[Federal Register: May 3, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 84)]
[Notices]
[Page 23314-23316]
[DOCID:fr03my10-98]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61983; File No. SR-ISE-2010-19]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities
Exchange, LLC; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change To List
and Trade Options on the ETFS Palladium Trust and the ETFS Platinum
Trust

April 26, 2010.
    On March 5, 2010, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to list and trade options on the
ETFS Palladium Trust and the ETFS Platinum Trust (collectively ``ETFS
Options''). The proposed rule change was published in the Federal
Register on March 26, 2010.\3\ The Commission received no comments on
the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61742 (March 19,
2010), 75 FR 14646 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of Proposal

    Recently, the Commission authorized ISE to list and trade options
on the SPDR Gold Trust,\4\ the iShares COMEX Gold Trust and the iShares
Silver Trust,\5\ the ETFS Gold Trust and the ETFS Silver Trust.\6\ Now,
the Exchange proposes to list and trade options on the ETFS Palladium
Trust and the ETFS Platinum Trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57894 (May 30,
2008), 73 FR 32061 (June 5, 2008) (SR-ISE-2008-12).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59055 (December 4,
2008), 73 FR 75148 (December 10, 2008) (SR-ISE-2008-58).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61483 (February 3,
2010), 75 FR 6753 (February 10, 2010) (SR-ISE-2009-106).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under current ISE Rule 502(h), only Exchange-Traded Fund Shares, or
ETFs, that are traded on a national securities exchange and are defined
as an ``NMS'' stock under Rule 600 of Regulation NMS, and that: (i)
Represent interests in registered investment companies (or series
thereof) organized as open-end management investment companies, unit
investment trusts or similar entities that hold portfolios of
securities and/or financial instruments, including, but not limited to,
stock index futures contracts, options on futures, options on
securities and indices, equity caps, collars and floors, swap
agreements, forward contracts, repurchase agreements and reverse
repurchase agreements (the ``Financial Instruments''), and money market
instruments, including, but not limited to, U.S. government securities
and repurchase agreements (the ``Money Market Instruments'') comprising
or otherwise based on or representing investments in broad-based
indexes or portfolios of securities and/or Financial Instruments and
Money Market Instruments (or that hold securities in one or more other
registered investment companies that themselves hold such portfolios of
securities and/or Financial Instruments and Money Market Instruments);
or (ii) represent interests in a trust that holds a specified non-U.S.
currency or currencies deposited with the trust when aggregated in some
specified minimum number may be surrendered to the trust by the
beneficial owner to receive the specified non-U.S. currency or
currencies and pays the beneficial owner interest and other
distributions on the deposited non-U.S. currency or currencies, if any,
declared and paid by the trust (``Funds''); or (iii) represent
commodity pool interests principally engaged, directly or indirectly,
in holding and/or managing

portfolios or baskets of securities, commodity futures contracts,
options on commodity futures contracts, swaps, forward contracts and/or
options on physical commodities and/or non-U.S. currency (``Commodity
Pool ETFs''); or (iv) represent interests in the SPDR[reg] Gold Trust,
the iShares COMEX Gold Trust, the iShares Silver Trust, the ETFS Gold
Trust or the ETFS Silver Trust; or (v) represents an interest in a
registered investment company (``Investment Company'') organized as an
open-end management company or similar entity, that invests in a
portfolio of securities selected by the Investment Company's investment
adviser consistent with the Investment Company's investment objectives
and policies, which is issued in a specified aggregate minimum number
in return for a deposit of a specified portfolio of securities and/or a
cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset value
(``NAV''), and when aggregated in the same specified minimum number,
may be redeemed at a holder's request, which holder will be paid a
specified portfolio of securities and/or cash with a value equal to the
next determined NAV (``Managed Fund Share'') are eligible as underlying
securities for options traded on the Exchange.\7\ This rule change
proposes to expand the types of ETFs that may be approved for options
trading on the Exchange to include the ETFS Palladium Trust and the
ETFS Platinum Trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See ISE Rule 502(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Apart from allowing the ETFS Palladium Trust and the ETFS Platinum
Trust to be an underlying for options traded on the Exchange as
described above, the listing standards for ETFs will remain unchanged
from those that apply under current Exchange rules. ETFs on which
options may be listed and traded must still be listed and traded on a
national securities exchange and must satisfy the other listing
standards set forth in ISE Rule 502(h).
    Specifically, in addition to satisfying the aforementioned listing
requirements, ETFs must meet either: (1) The criteria and guidelines
under ISE Rules 502(a) and (b); or (2) they must be available for
creation or redemption each business day from or through the issuing
trust, investment company, commodity pool or other entity in cash or in
kind at a price related to net asset value, and the issuer must be
obligated to issue Exchange-Traded Fund Shares in a specified aggregate
number even if some or all of the investment assets and/or cash
required to be deposited have not been received by the issuer, subject
to the condition that the person obligated to deposit the investment
assets has undertaken to deliver them as soon as possible and such
undertaking is secured by the delivery and maintenance of collateral
consisting of cash or cash equivalents satisfactory to the issuer, as
provided in the respective prospectus.
    The Exchange states that the current continued listing standards
for options on ETFs will apply to options on the ETFS Palladium Trust
and the ETFS Platinum Trust. Specifically, under ISE Rule 503(h),
options on Exchange-Traded Fund Shares may be subject to the suspension
of opening transactions as follows: (1) Following the initial twelve-
month period beginning upon the commencement of trading of the
Exchange-Traded Fund Shares, there are fewer than 50 record and/or
beneficial holders of the Exchange-Traded Fund Shares for 30 or more
consecutive trading days; (2) the value of the underlying palladium or
underlying platinum is no longer calculated or available; or (3) such
other event occurs or condition exists that in the opinion of the
Exchange makes further dealing on the Exchange inadvisable.
    Additionally, the ETFS Palladium Trust and the ETFS Platinum Trust
shall not be deemed to meet the requirements for continued approval,
and the Exchange shall not open for trading any additional series of
option contracts of the class covering the ETFS Palladium Trust and the
ETFS Platinum Trust, respectively, if the ETFS Palladium Trust and the
ETFS Platinum Trust ceases to be an ``NMS stock'' as provided for in
ISE Rule 503(b)(5) or the ETFS Palladium Trust and the ETFS Platinum
Trust is halted from trading on its primary market.
    The addition of the ETFS Palladium Trust and the ETFS Platinum
Trust to ISE Rule 502(h) will not have any effect on the rules
pertaining to position and exercise limits \8\ or margin.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See ISE Rules 412 and 414.
    \9\ See ISE Rule 1202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange represents that its surveillance procedures applicable
to trading in options on the ETFS Palladium Trust and the ETFS Platinum
Trust will be similar to those applicable to all other options on other
ETFs currently traded on the Exchange. Also, the Exchange may obtain
information from the New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. (``NYMEX'') (a
member of the Intermarket Surveillance Group) related to any financial
instrument that is based, in whole or in part, upon an interest in or
performance of palladium or platinum.

II. Commission Findings

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change submitted by ISE is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange \10\ and, in particular, the requirements of
Section 6 of the Act.\11\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed 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. In accordance with the
Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (``CFTC'') and the Commission on March 11, 2008, and
in particular the addendum thereto concerning Principles Governing the
Review of Novel Derivative Products, the Commission believes that novel
derivative products that implicate areas of overlapping regulatory
concern should be permitted to trade in either or both a CFTC- or
Commission-regulated environment, in a manner consistent with laws and
regulations (including the appropriate use of all available exemptive
and interpretive authority).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a national securities exchange, the ISE is required under
Section 6(b)(1) of the Act \13\ to enforce compliance by its members,
and persons associated with its members, with the provisions of the
Act, Commission rules and regulations thereunder, and its own rules. In
addition, brokers that trade ETFS Options will also be subject to best
execution obligations and FINRA rules.\14\ Applicable exchange rules
also require that customers receive appropriate disclosure before
trading ETFS Options.\15\ Further, brokers opening accounts and
recommending options transactions must comply with relevant customer
suitability standards.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \14\ See NASD Rule 2320.
    \15\ See ISE Rule 616.
    \16\ See FINRA Rule 2360(b) and ISE Rules 608 and 610.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ETFS Options will trade as options under the trading rules of the
ISE. These rules, among other things, are designed to avoid trading
through better

displayed prices for ETFS Options available on other exchanges and,
thereby, satisfy ISE's obligation under the Options Order Protection
and Locked/Crossed Market Plan.\17\ Series of the ETFS Options will be
subject to exchange rules regarding continued listing requirements,
including standards applicable to the underlying ETFS Silver and ETF
Gold Trusts. Shares of the ETFS Silver and ETFS Gold Trusts must
continue to be traded through a national securities exchange or through
the facilities of a national securities association, and must be ``NMS
stock'' as defined under Rule 600 of Regulation NMS.\18\ In addition,
the underlying shares must continue to be available for creation or
redemption each business day from or through the issuer in cash or in
kind at a price related to net asset value.\19\ If the ETFS Silver or
ETFS Gold Trust shares fail to meet these requirements, the exchanges
will not open for trading any new series of the respective ETFS
Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See ISE Rule 1902. Specifically, ISE is a participant in
the Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan.
    \18\ 17 CFR 242.600.
    \19\ See ISE Rule 502(a)-(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ISE has represented that it has surveillance programs in place for
the listing and trading of ETFS Options. For example, ISE may obtain
trading information via the ISG from the NYMEX related to any financial
instrument traded there that is based, in whole or in part, upon an
interest in, or performance of, palladium or platinum. Additionally,
the listing and trading of ETFS Options will be subject to the
exchange's rules pertaining to position and exercise limits \20\ and
margin.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See ISE Rules 412 and 414.
    \21\ See ISE Rule 1202. See also FINRA Rule 2360(b) and
Commentary .01 to FINRA Rule 2360.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\22\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ISE-2010-19) be, and is
hereby, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-10212 Filed 4-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 242 (Friday, December 16, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78154-78156]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32352]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-1091]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zones; New Year's Eve Fireworks Displays Within the
Captain of the Port Miami Zone, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing three temporary safety zones
during New Year's Eve fireworks displays on certain navigable waterways
in Miami Beach and West Palm Beach, Florida. These safety zones are
necessary to protect the public from the hazards associated with
launching fireworks over navigable waters of the United States. Persons
and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring
in, or remaining within any of the three safety zones unless authorized
by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2011
until 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-1091 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-1091 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary final rule, call or email Lieutenant Jennifer S. Makowski
Sector Miami Prevention Department, Coast Guard; telephone (305) 535-
8724, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not receive
necessary information regarding the fireworks displays until December
2, 2011. As a result, the Coast Guard did not have sufficient time to
publish an NPRM and to receive public comments prior to the fireworks
displays. Any delay in the effective date of this rule would be
contrary to the public interest because immediate action is needed to
minimize potential danger to the public during the fireworks displays.
    For the same reason discussed above, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective
less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish regulated navigation areas and other limited access areas: 33
U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191,
195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat.
2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    The purpose of the rule is to protect the public from the hazards
associated with the launching of fireworks over navigable waters of the
United States.

Discussion of Rule

    Multiple fireworks displays are planned for New Year's Eve
celebrations throughout the Captain of the Port Miami Zone. The
fireworks will be launched from barges and will explode over navigable
waters of the United States.
    The Coast Guard is establishing three temporary safety zones for
New Year's Eve fireworks displays on Saturday, December 31, 2011 on
navigable waters of the Captain of the Port Miami Zone. The three
safety zones are listed below.
    1. Miami Beach, Florida. All waters within a 374 yard radius around
the barge from which the fireworks will be launched, located 275 yards
east of Bay Front Park. This safety zone will be enforced from 11:59
p.m. on December

31, 2011 until 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2012.
    2. Miami Beach, Florida. All waters within a 234 yard radius around
the barge from which the fireworks will be launched, located 650 yards
north east of Star Island. This safety zone will be enforced from 11:59
p.m. on December 31, 2011 until 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2012.
    3. West Palm Beach, Florida. All waters within a 280 yard radius
around the barge from which the fireworks will be launched, located 650
yards north of Royal Park Bascule Bridge. This safety zone will be
enforced from 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2011 until 12:30 a.m. on
January 1, 2012.
    Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting
through, anchoring in, or remaining within any of the safety zones
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated
representative. Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within any of the safety zones may contact the
Captain of the Port Miami by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a
designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request
authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in,
or remain within any of the safety zones is granted by the Captain of
the Port Miami or a designated representative, all persons and vessels
receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative. The Coast
Guard will provide notice of the safety zones by Local Notice to
Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated
representatives.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,
and 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, direct agencies to assess
the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has not been designated a significant regulatory
action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the
Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed this regulation under
Executive Order 12866.
    The economic impact of this rule is not significant for the
following reasons: (1) The safety zones will be enforced for a total of
31 minutes; (2) vessel traffic in the areas are expected to be minimal
during the enforcement period; (3) although persons and vessels will
not be able to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within any
of the safety zones without authorization from the Captain of the Port
Miami or a designated representative, they may operate in the
surrounding areas during the enforcement period; (4) persons and
vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the safety zones during the enforcement period if authorized by the
Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative; and (5) the
Coast Guard will provide advance notification of the safety zones to
the local maritime community by Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast
Notice to Mariners.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within any of the three
safety zones established by this regulation during the respective
enforcement period. For the reasons discussed in the Regulatory
Planning and Review section above, this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-(888) 734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have Tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction. This rule involves establishing three temporary safety
zones, as described in paragraph 34(g) of the Instruction, that will be
enforced for a total of 31 minutes. An environmental analysis checklist
and a categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  165.T07-1091 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-1091  Safety Zones; New Year's Eve Fireworks Displays
Within the Captain of the Port Miami Zone, FL.

    (a) Regulated Areas. The following regulated areas are safety
zones, with the specific enforcement period for each safety zone. All
coordinates are North American Datum 1983.
    (1) Miami Beach, FL. All waters within a 374 yard radius around the
barge from which the fireworks will be launched, located on Biscayne
Bay in approximate position 25[deg]46'19'' N, 80[deg]10'34'' W. This
regulated area will be enforced from 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2011
until 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2012.
    (2) Miami Beach, FL. All waters within a 234 yard radius around the
barge from which the fireworks will be launched, located on Biscayne
Bay in approximate position 25[deg]46'54'' N, 80[deg]08'42'' W. This
regulated area will be enforced from 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2011
until 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2012.
    (3) West Palm Beach, FL. All waters within a 280 yard radius around
the pier from which the fireworks will be launched, located on the
Intracoastal Waterway in approximate position 26[deg]42'32'' N,
80[deg]02'48'' W. This regulated area will be enforced from 11:59 p.m.
on December 31, 2011 until 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2012.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Miami in the enforcement of the regulated areas.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated
areas unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a
designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within any of the regulated areas may contact the Captain
of the Port Miami by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization.
If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
any of the regulated areas is granted by the Captain of the Port Miami
or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the
Port Miami or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Effective Date. This rule is effective from 11:59 p.m. on
December 31, 2011 until 12:30 a.m. on January 1, 2012.

    Dated: December 6, 2011.
C.P. Scraba,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Miami.
[FR Doc. 2011-32352 Filed 12-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 26, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 57)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13166-13170]
[DOCID:fr26mr09-34]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0014; FRL-8783-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Louisiana; Baton Rouge 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area; Determination
of Attainment of the 1-Hour Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to determine that the Baton Rouge (BR) 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area is currently attaining the 1-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This determination is
based upon certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area has
monitored attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the 2006-2008
monitoring period. If this proposed determination is made final, the
requirements for this area to submit a severe attainment demonstration,
a severe reasonable further progress plan, applicable contingency
measures plans, and other planning State Implementation Plan (SIP)
requirements related to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, shall be
suspended for so long as the area continues to attain the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA is proposing this action in accordance with section 110 and
part D of the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act or CAA) and EPA's
regulations and consistent with EPA's guidance.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 27, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2009-0014, by one of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     U.S. EPA Region 6 ``Contact Us'' Web site: http://epa.gov/
region6/r6coment.htm. Please click on ``6PD'' (Multimedia) and select
``Air'' before submitting comments.
     E-mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
also send a copy by email to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
     Fax: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), at fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
     Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air
Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are
accepted only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays except
for legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2009-0014. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail that you consider to be
CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure. The http://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system, which means
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material,

will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made available by
appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal
holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT paragraph below to make an appointment. If possible, please
make the appointment at least two working days in advance of your
visit. There will be a fee of 15 cents per page for making photocopies
of documents. On the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA
Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas
75202-2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sandra Rennie, Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' means EPA. This supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:

I. What Is the Background for This Action?
II. What Is the Impact of a United States Court of Appeals Decision
in the South Coast Case Regarding EPA's Phase 1 Ozone Implementation
Rule on This Proposed Rule?
III. Proposed Determination of Attainment
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is the Background for This Action?

    The Act requires us to establish NAAQS for certain widespread
pollutants that cause or contribute to air pollution that is reasonably
anticipated to endanger public health or welfare (sections 108 and 109
of the Act). In 1979, we promulgated the revised 1-hour ozone standard
of 0.12 parts per million (ppm) (44 FR 8202, February 8, 1979). For
ease of communication, many reports of ozone concentrations are given
in parts per billion (ppb); ppb = ppm x 1000. Thus, 0.12 ppm becomes
120 ppb or 124 ppb when rounding is considered.
    An area exceeds the 1-hour ozone standard each time an ambient air
quality monitor records a 1-hour average ozone concentration above 0.12
ppm in any given day. Only the highest 1-hour ozone concentration at
the monitor during any 24-hour day is considered when determining the
number of exceedance days at the monitor. An area violates the ozone
standard if, over a consecutive 3-year period, more than 3 days of
exceedances occur at the same monitor. For more information please see
``National 1-hour primary and secondary ambient air quality standards
for ozone'' (40 CFR 50.9) and ``Interpretation of the 1-Hour Primary
and Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone'' (40
CFR part 50, Appendix H).
    The fourth-highest daily ozone concentration over the 3-year period
is called the design value (DV). The DV indicates the severity of the
ozone problem in an area; it is the ozone level around which a state
designs its control strategy for attaining the ozone standard. A
monitor's DV is the fourth highest ambient concentration recorded at
that monitor over the previous 3 years. An area's DV is the highest of
the design values from the area's monitors.
    The Act, as amended in 1990, required EPA to designate as
nonattainment any area that was violating the 1-hour ozone standard,
generally based on air quality monitoring data from the 1987 through
1989 period (section 107(d)(4) of the Act; 56 FR 56694, November 6,
1991). The Act further classified these areas, based on their ozone
DVs, as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme.
    The control requirements and date by which attainment is to be
achieved vary with an area's classification. Marginal areas are subject
to the fewest mandated control requirements and had the earliest
attainment date, November 15, 1993, while severe and extreme areas are
subject to more stringent planning requirements and are provided more
time to attain the standard.

Baton Rouge's History

    EPA first designated the Baton Rouge area as an ozone nonattainment
area in 1978. 43 FR 8964, 8998 (March 3, 1978). The BR 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area contains five parishes: East Baton Rouge; West Baton
Rouge; Ascension; Iberville; and Livingston Parishes (40 CFR 81.319).
In 1991, the BR area was designated nonattainment by operation of law
and EPA classified the BR area as a ``serious'' ozone nonattainment
area with a statutory deadline of November 15, 1999. 56 FR 56694
(November 6, 1991). EPA approved the serious attainment demonstration
SIP and its associated elements, e.g., attainment Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets (MVEB), the Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM) demonstration, on July 2, 1999. 64 FR 35930. The BR area,
however, did not attain by the serious area statutory deadline of
November 15, 1999. Before this deadline however, EPA had issued a
guidance memorandum that allowed an area to retain its existing
classification and receive a later attainment deadline if the EPA found
that area met all of its existing classification requirements, approved
a demonstration that the area would attain but for the transport from
another area, and approved the attainment demonstration SIP with its
associated elements. See EPA's ``Guidance on Extension of Attainment
Dates for Downwind Transport Areas'' (the Extension Policy) (Richard D.
Wilson, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation) July 16,
1998. On October 2, 2002, EPA approved the revised attainment
demonstration SIP and its associated elements, found the area met all
of the serious area requirements, found there was transport from Texas
affecting the BR area reaching attainment, and extended the attainment
date for the BR area to November 15, 2005, without reclassifying the
area from serious to severe, consistent with the policy. 67 FR 61786
(October 2, 2002).
    On December 11, 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit vacated EPA's Extension Policy used to extend the 1-hour ozone
attainment deadline for the Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas, area without
reclassifying the area. Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735 (5th Cir.
2002). Thereupon, EPA on April 24, 2003, withdrew its approval of the
BR area's revised attainment demonstration and the granting of an
extended attainment deadline, finalized its finding of the area failing
to attain the standard by the serious area deadline and reclassified
the BR area by operation of law, to severe nonattainment. See 68 FR
20077 (April 24, 2003).\1\ Once reclassified to severe,

the statutory attainment date for BR was November 15, 2005. As a result
of the reclassification to severe, the State was required to submit an
attainment demonstration SIP with an attainment date of November 15,
2005. The April 24, 2003, action also set the dates by which Louisiana
was to submit SIP revisions addressing the CAA's pollution control
requirements for severe ozone nonattainment areas and to attain the 1-
hour NAAQS for ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Petitions for review of the October 2, 2002, rulemaking were
filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Louisiana
Environmental Action Network (LEAN) v. EPA, No. 02-60991). The
issues raised concerned EPA's decision to approve Louisiana's
substitute contingency measures plan, the revised attainment
demonstration SIP with a later attainment deadline without
reclassifying the area to severe, and the associated precursor
trading provision of the NSR rules. On February 25, 2003, the court
granted EPA's partial voluntary remand to allow EPA the time to meet
the December 2002 court decision by withdrawing its approval of the
revised attainment demonstration SIP that extended the attainment
deadline without reclassifying the area and the associated NSR
precursor trading provision. The court also addressed the substitute
contingency measures claim, and vacated and remanded EPA's approval
of the contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under section 182(d) and section (i) of the Act, serious ozone
nonattainment areas reclassified to severe are required to submit SIP
revisions addressing the severe area requirements for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. Under section 182(d), severe area plans are required to meet all
the requirements for serious area plans and all the requirements for
severe area plans.
    In 1997, EPA promulgated a new, more protective standard for ozone
based on an 8-hour average concentration (the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard). In 2004, EPA published the 1997 8-hour ozone designations
and classifications and a rule governing certain facets of
implementation of the 8-hour ozone standard (Phase 1 Rule) (69 FR 23858
and 69 FR 23951, respectively, April 30, 2004). The BR area was
designated as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The 8-
hour nonattainment area is composed of the same five parishes as the 1-
hour ozone nonattainment area. The area was classified as marginal
under the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. At the time of designation, the
five parishes remained in nonattainment for the 1-hour standard.
    The Phase 1 Rule revoked the 1-hour ozone standard. See 69 FR
23951. The Phase 1 Rule also provided that 1-hour ozone nonattainment
areas are required to adopt and implement ``applicable requirements''
according to the area's classification under the 1-hour ozone standard
for anti-backsliding purposes. See 40 CFR 51.905(a)(i). On May 26,
2005, we determined that an area's 1-hour designation and
classification as of June 15, 2004 would dictate what 1-hour
obligations remain as ``applicable requirements'' under the Phase 1
Rule. 40 CFR 51.900(f). (70 FR 30592).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As detailed in Section II below, various parties challenged
the Phase 1 rule. In particular, the Chamber of Baton Rouge
challenged EPA's authority to continue to enforce the 1-hour area
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit vacated the Phase 1 Rule. South Coast Air Quality
Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007,
in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, Docket No. 04-1201,
in response to several petitions for rehearing, the DC Circuit
clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with regard to those
parts of the rule that had been successfully challenged. With respect
to the challenges to the anti-backsliding provisions of the rule, the
court vacated three provisions that would have allowed States to remove
from the SIP or not to adopt three 1-hour obligations once the 1-hour
standard was revoked to transition to the implementation of the 8-hour
ozone standard: (1) Nonattainment area new source review (NSR)
requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification;
(2) section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment
areas that fail to attain the 1-hour standard by the 1-hour attainment
date; and (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9)
or 182(c)(9) of the Act, on the contingency of an area not making
reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS or
for failure to attain that NAAQS. The court clarified that 1-hour
conformity determinations are not required for anti-backsliding
purposes.
    The provisions in 40 CFR 51.905(a)-(c) concerning anti-backsliding
remain in effect and areas must continue to meet those requirements.
However, the court decision vacated the portions of Sec.  51.905(e)
that removed the obligations to meet the three provisions noted above.
As a result, states must continue to meet the obligations for 1-hour
NSR; 1-hour contingency measures; and, for severe and extreme areas,
the obligations related to a section 185 fee program. Currently, EPA
has proposed one rule and is developing other actions to address the
court's vacatur and remand with respect to these three requirements. We
address below how the 1-hour obligations that currently continue to
apply under EPA's anti-backsliding rule (as interpreted and directed by
the court) apply where EPA has made a determination that the area is
currently attaining the 1-hour NAAQS.
    The Baton Rouge 1-hour nonattainment area was still classified as
severe on June 15, 2004, so the 1-hour ozone standard requirements
applicable to the five-parish area are those that apply to
nonattainment areas classified as severe. This includes meeting the
serious area requirements. Louisiana submitted and EPA approved all the
requirements for a 1-hour ozone area classified as serious. EPA's
approval of the serious area Contingency Measures was challenged in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (See footnote 1). The Court
vacated the serious area contingency measure and remanded it to EPA.
    The severe area requirements include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for both VOC and NOX, NSR Emissions Offset
Requirement, Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis, Post-1999 Rate of
Progress Plan, Contingency Measures, and an Attainment Demonstration.
The State has submitted many required severe area plan requirements,
including the severe area ROP Plan, but has not submitted others,
including the attainment demonstration and the contingency measures.
The VMT Analysis was approved November 21, 2006 (71 FR 67308).
    Under the Phase 1 rule and as a result of the South Coast decision,
the requirement to provide a severe attainment demonstration SIP and
the serious and severe RFP/failure-to-attain contingency measures
remain in place. However, as discussed below, these requirements would
be suspended based on a finding of attainment of the 1-hour ozone
standard, and for so long as the area remains in attainment of the
standard in the future.

II. Proposed Determination of Attainment

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Baton Rouge 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area is currently in attainment of the 1-hour standard
based on the most recent 3 years of quality-assured air quality data.
Certified ambient air monitoring data show that the area has monitored
attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the 2006-2008 monitoring
period. Consistent with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix H, Table 1 contains
the 1-hour ozone data for the BR 1-hour ozone nonattainment area
monitors that show that the area is currently attaining the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.

                 Table 1--1-Hour Ozone Data for the Baton Rouge 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Design value        Actual and expected number of          3-year
                                                (ppb)                 exceedances \a\                exceedance
                   Site                    --------------------------------------------------------    average
                                                                                -------------
                                              2006-2008       2006          2007          2008        2006-2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaquemine (22-047-0009)..................          114             0             0             0             0
Carville (22-047-0012)....................          113             0             0             0             0
Dutchtown (22-005-0004)...................          112             0             1             0          0.33
Baker (22-033-1001).......................          111             1             0             0          0.33
LSU (22-033-0003).........................          110             0             2             0          0.67
Grosse Tete (22-047-0007).................          110             1             1             0          0.67
Port Allen (22-121-0001)..................          106             1             0             0          0.33
Pride (22-033-0013).......................          101             0             0             0             0
French Settlement (22-063-0002)...........          100             1             0             0          0.33
Capitol (22-033-0009).....................           97             0             0             0            0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The actual and expected number of exceedances were equal in all cases.

    Pursuant to the interpretation set forth in the May 10, 1995
memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, entitled ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment
Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas
Meeting the Ozone Ambient Air Quality Standard'' (Clean Data Policy),
EPA is proposing to make a finding of attainment based on current air
quality. Under this policy, if EPA determines through rulemaking that
the Baton Rouge 1-hour ozone nonattainment area is meeting the 1-hour
ozone standard, the requirements for the State to submit and have an
approved attainment demonstration, and related components such as
reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further
progress (RFP) demonstration, contingency measures for failure to
attain or make reasonable further progress are suspended as long as the
area continues to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA intends to address
the impact of a Clean Data determination on a CAA section 185 fees
program separately based on the outcome of a rulemaking to address the
South Coast decision with respect to this issue, discussed above. See
74 FR 2936, 2941 (January 16, 2009).
    As stated above, the suspension of requirements continues for so
long as the area remains in attainment. If the area subsequently
violates the ozone NAAQS, EPA would initiate notice-and-comment
rulemaking to withdraw the determination of attainment, which would
result in reinstatement of the requirements for the State to submit
such suspended plans.
    The Tenth, Seventh and Ninth Circuits have upheld EPA rulemakings
applying the Clean Data Policy. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F. 3d 1551
(10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004) and
Our Children's Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 04-73032 (9th Cir. June 28,
2005) memorandum opinion.\3\ See also the discussion and rulemakings
cited in the Phase 2 Rule, 70 FR 71644-71646 (November 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Clean Data Policy, as it is embodied in 40 CFR 51.918,
is being challenged in the context of the 8-hour ozone standard in
the Phase 2 Rule ozone litigation pending in the DC Circuit, NRDC v.
EPA, No. 06-1045 (DC Cir.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What Action Is EPA Taking?

    EPA proposes to find that the BR 1-hour ozone nonattainment area
has attained the 1-hour ozone standard; thus the requirements for
submitting the severe attainment demonstration SIP with its RACM
demonstration and other associated elements, the severe RFP
requirements, and section 172(c)(9) and section 182(c)(9) serious and
severe contingency measures are suspended for so long as the area is
attaining the 1-hour ozone standard.
    Thus, pursuant to our proposed determination of attainment and in
accordance with our Clean Data Policy, the effect of the finding is
that the following requirements to submit SIP measures under the 1-hour
anti-backsliding provisions (40 CFR 51.905) are suspended for so long
as the area continues to attain the 1-hour standard:

RFP reductions under sections 182(d) and 182(c)(2)(B) (for severe
areas). Attainment demonstration under sections 182(d) and 182(c)(2)
(for severe areas) and associated RACM demonstration.
Contingency measures for failure to meet RFP under section 172(c)(9)
and section 182(c)(9) (for serious and severe areas) and contingency
measures for failure to attain under sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9)
(for severe areas).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
action proposes to make a determination based on air quality data, and
would, if finalized, result in the suspension of certain Federal
requirements. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et
seq.). Because this rule proposes to make a determination based on air
quality data, and would, if finalized, result in the suspension of
certain Federal requirements, it 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). This proposed
rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This proposed action also does not have
Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely
proposes to make a determination based on air quality data and would,
if finalized, result in the suspension of certain Federal requirements,
and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it proposes to determine that air quality in the
affected area is meeting Federal standards. The requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply because it would be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA, when determining the attainment status of an
area, to use voluntary consensus standards in place of promulgated air
quality standards and monitoring procedures that otherwise satisfy the
provisions of the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). Under Executive Order
12898, EPA finds that this rule involves a proposed determination of
attainment based on air quality data and will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on any communities in the area, including minority and low-
income communities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 5, 2009.
Lawrence Starfield,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. E9-6598 Filed 3-25-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 69)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16782-16783]
[DOCID:fr13ap09-10]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[USCG-2009-0203]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Jamaica Bay, New York, NY,
Maintenance

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Beach Channel Railroad Bridge at mile 6.7, across Jamaica Bay, at New
York City, New York. Under this temporary deviation the Beach Channel
Railroad Bridge may remain in the closed position for two weekends in
May. This deviation is necessary to facilitate bridge track repairs.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. on May 2, 2009 through 9
p.m. on May 10, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0203 and are available online
at http://www.regulations.gov. They are also available for inspection
or copying at two locations: The Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, and
the First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch Office, 408 Atlantic
Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02110, between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First
Coast Guard District, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Beach Channel Railroad Bridge, across
Jamaica Bay, mile 6.7, at New York, New York, has a vertical clearance
in the closed position of 26 feet at mean high water and 31 feet at
mean low water. The existing drawbridge operation regulations are
listed at 33 CFR 117.5.

    The owner of the bridge, New York City Transit Authority, requested
a temporary deviation to facilitate maintenance repairs to the bridge
rails.
    Under this temporary deviation the Beach Channel Railroad Bridge
need not open for the passage of vessel traffic between 6 a.m. and 9
p.m., from May 2, 2009 through May 3, 2009 and between 6 a.m. and 9
p.m., from May 9, 2009 through May 10, 2009.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the bridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: March 30, 2009.
Gary Kassof,
Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9-8268 Filed 4-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register: August 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 148)]
[Notices]
[Page 43736-43737]
[DOCID:fr02au06-65]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0237; FRL-8081-1]

Ace Info Solutions Inc and Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA
International; Transfer of Data

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces that pesticide related information
submitted to EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) pursuant to the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), including information
that may have been claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI)
by the submitter, will be transferred to Ace Info Solutions Inc and its
subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA International, in
accordance with 40 CFR 2.307(h)(3) and 2.308(i)(2). Ace Info Solutions
Inc and its subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA

International, have been awarded a contract to perform work for OPP,
and access to this information will enable Ace Info Solutions Inc and
its subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA International,
to fulfill the obligations of the contract.

DATES: Ace Info Solutions Inc and its subcontractor, Nortel Government
Solutions, and SRA International, will be given access to this
information on or before August 7, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Felicia Croom, Information Technology
and Resources Management Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action applies to the public in general. As such, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

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

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0237. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard

copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket
Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.

II. Contractor Requirements

    Under Contract No. GS-06F-0337Z, Ace Info Solutions Inc and its
subcontractors, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA International,
will perform:
    1. Maintenance of programming and software;
    2. Data dictionary and technical writing;
    3. Development, test and production server administration and
support;
    4. Database query and reporting;
    5. System Architecture; and
    6. Configuration Management.
    The OPP has determined that access by Ace Info Solutions Inc and
its subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA International,
to information on all pesticide chemicals is necessary for the
performance of this contract.
    Some of this information may be entitled to confidential treatment.
The information has been submitted to EPA under sections 3, 4, 6, and 7
of FIFRA and under sections 408 and 409 of FFDCA.
    In accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 2.307(h)(2), the
contract with Ace Info Solutions Inc and its subcontractor, Nortel
Government Solutions, and SRA International, prohibits use of the
information for any purpose not specified in the contract; prohibits
disclosure of the information to a third party without prior written
approval from the Agency; and requires that each official and employee
of the contractor sign an agreement to protect the information from
unauthorized release and to handle it in accordance with the FIFRA
Information Security Manual. In addition, Ace Info Solutions Inc and
its subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA International,
are required to submit for EPA approval a security plan under which any
CBI will be secured and protected against unauthorized release or
compromise. No information will be provided to Ace Info Solutions Inc
and its subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA
International, until the requirements in this document have been fully
satisfied. Records of information provided to Ace Info Solutions Inc
and its subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA
International, will be maintained by EPA Project Officers for this
contract. All information supplied to Ace Info Solutions Inc and its
subcontractor, Nortel Government Solutions, and SRA International, by
EPA for use in connection with this contract will be returned to EPA
when Ace Info Solutions Inc and its subcontractor, Nortel Government
Solutions, and SRA International, have completed their work.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Business and industry, Government
contracts, Government property, Security measures.

    Dated: July 17, 2006.
Arnold E. Layne,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-12342 Filed 8-1-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


This item is a compact disc purchased from the National Climate Data Center.  Contact docket staff regarding this item.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 169 (Thursday, August 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52746-52748]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21400]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0913]

Medical Countermeasures for a Burn Mass Casualty Incident

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop; request for abstracts for poster
presentation.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
following public workshop entitled ``Medical Countermeasures (MCM) for
a Burn Mass Casualty Incident.'' The purpose of this public workshop is
to describe medical countermeasure requirements for burn injuries of
radiological, nuclear, or chemical origin in a scarce resources
environment; identify gaps in the product landscape so as to articulate
a consensus-based needs assessment; discuss testing approaches and
regulatory pathways; and to educate workshop attendees on the concept
of medical utilization and response integration. The overall goal is to
engage stakeholders across the public and private sector in strategic
dialogue related to development, evaluation, deployment, and monitoring
of medical countermeasures to mitigate the adverse health consequences
arising from public health emergencies, specifically those involving
radiological, nuclear, or chemical threats.
    Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on September 27,
2012, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and September 28, 2012, from 8:30 a.m.
to 12 p.m.
    Location: The public workshop will be held at the FDA White Oak
Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building 31 Conference Center, the
Great Room (rm. 1503A), Silver Spring, MD 20993. Entrance for the
public meeting participants (non-FDA-employees) is through Building 1
where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking
and security information, please refer to http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.
    Contact: Suzanne Schwartz, Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
66, rm. G439,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration: Registration is free and available on a first-come,
first-served basis. Persons interested in attending this public
workshop must register online by 5 p.m. on September 21, 2012. Early
registration is recommended because facilities are limited and,
therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each
organization. If time and space permit, onsite registration on the day
of the public workshop will be provided beginning at 7 a.m.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Cindy Garris, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or phone: 301
796-5861 no later than September 21, 2012.
    To register for the public workshop, please visit FDA's Medical
Devices News & Events--Workshops & Conferences calendar at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm.
(Select this public workshop from the posted events list.) Please
provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name,
title, affiliation, address, email, and telephone number. Those without
Internet access should contact Suzanne Schwartz to register (see
Contact). Registrants will receive confirmation after they have been
accepted. You will be notified if you are on a waiting list.
    Streaming Webcast of the Public Workshop: This public workshop will

also be webcast. Persons interested in viewing the webcast must
register online by 5 p.m. September 13, 2012. Early registration is
recommended because webcast connections are limited. Organizations are
requested to register all participants, but to view using one
connection per location. Webcast participants will be sent technical
system requirements after registration and will be sent connection
access information after September 21, 2012. If you have never attended
a Connect Pro event before, test your connection at https://collaboration.fda.gov/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. To get
a quick overview of the Connect Pro program, visit http://www.adobe.com/go/connectpro_overview. (FDA has verified the Web site
addresses in this document, but FDA is not responsible for any
subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document publishes in
the Federal Register.)
    Requests for Poster Presentations: This public workshop will
include a poster session. During online registration you may indicate
if you wish to present an abstract during the poster session. FDA has
identified general topics in this document. FDA will do its best to
accommodate requests for poster presentation and will select and notify
participants by September 7, 2012. All abstract submissions for poster
presentations must be emailed to Suzanne Schwartz (see Contact) no
later than 5 p.m. on August 31, 2012. No commercial promotional
material will be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public
workshop.
    Comments: FDA is holding this public workshop to obtain information
on medical countermeasures for a burn mass casualty incident. In order
to permit the widest possible opportunity to obtain public comment, FDA
is soliciting either electronic or written comments on all aspects of
the public workshop topics. The deadline for submitting comments
related to this public workshop is October 31, 2012. However, only
comments received prior to August 31, 2012 will be incorporated into
the workshop while comments received after that date will be reviewed
by FDA after the conclusion of the workshop.
    Regardless of attendance at the public workshop, interested persons
may submit either electronic or written comments. Submit electronic
comments to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. It is only necessary
to send one set of comments. Please identify comments with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document. In addition,
when responding to specific topics as outlined in section II of this
document, please identify the topic you are addressing. Received
comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday and will be posted to the docket
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is
available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may
be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (see Comments). A
transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM,
after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests
are to be sent to the Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029),
Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg.,
Rockville, MD 20857. A link to the transcripts will also be available
approximately 45 days after the public workshop on the Internet at
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm. (Select this public workshop from the posted events list.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise
(PHEMCE) was established by the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) in 2006 as a Federal inter-Agency coordinating body responsible
for providing recommendations to the Secretary of HHS on medical
countermeasure priorities, development and acquisition activities, and
strategies for distributing and using medical countermeasures held in
the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) to prevent or mitigate potential
health effects from exposure to chemical, biological, radiological, and
nuclear agents and other terrorist threats. The PHEMCE mission is
therefore to advance national preparedness for natural, accidental, and
intentional threats by coordinating medical countermeasure-related
efforts within HHS and in cooperation with PHEMCE inter-Agency
partners.
    The 2012 PHEMCE Strategy has established the following 4 goals over
the next 5 years: (1) Identify, create, develop, manufacture, and
procure critical medical countermeasures; (2) establish and communicate
clear regulatory pathways to facilitate medical countermeasures
development and use; (3) develop logistics and operational plans for
optimized use of medical countermeasures at all levels of response; and
(4) address medical countermeasure gaps for all sectors of the American
population. This is a complex mission space and many Federal Agencies,
including FDA, have responsibilities that are critical to its success.
    FDA is hosting this public workshop to address topics specific to
national preparedness for a burn mass casualty incident of
radiological, nuclear, or chemical origin. The blast and subsequent
fires from such weapons could inflict serious thermal burns. With
respect to a nuclear detonation, these injuries could affect hundreds
to thousands of people. In such an attack, stabilizing individuals with
burns and concomitant injuries becomes an immediate priority. Medical
care for burns in a mass casualty incident would require the ready
availability of large quantities of medical countermeasures for
resuscitation, wound management, pain relief, and nutritional- and
airway/breathing support in the initial post-injury period. The overall
response is further complicated by the complex, expensive, and
resource-intensive needs that extend over the longer-term treatment
period for serious burns compounded by burn care expertise being in
short supply.
    There are approximately 1,850 burn beds in 126 burn units across
the United States. The American Burn Association estimates that 700-800
of these beds may be occupied at any given time. To respond to a mass
casualty incident such as a nuclear detonation--whereupon an estimated
10,000 or more individuals could require specialized burn care--
patients may need to be transferred to specialized burn centers
throughout the country because there may be relatively few dedicated
burn beds available in the region. Also, patients may need to be
treated in other care sites, such as local or regional trauma centers,
if specialized burn centers are filled to capacity. The short supply of
specialized burn experts and facilities may need to be considered one
driver in regard to burn care product(s) design and development,
enabling versatile use in the hands of nonspecialists as well.

II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Workshop

    The workshop sessions will focus on the following general topics:
Product (drug, device, biologic, and combination products) development
challenges; clinical study design considerations for new products;
regulatory pathways to market; challenges related to the organization
and delivery of burn care

in disaster management (including medical utilization and response
integration); FDA's role in coordination with the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention for deployment of assets in SNS; protecting the
public from counterfeit as well as nonregulated ineffective products;
FDA's responsibility for developing and implementing strategies to
assess, evaluate and monitor medical countermeasure safety,
performance, and patient compliance during and after a burn mass
casualty incident; and a discussion of specific medical countermeasure
needs for at-risk individuals.

    Dated: August 24, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-21400 Filed 8-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 04/03/2008 07:31 PM

To

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Thanks Ron, that's great.  I'm at your disposal either way.

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 6:47 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: RE: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Hi Heidi, I was checking out the setup on my laptop and saw your note.

We are prepared to engage with you substantively tomorrow.   Based on

last week's conversation and my expectations, I think that the benefits

methodology discussion is going to take most of the scheduled hour.

The purpose of Kathy's e-mail was to indicate that.  I expect that we

will need to look for additional time early next week (preferably

Monday) to finish the conversation, including the dicussion of the cost

methodology.  Talk to you @ 1:00.

 Ron Evans

Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group

HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA

Mail Drop C-439-02

919-541-5488

919-541-0839 fax

             "King, Heidi R."

             <Heidi_R._King@o

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To

                                      Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             04/03/2008 05:56                                        cc

             PM                       Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal

                                      Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

                                                                Subject

                                      RE: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Hi Kathy -

I thought we had already discussed process, and that we would discuss

both benefits and costs methodology and whatever estimates might be

available at this point.  The objective of this meeting is to align on

whether the analyticsl approach is consistent with circular a-4; if it

is too early to discuss all elements of the analysis to assess those

elements in the context of a-4, then perhaps we should reschedule.

Thanks for getting us on the same page, Kathy,

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 5:17 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: tomorrow's 1:00 meeting

Heidi -- just to get on the same page for tomorrow's 1:00 meeting -- our

plan is to discuss process and benefits methodology tomorrow.  That

seems like plenty to start out with.

Thanks!

-- Kathy

Kathy Kaufman

EPA/OAQPS Mail Code C539-03

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>


[Federal Register: September 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 173)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46317-46319]
[DOCID:fr09se09-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0526; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-029-AD;
Amendment 39-16008; AD 2009-18-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC-8-400 Series
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This 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:

    Four aircraft have experienced a dual AC [alternating current]
generator shutdown, caused by a broken propeller de-ice bus bar
which short-circuited with the backplate assembly.
    * * * A short circuit can cause a dual AC generator shutdown
that, particularly in conjunction with an engine failure in icing
conditions, could result in reduced controllability of the aircraft.

* * * * *
    Reduced controllability of the airplane in certain operating
conditions affects continued safe flight and landing. We are issuing
this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective October 14, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 14,
2009.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wing Chan, Aerospace Engineer,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR
27476). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Four aircraft have experienced a dual AC [alternating current]
generator shutdown, caused by a broken propeller de-ice bus bar
which short-circuited with the backplate assembly.
    It was subsequently determined that any friction or contact
between a propeller de-ice bus bar and the backplate assembly can
cause an intermittent short circuit. Such a short circuit can cause
a dual AC generator shutdown that, particularly in conjunction with
an engine failure in icing conditions, could result in reduced
controllability of the aircraft.
    This [Transport Canada Civil Aviation] directive mandates
revision of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to introduce a
procedure that restores AC power following a failure of No. 1 and
No. 2 AC generators with propeller de-ice on. Additionally, in order
to prevent similar dual AC generator shutdowns, it mandates the
application of sealant as insulation between the propeller de-ice
bus bars and the backplate assembly.

    Reduced controllability of the airplane in certain operating
conditions affects continued safe flight and landing. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

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 required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a Note within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 62 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 6 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the

cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $29,760, or $480 per
product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    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 AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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 the NPRM, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2009-18-12 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, Inc.): Amendment
39-16008. Docket No. FAA-2009-0526; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-
029-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective October
14, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model DHC-8-400, DHC-8-401,
and DHC-8-402 series airplanes, certificated in any category, serial
numbers 4001, 4003, 4004, 4006, and 4008 through 4154 inclusive.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 61:
Propellers/Propulsors.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Four aircraft have experienced a dual AC [alternating current]
generator shutdown, caused by a broken propeller de-ice bus bar
which short-circuited with the backplate assembly.
    It was subsequently determined that any friction or contact
between a propeller de-ice bus bar and the backplate assembly can
cause an intermittent short circuit. Such a short circuit can cause
a dual AC generator shutdown that, particularly in conjunction with
an engine failure in icing conditions, could result in reduced
controllability of the aircraft.
    This [Transport Canada Civil Aviation] directive mandates
revision of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to introduce a
procedure that restores AC power following a failure of No. 1 and
No. 2 AC generators with propeller de-ice on. Additionally, in order
to prevent similar dual AC generator shutdowns, it mandates the
application of sealant as insulation between the propeller de-ice
bus bars and the backplate assembly.
    Reduced controllability of the airplane in certain operating
conditions affects continued safe flight and landing.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the Limitations Section of the Bombardier Dash 8 Q400 AFM, PSM 1-84-
1A, by inserting a copy of Bombardier Dash 8 Q400 Temporary
Amendment (TA) 14, Issue 1, dated May 10, 2006. When the information
in Bombardier TA 14, Issue 1, dated May 10, 2006, is included in the
general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted
in the AFM and the TA may be removed.
    (2) Within 5,000 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD: Apply sealant between the bus bar assemblies and the backplate
assembly by incorporating Bombardier DHC-8-400 Modification Summary
4-163047, Revision B, dated August 22, 2008, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-61-03,
Revision `A,' dated September 18, 2008.
    (3) Incorporating Bombardier DHC-8-400 Modification Summary
Package 4-163047 before the effective date of this AD in accordance
with Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-61-03, dated April 27, 2007, is
considered acceptable for compliance with the requirements of
paragraph (f)(2) 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

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Wing Chan, Aerospace
Engineer, Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York
ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any
approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your
principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics
inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector,
your local Flight Standards District Office.
    (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: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-01,
dated January 19, 2009; Bombardier Dash 8 Q400 TA 14, Issue 1, dated
May 10, 2006; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-61-03, Revision
`A,' dated September 18, 2008; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Bombardier Dash 8 Q400 Temporary Amendment 14,
Issue 1, dated May 10, 2006; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-61-
03, Revision `A,' dated September 18, 2008; as applicable; to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the 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> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 18, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-20836 Filed 9-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P