[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 141 (Monday, July 23, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34816-34819]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15480]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0388, FRL-9980-67--Region 8]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Monitoring Requirements for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010
NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve elements of State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions from the
State of Utah to demonstrate the State meets infrastructure monitoring
requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA) for the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for lead (Pb) on October 15,
2008, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) on January 22, 2010, sulfur
dioxide (SO2) on June 2, 2010, and fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) on December 14, 2012. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires that each state submit a SIP for the implementation,
maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 22, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2018-0388 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. The EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the
hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Gregory, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,''
``us'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

I. Background

    On October 15, 2008, the EPA revised the level of the primary and
secondary Pb NAAQS from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) to
0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ (73 FR 66964, Nov. 12, 2008). On January 22, 2010, the
EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a
level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average of 98th
percentile 1-hour daily maximum concentrations, while retaining the
annual primary standard of 53 ppb. The secondary annual NO2
NAAQS remains unchanged at 53 ppb (75 FR 6474, Feb. 9, 2010). On June
2, 2010, the EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2 standard
at 75 ppb, based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of
1-hour daily maximum concentrations (75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010).
Finally, on December 14, 2012, the EPA promulgated a revised annual
PM2.5 standard by lowering the level to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and
retaining the 24-hour PM2.5 standard at a level of 35 [mu]g/
m\3\ (78 FR 3086, Jan. 15, 2013).
    Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to
submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure their SIPs provide for
implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the NAAQS. These
submissions must contain any revisions needed for meeting the
applicable SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications
that their existing SIPs for PM2.5, Pb, NO2 and
SO2 already meet those requirements. The EPA highlighted
this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007, guidance document
entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1)
and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient
Air Quality Standards'' (2007 Memo). On September 25, 2009, the EPA
issued an additional guidance document pertaining to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required
Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)''
(2009 Memo), followed by the October 14, 2011, ``Guidance on
Infrastructure SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)''
(2011 Memo). Most recently, the EPA issued ``Guidance on Infrastructure
State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and (2)'' on September 13, 2013 (2013 Memo).

II. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

    The EPA is acting upon the SIP submissions from Utah that address
the infrastructure monitoring requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make a
SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1).
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions
``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may
prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air
quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and these SIP submissions
are to provide for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement''
of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make
these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is
not conditioned upon the EPA taking any action other than promulgating
a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific
elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address.
    The EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for
the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, the EPA uses the
term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from
submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under
the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP''
submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part
D of title I of the CAA; ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by
the EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA
section 169A; and nonattainment new source review (NSR) permit program
submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
    Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for
infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more
details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list
of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide
variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required
legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program
provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both
authority and substantive program provisions.\1\ The EPA therefore
believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is
unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In
particular, the EPA believes that the list of required elements for
infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains
ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an
infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states
must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority
under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C)
provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address
certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and
section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority
to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
triggered in the event of such emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Examples of some of these ambiguities and the context in which the
EPA interprets the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) are discussed at length in our notice of proposed rulemaking:
Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure
Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5, 2008 Lead, 2008
Ozone, and 2010 NO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards;
South Dakota (79 FR 71040, Dec. 1, 2014) under ``III. What is the Scope
of this Rulemaking?''
    With respect to certain other issues, the EPA does not believe that
an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the
appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in
a state's

existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions related to
excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction (SSM) that may be contrary to the CAA and the EPA's
policies addressing such excess emissions; (ii) existing provisions
related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's discretion'' that
may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to
SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not
requiring further approval by the EPA; and (iii) existing provisions
for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs that may be
inconsistent with current requirements of the EPA's ``Final NSR
Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186, Dec. 31, 2002, as amended by 72 FR
32526, June 13, 2007 (``NSR Reform'').

III. What infrastructure elements are required under sections 110(a)(1)
and (2)?

    CAA section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing
requirements for SIP submissions after a new or revised NAAQS is
promulgated. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP must
contain or satisfy. These infrastructure elements (listed below)
include requirements such as modeling, monitoring and emissions
inventories, which are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS.
     110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
     110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
     110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control measures.
     110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport.
     110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority, conflict
of interest, and oversight of local governments and regional agencies.
     110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and reporting.
     110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers.
     110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
     110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials;
public notification; and PSD and visibility protection.
     110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data.
     110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.
    Of these infrastructure elements, element B is the subject of this
action, as all other elements were acted on in the EPA rulemaking
titled Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010
NO2, 2010 SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah.\2\ A detailed discussion of
element 110(a)(2)(B) is contained in the next section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 81 FR 50626 (August 2, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. How did Utah address the infrastructure elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?

    The Utah Department of Environmental Quality (Department or UDEQ)
submitted certification of Utah's infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Pb
NAAQS on January 19, 2012; 2010 NO2 NAAQS on January 31,
2013; 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 2, 2013; and 2012
PM2.5 on December 4, 2015. Utah's infrastructure
certifications demonstrate how the State, where applicable, has plans
in place that meet the requirements of section 110 for the 2008 Pb,
2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. These plans reference the Utah Code Annotated (UCA) and the Utah
SIP. These submittals are available within the electronic docket for
today's proposed action at www.regulations.gov. The UCA and the Utah
SIP referenced in the submittals are publicly available at http://le.utah.gov/xcode/code.html and https://deq.utah.gov/legacy/laws-and-rules/air-quality/sip/. Air pollution control regulations and statutes
that have been previously approved by the EPA and incorporated into the
Utah SIP can be found at 40 CFR 52.2320.

V. Analysis of the State Submittals

    Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B)
requires SIPs to ``provide for establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary'' to
``(i) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and
(ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator.''
    The State's submissions cite UAC rule R307-110-5, which
incorporates by reference SIP Section IV (Ambient Air Monitoring
Program), and provides a brief description of the purposes of the air
monitoring program approved by the EPA in the early 1980s and most
recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744). Pursuant to its Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), the Department makes arrangements to
operate and maintain federal reference monitors and establishes
federally-approved protocols for sample collection, handling and
analysis. The State's QAPP was most recently approved on November 28,
2016, with an annual update in November of 2017.
    Utah's annual monitoring network plan (AMNP), is made available by
the Department for public review and comment prior to submission to the
EPA. Additionally, the State of Utah submits data to the EPA's Air
Quality System database in accordance with 40 CFR 58.16. Finally,
Utah's 2017 AMNP was approved by the EPA through a letter dated October
27, 2017 (available within the docket). The State provides the EPA with
prior notification when changes to its monitoring network or plan are
being considered. This action proposes to approve the State's submittal
in reference to element B: Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
Previous action was not taken in the final EPA ruling titled
Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010
SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards; Utah.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 81 FR 50626 (August 2, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We find that Utah's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient
air quality monitoring and data system requirements and therefore
propose to approve the infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Pb, 2010
SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for
this element. Approval of element B will satisfy any outstanding
requirements under Section 110(a)(2).

VI. What proposed action is the EPA taking?

    In this action, the EPA is proposing to approve infrastructure
element B for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS from the State's certifications as shown in
Table 1.

 Table 1--List of Utah Infrastructure Elements That the EPA Is Proposing
                               To Approve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Proposed for approval                       Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 19, 2012 submittal--2008 Pb NAAQS....................       (B)
January 31, 2013 submittal--2010 NO2 NAAQS...................       (B)
June 2, 2013 submittal--2010 SO2 NAAQS.......................       (B)
December 4, 2015 submittal--2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.................       (B)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal
requirements and

does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because
this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and
     Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Greenhouse
gases, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: July 13, 2018.
Debra Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2018-15480 Filed 7-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 67 (Monday, April 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20983-20985]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08094]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69272; File No. SR-NYSE-2013-23]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Establishing the NYSE Trades Digital Media Data Feed and a Schedule of
the NYSE Proprietary Market Data Fees

April 2, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that March 20, 2013, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to establish the NYSE Trades Digital Media
data feed and a schedule of the NYSE Proprietary Market Data Fees
(``Market Data Fee Schedule''). The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to establish the NYSE Trades Digital Media
data feed and a Market Data Fee Schedule.
Background
    In 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or the
``Commission'') approved the NYSE Trades data feed and certain fees for
it.\4\ NYSE Trades is a NYSE-only market data feed that allows a vendor
to redistribute on a real-time basis the same last sale information
that the

Exchange reports under the Consolidated Tape Association (``CTA'') Plan
for inclusion in the CTA Plan's consolidated data streams and certain
other related data elements. Specifically, NYSE Trades includes the
real-time last sale price, time, size, and bid/ask quotations for each
security traded on the Exchange and a stock summary message. The stock
summary message updates every minute and includes NYSE's opening price,
high price, low price, closing price, and cumulative volume for the
security. The Exchange currently charges NYSE Trades data feed
recipients an access fee of $1,500 per month, and a subscriber fee for
professional subscribers of $15 per month per device, which may be
counted, at the election of the vendor based on the number of
``Subscriber Entitlements'' \5\ (collectively, these fees are referred
to in this filing as ``NYSE Trades basic fees''). In July 2012, the
Exchange added a fee for distribution by television broadcasters
(``Broadcast Fee''), which is $40,000 per month.\6\ The television
broadcast distribution method differs from the other distribution
methods in that the data is available in a temporary, view-only mode on
television screens. NYSE Trades is not offered in a manner to
facilitate its distribution via Web sites or mobile devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59606 (Mar. 19,
2009), 74 FR 13293 (Mar. 26, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-04).
    \5\ See id. at n.5; Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62038
(May 5, 2010), 75 FR 26825 (May 12, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-22).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67467 (July 19,
2012), 77 FR 43636 (July 25, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Change
    The Exchange proposes to offer a new version of NYSE Trades called
``NYSE Trades Digital Media,'' which will include, as with NYSE Trades
as currently offered, access to the real-time last sale price, time,
and size for each security traded on the Exchange as well as the stock
summary message. NYSE Trades Digital Media will not, however, include
access to the bid/ask quotation that is included with the current NYSE
Trades product under the NYSE Trades basic fees and Broadcast Fee. NYSE
Trades will be offered in a new manner that will permit market data
vendors, television broadcasters, Web site and mobile device service
providers, and others to distribute this data product to their
customers for viewing via television, Web site, and mobile devices.
Vendors will not be permitted to provide NYSE Trades Digital Media in a
context in which a trading or order routing decision can be implemented
unless CTA data is available in an equivalent manner, must label the
products as NYSE-only data, and must provide a hyperlinked notice
similar to the one provided for CTA delayed data.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ These are requirements that currently apply to NYSE Realtime
Reference Prices (``NYSE RRP''), a separate last sale product that
also is offered for use in a non-trading environment. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 60004 (May 29, 2009), 74 FR 26905 (June 4,
2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-42). The Exchange also intends to offer NYSE RRP
in the future as NYSE RRP Digital Media, but there will be no
substantive change to the NYSE RRP product elements, only the
permitted distribution channels. The Exchange will propose pricing
for NYSE Trades Digital Media and NYSE RRP Digital Media in a
separate filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to establish a Market Data Fee Schedule.
The market data fees on the proposed Market Data Fee Schedule for NYSE
OpenBook,\8\ NYSE BBO,\9\ NYSE Trades,\10\ NYSE RRP,\11\ NYSE
Alerts,\12\ and NYSE Order Imbalances\13\ have been previously filed
with the Commission. The Exchange is proposing the Market Data Fee
Schedule in order to provide greater transparency to its customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 59544 (Mar. 9,
2009), 74 FR 11162 (Mar. 16, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2008-131) and 62038 (May
5, 2010), 75 FR 26825 (May 12, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-22).
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62181 (May 26,
2010), 75 FR 31488 (June 3, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-30).
    \10\ See supra notes 4-6.
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61406 (Jan. 22,
2010), 75 FR 4600 (Jan. 28, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2009-120).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50844 (Dec. 13,
2004), 69 FR 76806 (Dec. 22, 2004) (SR-NYSE-2004-53).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60153 (June 19,
2009), 74 FR 30656 (June 26, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-49).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \14\ of
the Act, in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5)
\15\ of the Act, in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, 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 it is not designed to permit
unfair discrimination among customers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is offering the NYSE Trades Digital Media data product
in recognition of the demand for a more seamless and easier-to-
administer data distribution model that takes into account the expanded
variety of media and communication devices that investors utilize
today. For example, a television broadcaster could display the NYSE
Trades Digital Media data during market-related television programming
and on its Web site and allow its viewers to view the data via their
mobile devices, creating a more seamless distribution model that will
allow investors more choice in how they receive and view market data.
Because the product is intended for use in a non-trading environment,
the Exchange will not include a bid/ask quotation as a product element.
Market participants that still wish to obtain bid/ask quotations can do
so by paying the NYSE Trades basic fees. The Exchange believes that
establishing the Market Data Fee Schedule will provide greater
transparency for the Exchange's customers.
    In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory
organizations and broker-dealers increased authority and flexibility to
offer new and unique market data to consumers of such data. It was
believed that this authority would expand the amount of data available
to users and consumers of such data and also spur innovation and
competition for the provision of market data. The Exchange believes
that the data products proposed herein are precisely the sort of market
data products that the Commission envisioned when it adopted Regulation
NMS. The Commission concluded that Regulation NMS--by lessening
regulation of the market in proprietary data--would itself further the
Act's goals of facilitating efficiency and competition:
    [E]fficiency is promoted when broker-dealers who do not need the
data beyond the prices, sizes, market center identifications of the
NBBO and consolidated last sale information are not required to
receive (and pay for) such data. The Commission also believes that
efficiency is promoted when broker-dealers may choose to receive
(and pay for) additional market data based on their own internal
analysis of the need for such data.\16\

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By removing ``unnecessary regulatory restrictions'' on the ability
of exchanges to sell their own data, Regulation NMS advanced the goals
of the Act and the principles reflected in its legislative history.
    The Exchange further notes that the existence of alternatives to
the Exchange's products, including real-time consolidated data, free
delayed consolidated data, and proprietary data from other sources,
ensures that the Exchange is not unreasonably

discriminatory because vendors and subscribers can elect these
alternatives.
    The proposed data product will remove impediments to and help
perfect a free and open market by permitting the Exchange's last sale
data to be more widely distributed, thereby benefiting users of the
data. In addition, the proposal would not permit unfair discrimination
because the product will be available to all of the Exchange's vendors
and customers on an equivalent basis.

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 market for proprietary
data products is currently competitive and inherently contestable
because there is fierce competition for the inputs necessary to the
creation of proprietary data. Numerous exchanges compete with each
other for listings, trades, and market data itself, providing virtually
limitless opportunities for entrepreneurs who wish to produce and
distribute their own market data. This proprietary data is produced by
each individual exchange, as well as other entities (such as
internalizing broker-dealers and various forms of alternative trading
systems, including dark pools and electronic communication networks),
in a vigorously competitive market. It is common for market
participants to further and exploit this competition by sending their
order flow and transaction reports to multiple markets, rather than
providing them all to a single market.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \17\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not
become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\19\
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)\20\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change will make the Exchange's last sale data more
widely available through more distribution channels, which will enable
investors to better monitor trading activity on the Exchange, and
thereby serve the public interest. The Exchange also notes that other
exchanges already offer similar products, and thus believes that the
Exchange's proposed products will enhance competition. The Exchange
believes that expanding distribution channels and offering a new
version of the product for use in a non-trading environment will
benefit investors. The Commission believes that permitting the Exchange
to offer this product without delay is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 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.
    \20\ Id.
    \21\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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-NYSE-2013-23 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2013-23. 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 the 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-NYSE-2013-23 and should be
submitted on or before April 29, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-08094 Filed 4-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 146)]
[Notices]
[Page 41730-41731]
[DOCID:fr31jy07-66]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP07-390-000]

Enstor Houston Hub Storage and Transportation, L.P.; Notice of
Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Houston
Hub Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

July 20, 2007.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Houston Hub Project involving
construction and operation of a new salt dome cavern gas storage
project and pipelines by Enstor Houston Hub Storage and Transportation,
L.P. (Enstor) at the North Dayton Salt Dome in Liberty County,
Texas.\1\ This EA will be used by the Commission in its decision-making
process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience
and necessity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Enstor's application was filed with the Commission under
Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by a pipeline company representative about the acquisition of an
easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities.
The pipeline company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable
agreement. However, if the project is approved by the Commission, that
approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if
easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline
company could initiate condemnation proceedings in accordance with
state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' was attached to the
project notice Enstor provided to landowners. This fact sheet addresses
a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent
domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is
available for viewing on the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov
).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    Enstor is proposing to construct four solution-mined caverns with
an initial total storage capacity of 16 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of
working gas, supported by 8.7 Bcf of pad gas. Upon completion of
solution mining, the caverns would be taken out of service one at a
time for additional solution mining to increase the capacity of each of
the four storage caverns by 7.5 Bcf for a total volume of 30 Bcf of
working gas and 16.3 Bcf of pad gas. The project would be capable of
injecting about 600 MMcf per day and provide a nominal withdrawal of 1
Bcf per day. Enstor seeks authority to construct and operate in Liberty
County, Texas:
     Four solution-mined gas storage salt caverns;
     Five brine disposal wells and associated 20-inch-diameter
brine disposal pipeline;
     Five raw water wells and associated 20-inch-diameter raw
water pipeline;
     31,600 horse-power compressor station;
     Two interconnects and meter stations;
     2.3 miles of dual 24-inch-diameter pipeline;
     Ancillary facilities including dehydration equipment,
pressure reducing station, withdrawal separator with slug catcher; and
     138-kilo-volt (kv):34-kv power drop substation, 24-kv
power drop and associated electric power lines.
    The location of the project facilities is shown in Appendix 1.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies of all appendices, other
than Appendix 1 (maps), are available on the Commission's Web site
at the ``eLibrary'' link or from the Commission(s Public Reference
Room, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20426, or call (202)
502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary refer to the
last page of this notice. Copies of the appendices were sent to all
those receiving this notice in the mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would require about 238.4
acres of land. Following construction, about 180.2 acres would be
maintained as new aboveground facility sites and permanent rights-of-
way.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals.
This process is referred to as ``scoping''. The main goal of the
scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this Notice of Intent, the Commission staff
requests public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the
EA. All comments received are considered during the preparation of the
EA. State and local government representatives are encouraged to notify
their constituents of this proposed action and encourage them to
comment on their areas of concern.
    In the EA we \3\ will discuss impacts that could occur as a result
of the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``We'', ``us'', and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     geology and soils.
     land use.
     water resources, fisheries, and wetlands.
     cultural resources.
     vegetation and wildlife.
     endangered and threatened species.
     air quality and noise.
     hazardous waste.
     public safety.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or

avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the EA. Depending
on the comments received during the scoping process, the EA may be
published and mailed to federal, state, and local agencies, public
interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners,
newspapers, libraries, and the Commission's official service list for
this proceeding. A comment period will be allotted for review if the EA
is published. We will consider all comments on the EA before we make
our recommendations to the Commission.
    To ensure your comments are considered, please carefully follow the
instructions in the public participation section below.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. By becoming a commentor, your
concerns will be addressed in the EA and considered by the Commission.
You should focus on the potential environmental effects of the
proposal, alternatives to the proposal, and measures to avoid or lessen
environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more useful
they will be. Please carefully follow these instructions to ensure that
your comments are received in time and properly recorded:
     Send an original and two copies of your letter to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Acting Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A. Washington, DC 20426
     Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas
Branch 3.
     Reference Docket No. CP07-390-000.
     Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before August 22, 2007.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing of any
comments or interventions or protests to this proceeding. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov under the ``e-Filing'' link and the link to the

User's Guide. Before you can file comments you will need to create a
free account which can be created on-line.
    We may mail the EA for comment. If you are interested in receiving
it, please return the Information Request (Appendix 3). If you do not
return the Information Request, you will be taken off the mailing list.

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an official party to the proceeding, or ``intervenor''. To
become an intervenor you must file a motion to intervene according to
Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR
385.214). Intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the
Commission's decision. Motions to Intervene should be electronically
submitted using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov.

Persons without Internet access should send an original and 14 copies
of their motion to the Secretary of the Commission at the address
indicated previously. Persons filing Motions to Intervene on or before
the comment deadline indicated above must send a copy of the motion to
the Applicant. All filings, including late interventions, submitted
after the comment deadline must be served on the Applicant and all
other intervenors identified on the Commission's service list for this
proceeding. Persons on the service list with e-mail addresses may be
served electronically; others must be served a hard copy of the filing.
    Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be
granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they
have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be
adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor
status to have your environmental comments considered.

Environmental Mailing List

    An effort is being made to send this notice to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the proposed project. This includes all landowners who are
potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily
for project purposes, or who own homes within distances defined in the
Commission's regulations of certain aboveground facilities. By this
notice we are also asking governmental agencies, especially those in
Appendix 2, to express their interest in becoming cooperating agencies
for the preparation of the EA.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the
FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link.

Click on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the
docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number
field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx
 along with other related information.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-14767 Filed 7-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 32)]
[Notices]
[Page 7724-7725]
[DOCID:fr19fe09-90]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59385; File No. SR-OCC-2009-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Clarify Exchange Directorships Under Its By-Laws

February 11, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on January 12, 2009, The
Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change described
in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared primarily
by OCC. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on
the proposed rule change from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to clarify that for
purposes of OCC's By-Laws, including quorum and voting, an individual
may serve as an Exchange Director for more than one exchange and that
that individual counts as a separate director for each exchange
represented.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC 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. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to clarify that for all
purposes under the By-Laws, including quorum and voting, an individual
may occupy more than one Exchange directorship and that if an
individual does so, he or she counts as a separate director for each
such Exchange represented.
    OCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act \3\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to OCC because the proposed rule
change assures a fair representation of OCC's shareholders in the
administration of its affairs by eliminating any ambiguity as to what
constitutes a quorum and how votes shall be counted in the situation
where an individual occupies more than one Exchange directorship.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact on or impose any burden on competition.

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

    No written comments relating to the proposed rule change have been
solicited or received. OCC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by OCC.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) \5\
thereunder because the proposed rule change constitutes a stated
policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the meaning,
administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of OCC. At any time
within sixty days of the filing of such rule change, the Commission may
summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors,

or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-OCC-2009-02 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2009-02. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filings also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's Web
site at http://www.optionsclearing.com/publications/rules/proposed_
changes/sr_occ_09_02.pdf. 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-OCC-2009-02 and should be submitted on or before March
12, 2009.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-3427 Filed 2-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 172 (Thursday, September 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54658-54659]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21555]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001]

Allergenic Products Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Allergenic Products Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on November 5, 2013, from 9
a.m. to approximately 3:30 p.m. and on November 6, 2013, from 8:30 a.m.
to approximately 2:45 p.m.
    Location: FDA, 5630 Fishers Lane, Conference Room 1066, Rockville,
MD 20857. For those unable to attend in person, the meeting will also
be webcast. The webcast will be available at the following links:
    November 5, 2013: http://fda.yorkcast.com/webcast/Viewer/?peid=3074a2c9f7ac478db3303477ac1c146b1d.
    November 6, 2013: http://fda.yorkcast.com/webcast/Viewer/?peid=2f114f7579ef42e8b4ca4523b0b26eb51d.
    Contact Person: Donald Jehn or Joanne Lipkind, Food and Drug
Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike (HFM-71), Rockville, MD 20852, 301-
827-0314<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>FDA
Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in
the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last
minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory
committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide
timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency's Web site
at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to
the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory
committee information line to learn about possible modifications before
coming to the meeting.
    Agenda: On November 5, 2013, the committee will meet in open
session to discuss and make recommendations on the safety and efficacy
of Oralair, a Sweet Vernal Grass, Perennial Ryegrass, Timothy Grass,
Orchard Grass, and Kentucky Bluegrass Mixed Pollens Allergen Extract
tablet for sublingual use, manufactured by Stallergenes. On November 6,
2013, the committee will meet in open session to discuss and make
recommendations on the safety and efficacy of Grastek, a Timothy Grass
Pollen Allergen Extract tablet for sublingual use, manufactured by
Merck.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
October 29, 2013. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 12 noon and 12:30 p.m. on November 5, 2013, and
between approximately 11:10 a.m. and 11:40 a.m. on November 6, 2013.
Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should
notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general
nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and
addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the
approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before
October 21, 2013. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited.
If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be
reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing
session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the
scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify
interested persons regarding their request to speak by October 22,
2013.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Donald Jehn or
Joanne Lipkind at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: August 29, 2013
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-21555 Filed 9-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34983-34984]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14833]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9319-6]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Consent Decree; Request for Public Comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby
given of a proposed consent decree to address lawsuits filed by
WildEarth Guardians, National Parks Conservation Association, and the
Environmental Defense Fund (collectively, ``Plaintiffs'') in the United
States District Court for the District of Colorado: WildEarth
Guardians, et al. v. Jackson, No. 1:11-cv-0001-CMA-MEH (D. CO) and
consolidated case (No. 11-cv-00743-CMA-MEH). Plaintiffs filed
complaints alleging that EPA failed to perform certain nondiscretionary
duties under sections 110(k)(2) and 110(c) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C.
7410(k)(2). Specifically, Plaintiffs' complaints alleged that EPA:
failed to act on two State Implementation Plan (``SIP'') submissions,
one addressing Colorado regional haze and the other addressing North
Dakota excess emissions during startup, shutdown, malfunction and
maintenance; failed to act on a Wyoming SIP submission addressing
Wyoming regional haze, and failed to promulgate regional haze Federal
Implementation Plans (``FIPs'') for Montana, North Dakota, Colorado and
Wyoming; and failed to promulgate a regional haze FIP for the State of
Colorado or, alternatively, to finally approve a regional haze SIP for
the State of Colorado. Under the terms of the proposed consent decree,
deadlines are established for EPA to take action on the relevant SIPs
and FIPs.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by July 15, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2011-0533, online at http://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred
method); by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lea Anderson, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    The proposed consent decree would resolve lawsuits filed by
Plaintiffs for EPA's alleged failure to take timely action under CAA
sections 110(k)(2) and 110(c) on SIPs and FIPs as described in the
Summary section of this notice. Under the terms of the proposed consent
decree, deadlines are established for EPA to sign rulemaking actions to
meet the relevant obligations. In addition, the proposed consent decree
requires that no later than 10 business days following signature of the
notice of any proposed or final rulemaking, EPA shall send the notice
to the Office of the Federal Register for review and publication. After
EPA fulfills its obligations under the proposed consent decree, the
consent decree may be terminated.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice

determines that consent to this consent decree should be withdrawn, the
terms of the proposed consent decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How can I get a copy of the consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2011-0533) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at
the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
http://www.regulations.gov. You may use http://www.regulations.gov to
submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents
in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select
``search.''
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov without change,
unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information
claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute is not included in the official public docket or in the
electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material,
including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not
be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only
in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD
ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Use of the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments
to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments.
The electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(e-mail) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
e-mail comment directly to the Docket without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: June 9, 2011.
Richard B. Ossias,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011-14833 Filed 6-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 177)]
[Notices]
[Page 55810-55811]
[DOCID:fr14se10-94]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3315-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Massachusetts; Emergency and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of an
emergency for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (FEMA-3315-EM), dated
September 2, 2010, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 2, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated September 2, 2010, the President issued an emergency declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the Stafford Act), as
follows:

    I have determined that the emergency conditions in certain areas
of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts resulting from Hurricane Earl
beginning on September 1, 2010, and continuing, are of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant an emergency declaration under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42
U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (``the Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such an emergency exists in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
    You are authorized to provide appropriate assistance for
required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the
Stafford Act, to save lives and to protect property and public
health and safety, and to lessen or avert the threat of a
catastrophe in the designated areas. Specifically, you are
authorized to provide assistance for emergency protective measures
(Category B), including direct Federal assistance, under the Public
Assistance program. This assistance excludes regular time costs for
subgrantees' regular employees.
    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any

Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance
will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. In order
to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate
from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find
necessary for Federal emergency assistance and administrative
expenses.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department
of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, James N.
Russo, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this declared emergency.
    The following areas of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have been
designated as adversely affected by this declared emergency:

    Barnstable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Nantucket,
Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk, and Worcester Counties for emergency
protective measures (Category B), including direct Federal
assistance, under the Public Assistance program.
The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-22853 Filed 9-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

Open Meeting, December 4-7, 2007, to consider and review the

interpretation of the ecological significance of atrazine stream-water concentrations using a statistically-designed monitoring program

Docket Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0934

FIFRA SAP Website:    HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/"  http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/

OPP Docket Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

PANEL

FIFRA SAP Chair

Steven G. Heeringa, Ph.D.

Research Scientist & Director for Statistical Design

University of Michigan Institute for Social Research

Ann Arbor, MI

Designated Federal Official

Jim Downing

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Science Coordination & Policy

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

EPA East Building

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC  20460

Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>,   HYPERLINK <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel Members

Janice E. Chambers, Ph.D., D.A.B.T., A.T.S.

William L. Giles Distinguished Professor

Director, Center for Environmental Health Sciences

College of Veterinary Medicine

Mississippi State University

Mississippi State, MS

Stuart Handwerger, M.D.

Robert and Mary Shoemaker Professor of Pediatrics and Director of Endocrinology

Professor of Cell Biology, Neurobiology and Anatomy

University of Cincinnati/Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center

Cincinnati, OH

Gary E. Isom, Ph.D.

Professor of Toxicology

Department of Medicinal Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology

School of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences

Purdue University

West Lafayette, IN

Kenneth M. Portier, Ph.D.

Program Director, Statistics

American Cancer Society

National Home Office

Atlanta, GA

Daniel Schlenk, Ph.D.

Professor of Aquatic Ecotoxicology & Environmental Toxicology,

Department of Environmental Sciences

University of California, Riverside,

Riverside, CA

FQPA Science Review Board Members

Xuefeng Chu, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor and Research Scientist

Annis Water Resources Institute

Grand Valley State University

Muskegon, MI

William R. Effland, Ph.D.

Soil Scientist

Resource Inventory and Assessment Division

USDA-National Resource Conservation Service

Beltsville, MD

Timothy R. Ellsworth, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Soil Physics

Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences

University of Illinois

Urbana, IL

James Fairchild, M.S.

Research Aquatic Ecologist

USGS

Columbia Environmental Research Center

Columbia, MO

Paige Gay, Ph.D.

Assistant Research Scientist

Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering

University of Georgia

Tifton, GA

Robert J. Gilliom, M.S.

Chief, Pesticide National Synthesis

National Water Quality Assessment Program

USGS

Sacramento, CA

Christian Grue, Ph.D.

Wildlife Research Biologist

Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit

School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences

University of Washington

Seattle, WA

Thomas W. La Point, Ph.D.

Professor and Director

Institute of Applied Sciences

University of North Texas

Denton, TX

Robert Lerch, Ph.D.

Soil Scientist and Adjunct Assistant Professor

Department of Soil, Environmental and Atmospheric Sciences

University of Missouri

USDA/ARS, Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit

Columbia, MO

Jeffrey M. Novak, Ph.D.

Research Soil Scientist

USDA-ARS-Coastal Plains Soil, Water and Plant Research Center

Florence, SC

James C. Randolph, Ph.D.

Professor and Director

Environmental Science Program

School of Public & Environmental Affairs

Indiana University

Bloomington, IN

Linda J. Young, Ph.D.

Professor

Department of Statistics

Institute of Food, Agricultural Sciences

University of Florida

Gainesville, FL


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 151 (Friday, August 5, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47520-47522]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19902]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0721; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-217-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; ATR-GIE Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional Model ATR42 and ATR72 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    One ATR operator has experienced in-flight elevator travel
limitations with unusual effort being necessary on pitch axis to
control the aeroplane, while the ``pitch mistrim'' message appeared
on the ADU [advisory display unit] display. The elevators seemed to
be jammed.
    During the post-flight inspection, it was discovered that the LH
[left-hand] elevator lower stop assembly was broken at the level of
the angles, which may have prevented the elevator to respond
normally to the flight control input.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
reduced control of the aeroplane.
* * * * *

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 19,
2011.

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 W12-40, 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
ATR-GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional, 1, All[eacute]e Pierre
Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21;
fax +33 (0) 5 62 21 67 18; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.aerochain.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: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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-2011-0721;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-217-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 2010-0138, dated July 1, 2010 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    One ATR operator has experienced in-flight elevator travel
limitations with unusual effort being necessary on pitch axis to
control the aeroplane, while the ``pitch mistrim'' message appeared
on the ADU display. The elevators seemed to be jammed.
    During the post-flight inspection, it was discovered that the LH
elevator lower stop assembly was broken at the level of the angles,
which may have prevented the elevator to respond normally to the
flight control input.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
reduced control of the aeroplane.
    For the reasons described above, and as a precautionary measure,
this [EASA] AD requires a one-time [general visual and detailed]
inspection [for damaged angles] of the elevator hinge fittings and
the reporting of all findings. Depending on the results, further
action may be considered.

Corrective actions also include replacement of damaged angles with
serviceable parts; and a detailed inspection of adjacent areas for
damage, and repair if necessary. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional has issued Service Bulletin
ATR42-55-0014, dated May 11, 2010; and Service Bulletin ATR72-55-1006,
dated May 11, 2010. 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.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 86 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 4 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $29,240, or $340 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 60 work-hours and require parts costing up to $960, for a
cost of up to $6,060 per product. We have no way of determining the
number of products that may need these actions.

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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    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:

ATR-GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional: Docket No. FAA-2011-
0721; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-217-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by September 19, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to ATR-GIE Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional Model ATR42-200, -300,

-320, and -500 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers (MSN) up
to MSN 643 inclusive; and Model ATR72-101, -102, -201, -202, -211, -
212, and -212A airplanes, all MSNs up to MSN 728 inclusive;
certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55:
Stabilizers.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    One ATR operator has experienced in-flight elevator travel
limitations with unusual effort being necessary on pitch axis to
control the aeroplane, while the ``pitch mistrim'' message appeared
on the ADU [advisory display unit] display. The elevators seemed to
be jammed.
    During the post-flight inspection, it was discovered that the LH
[left-hand] elevator lower stop assembly was broken at the level of
the angles, which may have prevented the elevator to respond
normally to the flight control input.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
reduced control of the aeroplane.
* * * * *

Compliance

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

Actions

    (g) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, perform
a general visual inspection of the inboard hinge fitting area and a
detailed inspection of lower stop angles of the inboard hinge
fittings on both LH and right-hand (RH) elevators, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional Service Bulletin ATR42-55-0014, dated May 11, 2010;
or Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Service Bulletin ATR72-55-
1006, dated May 11, 2010; as applicable.
    (1) If any damaged angle is found during the inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, replace the
damaged angles with serviceable parts and accomplish a detailed
inspection of the adjacent areas to detect any damage, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional Service Bulletin ATR42-55-0014, dated May 11, 2010;
or Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Service Bulletin ATR72-55-
1006, dated May 11, 2010; as applicable.
    (2) If any damage is detected in adjacent areas during the
inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, before further
flight, repair the damage using a method approved by either the
Manager, International Branch, ANM 116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its
delegated agent).
    (h) Submit a report of the findings (damaged angles found on the
LH and RH side elevator) of the inspection required by paragraph (g)
of this AD to ATR Engineering, Service Bulletin Group, 1 Allee
Pierre Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex, France, at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. The report must
include the MSN, accomplishment date, registration number, number of
flights, flight hours, inspection results, and performed actions. In
addition, return any damaged lower stop angles to ATR Engineering,
Service Bulletin Group, 1 Allee Pierre Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex,
France.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (i) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, 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 International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be e-mailed to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: 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 be approximately 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.,
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2010-0138, dated
July 1, 2010; Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Service Bulletin
ATR42-55-0014, dated
    May 11, 2010; and Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Service
Bulletin ATR72-55-1006, dated May 11, 2010; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 26, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-19902 Filed 8-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P