho El Tejon
         line to the
         southeast corner of
         Section 34, Township
         32 South, Range 30
         East, Mount Diablo
         Base and Meridian;
         then north to the
         northwest corner of
         Section 35, Township
         31 South, Range 30
         East; then northeast
         along the boundary
         of the Rancho El
         Tejon Land Grant to
         the southwest corner
         of Section 18,
         Township 31 South,
         Range 31 East; then
         east to the
         southeast corner of
         Section 13, Township
         31 South, Range 31
         East; then north
         along the range line
         common to Range 31
         East and Range 32
         East, Mount Diablo
         Base and Meridian,
         to the northwest
         corner of Section 6,
         Township 29 South,
         Range 32 East; then
         east to the
         southwest corner of
         Section 31, Township
         28 South, Range 32
         East; then north
         along the range line
         common to Range 31
         East and Range 32
         East to the
         northwest corner of
         Section 6, Township
         28 South, Range 32
         East, then west to
         the southeast corner
         of Section 36,
         Township 27 South,
         Range 31 East, then
         north along the
         range line common to
         Range 31 East and
         Range 32 East to the
         Kern-Tulare County
         boundary.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-14444 Filed 7-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 197 (Thursday, October 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51535-51538]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22049]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84364; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2018-39]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Allow Flexible Exchange Equity
Options Where the Underlying Security is an Exchange-Traded Fund That
Is Included in the Option Penny Pilot To Be Settled in Cash

October 4, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on September 20, 2018, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 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 certain rules related to Flexible
Exchange (``FLEX'') Options. The proposed rule change is available on
the Exchange's website 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to amend certain rules related to
FLEX Options, as described below.
    FLEX Options are customized equity or index contracts that allow
investors to tailor contract terms for exchange-listed equity and index
options.\4\ The Exchange is proposing to modify rules to offer an
alternative settlement for certain FLEX Equity Options.\5\ As proposed,
FLEX Equity Options where the underlying security is an Exchange-Traded
Fund (``ETF'') that is included in the Option Penny Pilot \6\ (``FLEX
ETF Penny Option'') would be settled by physical delivery of the
underlying ETF or by delivery in cash. Currently, all FLEX Equity
Options are settled by physical delivery of the underlying security.\7\
All FLEX Index Options, however, are currently settled by delivery in
cash.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See generally Section 15, Flexible Exchange Options, Rules
900G-910G.
    \5\ The term ``FLEX Equity Option'' means an option on a
specified underlying security that is subject to the rules in
Section 15, Flexible Exchange Options Rules. See Rule 900G(b)(10).
    \6\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 55162 (January
24, 2007), 72 FR 4738 (February 1, 2007) (SR-Amex-2006-106). The
Option Penny Pilot has been extended numerous times and remains
operational through December 31, 2018. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 83507 (June 25, 2018), 83 FR 30808 (June 29, 2018) (SR-
NYSEAMER-2018-33).
    \7\ See Rule 903G(c)(3)(i).
    \8\ See Rule 903G(b)(2) and (3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To effectuate this change, the Exchange proposes to adopt new Rule
903G(c)(3)(ii) \9\ which would provide that the exercise settlement for
a FLEX ETF Penny Option shall be by physical delivery of the underlying
security or by delivery in cash.\10\ The proposed rule also adopts a
definition of the term FLEX ETF Penny Option for purpose of Rule
903G(3) to mean a FLEX Equity Option whose underlying security is an
ETF that is included in the Option Penny Pilot.\11\ The Exchange
believes it is appropriate to introduce cash-settlement as an
alternative to this group of equity securities because ETFs generally
have increasingly become a major part of investors' portfolio. The vast
proliferation of ETFs has greatly

expanded the ability of investors to take advantage of many unique
opportunities to hedge their portfolio and manage risk. Investors can
take long and/or short positions--as well as in many cases, leveraged
long or short positions--in baskets of securities whose components can
include foreign and domestic stock indexes, currencies, commodities and
bonds. Over the years, ETFs have also attracted a great deal of options
trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange proposes a non-substantive amendment to Rule
903G to renumber current Rule 903G(c)(3)(ii) as new Rule
903G(c)(3)(iii).
    \10\ See proposed Rule 903G(c)(3)(ii).
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, all ETF options are settled physically, i.e., upon exercise,
shares of the underlying ETF must be assumed or delivered. Physical
settlement possesses certain risks with respect to volatility and
movement of the underlying security at expiration that market
participants may need to hedge against. Cash settlement does not
present the same risk. If an issue with the delivery of the underlying
security arises, it may become more expensive (and time consuming) to
reverse the delivery because the price of the underlying security would
almost certainly have changed. Reversing a cash payment, on the other
hand, would not involve any such issue because reversing a cash
delivery would simply involve the exchange of cash. Additionally, with
physical settlement, market participants that have a need to generate
cash would have to sell the underlying security while incurring the
costs associated with liquidating their position in the underlying
security as well as the risk of an adverse movement in the price of the
underlying security. The Exchange notes that cash settlement for
options is not a unique feature and other options exchanges currently
trade cash-settled options.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See e.g. PHLX FX Options traded on Nasdaq PHLX and S&P
500[supreg] Index Options traded on Cboe Options Exchange. More
recently, the Commission approved, on a pilot basis, the listing and
trading of RealDayTM Options on the BOX Options Exchange
LLC. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79936 (February 2,
2017), 82 FR 9886 (February 8, 2017) (``RealDay Pilot Program'').
The RealDay Pilot Program has been extended until February 2, 2019.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82414 (December 28, 2017),
83 FR 577 (January 4, 2018) (SR-BOX-2017-38).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange understands that there are concerns that have been
raised in the past regarding cash-settled equity options. The Exchange
seeks to allay such concerns by proposing to adopt cash-settlement as
an alternative to ETFs only, and more specifically, to a narrow
universe of ETFs, i.e., ETFs that are in the Option Penny Pilot. As a
general matter, all index options traded today are cash-settled and
derive their value from a disseminated index price. Similarly, ETFs
typically have their values linked to a disseminated index price. As
noted above, the Exchange seeks to limit cash-settlement to a subset of
ETFs which are the most actively traded, as evidenced by their
inclusion in the Option Penny Pilot. The Options Penny Pilot is an
ongoing pilot program that, since 2007, allows certain option classes
to be quoted in reduced price increments compared to all other option
classes. More specifically, the Option Penny Pilot specifies that
options trading at less than $3.00 have trading increment of one cent,
while those trading at $3.00 or more have trading increments of five
cents. There are currently 363 classes in the Options Penny Pilot. Each
class added to the original pilot was chosen because it was one of the
``most actively-traded multiply-listed options classes.'' Upon the last
expansion of the pilot, the specific 300 most-active classes were
identified based on the underlying security's ``national average daily
volume over a six-month period'' thereby ensuring that the Option Penny
Pilot continues to include only those classes that are actively traded.
There are currently only 64 ETFs in the Option Penny Pilot that would
be subject to the proposed rule change.
    With respect to position limits, cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny
Options will be subject to the position limits set forth in Rule 906G.
Accordingly, the Exchange would establish position limits for cash-
settled FLEX ETF Penny Options that are the same as non-cash-settled
FLEX ETF Penny Options.
    The Exchange understands that FLEX ETF Penny Options are currently
traded in the over-the-counter (``OTC'') market by a variety of market
participants, e.g., hedge funds, proprietary trading firms, and pension
funds, to name a few. The Exchange believes there is room for
significant growth if a comparable product were introduced for trading
on a regulated market. The Exchange expects that users of these OTC
products would be among the primary users of exchange-traded cash-
settled FLEX ETF Penny Options. The Exchange also believes that the
trading of cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options would allow these same
market participants to better manage the risk associated with the
volatility of underlying ETF positions given the enhanced liquidity
that an exchange-traded product would bring.
    Cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options traded on the Exchange would
have three important advantages over the contracts that are traded in
the OTC market. First, as a result of greater standardization of
contract terms, exchange-traded contracts should develop more
liquidity. Second, counter-party credit risk would be mitigated by the
fact that the contracts are issued and guaranteed by The Options
Clearing Corporation (``OCC''). Finally, the price discovery and
dissemination provided by the Exchange and its members would lead to
more transparent markets. The Exchange believes that its ability to
offer cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options would aid it in competing
with the OTC market and at the same time expand the universe of
products available to interested market participants. The Exchange
believes that an exchange-traded alternative may provide a useful risk
management and trading vehicle for market participants and their
customers.
    The Exchange has confirmed with the OCC that OCC can support the
clearance and settlement of cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options. The
Exchange has analyzed its capacity and represents that it believes the
Exchange and OPRA have the necessary systems capacity to handle the
additional traffic associated with the listing of cash-settled FLEX ETF
Penny Options. The Exchange believes any additional traffic that would
be generated from the introduction of cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny
Options will be manageable. The Exchange believes ATP Holders will not
have a capacity issue as a result of this proposed rule change. The
Exchange also represents that it does not believe this proposed rule
change will cause fragmentation of liquidity. The Exchange will monitor
the trading volume associated with the additional options series listed
as a result of this proposed rule change and the effect (if any) of
these additional series on market fragmentation and on the capacity of
the Exchange's automated systems.
    The Exchange has an adequate surveillance program in place for
cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options and intends to apply the same
program procedures that it applies to the Exchange's other options
products. FLEX options products and their respective symbols are
integrated into the Exchange's existing surveillance system
architecture and are thus subject to the relevant surveillance
processes. As a result, the Exchange believes it would be able to
effectively police the trading of cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options
using means that include its surveillance for manipulation. The
Exchange believes that manipulating the settlement price of cash-
settled FLEX ETF Penny Options would be difficult based on the size of
the market for such ETFs. Additionally, the Exchange notes that each
cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Option that would be subject to this
proposed rule change is sufficiently active so as to alleviate concerns
about

potential manipulative activity. Further, the vast liquidity of ETF
options as well as the underlying equities markets ensures a multitude
of market participants at any given time. Given the high level of
participation among market participants that enter quotes and/or orders
in ETF options, the Exchange believes it would be very difficult for a
single participant to alter the prices of each of the underlying
securities of an ETF in any significant way without exposing the would-
be manipulator to regulatory scrutiny. The Exchange further believes
any attempt to manipulate the prices of the underlying securities of an
ETF would also be cost prohibitive.
    Additionally, the Exchange is a member of the Intermarket
Surveillance Group (``ISG'') under the Intermarket Surveillance Group
Agreement dated June 20, 1994. The ISG members work together to
coordinate surveillance and investigative information sharing in the
stock and options markets. For surveillance purposes, the Exchange
would therefore have access to information regarding trading activity
in the pertinent underlying securities.
    The Exchange believes that introducing cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny
Options would further broaden the base of investors that use FLEX
Options to manage their trading and investment risk, including
investors that currently trade in the OTC markets for customized
options, where settlement restrictions do not apply. The proposed rule
change is also designed to encourage market makers to shift liquidity
from OTC markets onto the Exchange, which, it believes, will enhance
the process of price discovery conducted on the Exchange through
increased order flow. The Exchange also believes that this may open up
cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options to more retail investors. The
Exchange does not believe that this raises any unique regulatory
concerns because existing safeguards--such as position limits, exercise
limits, and reporting requirements--would continue to apply.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\13\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\
in particular, in that it is 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. Specifically,
the Exchange believes that introducing cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny
Options will increase order flow to the Exchange, increase the variety
of options products available for trading, and provide a valuable tool
for investors to manage risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to add cash-settled FLEX
ETF Penny Options would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market as cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options would
enable market participants to receive cash in lieu of shares of the
underlying security, which would, in turn provide greater opportunities
for market participants to manage risk through the use of cash-settled
FLEX ETF Penny Options to the benefit of investors and the public
interest.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to permit cash settlement
would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market because the proposed rule change would provide OTP [sic]
Holders with enhanced methods to manage risk by receiving cash if they
choose to do so instead of the underlying security. In addition, this
proposal would promote just and equitable principles of trade and
protect investors and the general public because cash settlement would
provide investors with an additional tool to manage their risk.
Further, the Exchange notes that its proposal to introduce cash-settled
FLEX ETF Penny Options is not novel in that other exchanges currently
offer [sic] cash settlement for options whose underlying security is an
ETF. The proposed rule change therefore should not raise any issues for
the Commission that have not been previously addressed.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change to permit cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny
Options is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade
in that the availability of cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options will
give market participants an alternative to trading similar products in
the OTC market. By trading a product in an exchange-traded environment
(that is currently being used in the OTC market), the Exchange will be
able to compete more effectively with the OTC market. The Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices in that it will hopefully lead to the
migration of options currently trading in the OTC market to trading to
the Exchange. Also, any migration to the Exchange from the OTC market
will result in increased market transparency. Additionally, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is designed to remove
impediments to and to perfect the mechanism for a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest in that it should create greater trading and
hedging opportunities and flexibility. The proposed rule change should
also result in enhanced efficiency in initiating and closing out
positions and heightened contra-party creditworthiness due to the role
of OCC as issuer and guarantor of cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Options.
Further, the proposed rule change will result in increased competition
by permitting the Exchange to offer products that are currently used in
the OTC market.
    Finally, the Exchange represents that it has an adequate
surveillance program in place to detect manipulative trading in cash-
settled FLEX ETF Penny Options. Regarding the proposed cash settlement,
the Exchange would use the same surveillance procedures currently
utilized for the Exchange's other FLEX Options. For surveillance
purposes, the Exchange would have access to information regarding
trading activity in the pertinent underlying securities. The Exchange
believes that limiting cash settlement to FLEX ETF Penny Options will
minimize the possibility of manipulation due to the robust liquidity in
both the ETF and options markets.

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal is designed to
increase competition for order flow on the Exchange in a manner that is
beneficial to investors because it is designed to provide investors
seeking to effect cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Option orders with the
opportunity for different methods of settling option contracts at
expiration.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily direct order flow to competing
venues who offer similar functionality. The Exchange believes the
proposed rule change encourages competition amongst market participants
to provide tailored cash-settled FLEX ETF Penny Option contracts.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2018-39 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2018-39. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2018-39, and should be
submitted on or before November 1, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-22049 Filed 10-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION 1. Agency/ Subagency originating request EPA/ OSWER/ OSW 2. OMB control number b.

None a. 2050 0024 3. Type of information collection ( check one)

a. New collection

b. Revision of a currently approved collection  c. Extension of a currently approved collection

d. Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired

e. Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired

f. Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one)

 a. Regular

b. Emergency

c. Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes  No 6. Requested Expiration Date  a. Three years from the approval date

b. Other 7. Title The 2003 Hazardous Waste Report 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) ICR # 0976.11, EPA form # 8700 13 A/ B 9. Keywords Hazardous Waste, Information, States, Regulated Community 10. Abstract RCRA requires large quantity hazardous waste generators and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities ( TSDF's) to submit a report every other year ( the Biennial Report) on the quantity, composition, and disposition of hazardous wastes they generate or receive for treatment, storage, or disposal. To implement these provisions, EPA issued the Biennial Report regulations, found in 40 CFR 262.41, 264.75, and 265.75. Generators and TSDFs must submit the Biennial Report forms by March 1 of every even numbered year for their hazardous waste activities in the previous ( odd numbered) year. Through the Biennial Report forms and instructions, EPA tells generators and TSDFs what information they must provide.

11. Affected public

a. Individuals or households P b. Business or other for profit

c. Not for profit institutions

d. Farms

e. Federal Government  f. State, Local or Tribal Government Primary affected public: 12. Obligation to respond

a. Voluntary

b. Required to obtain or retain benefits P c. Mandatory Primary obligation to respond:

13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 10,178 b. Total annual responses 505,251 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 85 % c. Total annual hours requested 196,976 d. Current OMB inventory 188,624 e. Difference 8,352 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 0 2. Adjustment 8,352 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars)

a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 25 c. Total annualized cost requested 25 d. Current OMB inventory 26 e. Difference ( 1) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 0 2. Adjustment ( 1)

15. Purpose of information collection

a. Application for benefits  b. Program evaluation

c. General purpose statistics

d. Audit

e. Program planning or management  f. Research P g. Regulatory or compliance Primary purpose of information collection: 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply)

 a. Recordkeeping

b. Third party disclosure  c. Reporting

1. On occasion Q 2. Weekly Q 3. Monthly Q 4. Quarterly Q 5. Semi annually Q 6. Annually  7. Biennually Q 8. Other ( describe )

17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes  No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Dave Levy Phone: 703 308 8479 Email: levy. dave@ epa. gov Mail: 5303W OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( i) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( i) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Office Official James R. Berlow, Director Hazardous Waste Minimization and Management Division Office of Solid Waste Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information ( OEI) Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95 Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 5 CFR 1320.9 reads " As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency ( through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify ( and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information

"( a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

"( b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

"( c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U. S. C § 601( 6)), the use of such techniques as:

"( 1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond; "( 2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof; "( 3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

"( d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

"( e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

"( f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

"( g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8( b)( 3); [ see below]

"( h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of the information in a manner which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

"( i) uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and "( j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public."

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3) requires that each collection of information:

"( 3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of: "( i) the reasons the information is planned to be and/ or has been collected; "( ii) the way such information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of the average burden of the collection ( together with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden); "( iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit ( citing authority), or mandatory ( citing authority); "( v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any ( citing authority); and "( vi) the fact that any 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."

10/ 95