[Federal Register: January 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 16)]
[Notices]
[Page 4187-4189]
[DOCID:fr25ja06-120]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53147; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Delay Implementation of a Split of the PHLX Housing SectorSM
Index Option

January 19, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 4, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Phlx. The Phlx filed
the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change pursuant
to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon filing with
the Commission.\5\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \5\ As required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 17 CFR 240.19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Phlx submitted written notice of its intent to
file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and
text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior
to the date of filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Phlx, pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Act \6\ and Rule 19b-
4 thereunder,\7\ proposes to delay until February 1, 2006 \8\ the
implementation of a split of the PHLX Housing SectorSM Index
(``Index'') option (``HGX'') \9\ to one-half

its present value,\10\ so that any open interest in HGX contracts at
$2.50 strike price intervals expire before the split.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \8\ In its proposal, the Phlx requested a delay until February
2006. During a telephone conversation on January 12, 2006, the
Exchange specified that it is seeking to delay implementation until
February 1, 2006. Telephone conversation between Jurij Trypupenko,
Director and Counsel, Phlx, and Christopher Chow, Attorney, Division
of Market Regulation, on January 12, 2006.
    \9\ HGX is a modified capitalization-weighted index composed of
21 companies whose primary lines of business are directly associated
with the U.S. housing construction market. The Index encompasses
residential builders, suppliers of aggregate, lumber and other
construction materials, manufactured housing and mortgage insurers.
The Index is currently composed of the following stocks: American
Standard Companies, Beazer Homes USA, Inc., Champion Enterprises,
Inc., Centex Corp., DR Horton, Inc., Hovnanian Enterprises, Inc., KB
Home, Lennar Corp., Masco Corp., MDC Holdings, Inc., OfficeMax,
Inc., Pulte Homes, PMI Group, Inc., Radian Group, Inc., Ryland
Group, Inc., Standard Pacific Corp., Temple Inland, Inc., Toll
Brothers, Inc., USG Corp., Vulcan Materials Company, Weyerhaeuser
Company.
    \10\ The Commission notes that it published notice of a proposed
rule change allowing a split of the HGX, which was effective upon
filing (September 15, 2005) and which, per the Exchange's request,
became operative on September 27, 2005. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 52512 (September 27, 2005), 70 FR 57919 (October 4,
2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-50).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    Previously, the Exchange filed a proposed rule change to reduce the
value of the HGX to one-half its present value.\11\ The purpose of the
proposed rule change is to delay the implementation of a split of the
value of the HGX so that upon splitting the index the Exchange can list
new, post-split options series at strike prices of $2.50 or higher.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See above, at n.10; telephone conversation between Jurij
Trypupenko, Director and Counsel, Phlx, and Florence E. Harmon,
Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, on January
19, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange may now set index option strike price intervals at
$2.50 or higher pursuant to Phlx Rule 1101A. Rule 1101A indicates that
the Exchange may determine fixed strike price intervals for index
options that may generally be $2.50 for the three consecutive near-term
months, $5 for the fourth month and $10 for the fifth month. The rule
further allows that the Exchange may determine to list strike prices at
$2.50 intervals in response to demonstrated customer interest or
specialist request, and to list strike prices at wider intervals.\12\
No Phlx rule accommodates index option strike price intervals lower
than $2.50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Exchange has filed a rule change (SR-Phlx-2005-43) and
amendments thereto proposing to simplify the Rule 1101A procedure
for setting option index strike prices so that, among other things,
there is no correlation between index strike price intervals and
months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are several HGX option series priced at $2.50 strike price
intervals that have options contracts with open interest. The open
interest in these series would expire by the end of January 2006.
Splitting the HGX index at a time when there is open interest in these
series would result in strike price intervals smaller than $2.50.\13\
Because index option strike prices that are smaller that $2.50 (for
example $1.00) are not supported in Phlx rules, the delay in the
implementation of the split is necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For example, an HGX option series with a $457.50 pre-split
strike price, after a two-for-one split, would change to a $228.75
strike price, which would require a smaller than $2.50 strike price
interval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that delayed implementation should attract
more volume by making option premiums more appealing for retail
investors and allowing investors to better utilize the HGX as a trading
and hedging vehicle with a smaller capital outlay.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Exchange notes that to accommodate the two-fold
increase in the number of contracts outstanding after the split, the
position limits applicable to HGX (currently 31,500 contracts
pursuant to Rule 1001A) will be temporarily increased to 63,000
until such time that all pre-split options expire, at which point
the position limits will return to the 31,500 position limit
specified in Rule 1001A. See Exchange Act Release No. 52512
(September 27, 2005), 70 FR 57919 (October 4, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-
50).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will announce the effective date of the implementation
of the split on February 1, 2006 by way of an Exchange memorandum to
the membership, which will also serve as notice of the strike price and
position limit changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b) of the Act \15\ in general, and furthers the objectives of section
6(b)(5) of the Act \16\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest, by delaying the implementation of a split establishing a
lower Index value, which should, in turn, facilitate trading in HGX,
creating a more liquid trading environment. The Exchange believes that
reducing the value of the Index should not raise manipulation concerns
and should not cause adverse market impact because the Exchange will
continue to employ its surveillance procedures and has proposed an
orderly procedure to achieve the Index split, including adequate prior
notice to market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Phlx believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    The Phlx has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Phlx has asked the Commission to waive the 30-
day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest because the additional time may allow the Exchange to
list new, post-split options series at strike prices of $2.50 or
higher, as required under the Exchange's rules.\17\ For this reason,
the Commission designates that the proposal has become effective and

operative immediately upon filing with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Phlx-2006-02 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-02. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Phlx.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-02
and should be submitted on or before February 15, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-923 Filed 1-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: December 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 241)]
[Notices]
[Page 76088]
[DOCID:fr15de08-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Tenth Joint Meeting, RTCA Special Committee 205/EUROCAE Working
Group 71: Software Considerations in Aeronautical Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 205/EUROCAE Working Group 71
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 205/EUROCAE Working Group 71:
Software Considerations in Aeronautical Systems.

DATES: The meeting will be held February 23-27, 2009, from 8:30 a.m.-
5:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Hotel NH Koeln Mediapark, Im
Media Park 8b, Cologne, Germany, Reservation: +49.211.7811.100, Fax:
+49.211.7811.888, E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street,
NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(202) 833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org; (2) Hotel Front Desk:
(602) 273-7778; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice
is hereby given for a Special Committee 205/EUROCAE Working Group 71
meeting. The agenda will include:

February 23

 Opening Plenary (Chair's Introductory Remarks, Review of
Meeting Agenda and Agreement of Previous Minutes
 Reports of Sub-Group Activity
 Other Committee/Other Documents Interfacing Personnel Reports
(CAST, Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Security, WG-63/SAE S-18)
 Sub-Group Break Out Sessions
 New Members Introduction Session
 CAST Meeting: Closed
 Sub-group Breakout Sessions
 Plenary Session: Text Acceptance (for papers posted, commented
on and reworked prior to Plenary)
 Executive Committee and SG Chairs/Secretaries Meeting

February 24

 Sub-Group Break Out Sessions
 Mandatory Paper Reading Session
 Executive Committee and SG Chairs/Secretaries Meeting

February 25

 IP Comment Reply & Sub-Group Break Out Sessions (focused on
finalizing any changes to papers being presented later in the morning)
 Plenary Text Acceptance (for papers posted, commented on and
reworked prior to Plenary)
 Sub-Group Break Out Sessions
 Executive Committee and SG Chairs/Secretaries Meeting

February 26

 Sub-Group Break Out Sessions
 Plenary Session
 Mandatory Paper Reading Session
 Executive Committee and SG Chairs/Secretaries Meeting

February 27

 IP Comment Reply & Sub-Group Break Out Sessions (focused on
finalising any changes to papers being presented later in the morning)
 Plenary Text Approval (reworked and late posted papers)
 SG Report Outs
 SG1: SCWG Document Integration Sub-Group
 SG2: Issue & Rationale Sub-Group
 SG3: Tool Qualification Sub-Group
 SG4: Model Based Design & Verification Sub-Group
 SG5: Object Oriented Technology Sub-Group
 SG6: Formal Methods Sub-Group
 SG7: Special Considerations Sub-Group
 Closing Plenary (any other business, next meeting information,
closing remarks, meeting evaluation, formal meeting close, meeting
adjourned)
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 8, 2008.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
 [FR Doc. E8-29541 Filed 12-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 210 (Thursday, October 29, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68450]
[FR Doc No: C1-2020-20973]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 35

[Docket No. RM18-9-000; Order No. 2222]

Participation of Distributed Energy Resource Aggregations in
Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent
System Operators

Correction

    In rule document 2020-20973 beginning on page 67094 in the issue of
Wednesday, October 21, 2020, make the following correction:
    On page 67094, in the second column, in the 16th line, ``September
17, 2021'' should read ``July 19, 2021''.

[FR Doc. C1-2020-20973 Filed 10-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

<META name="generator" content="PDFCreactiveX HTML Export">
<META name="creation-date" content="22/07/2008 11:51:34 ">
<TITLE></TITLE>


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 5 (Friday, January 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 1052]
[FR Doc No: X10-250108]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL10-29-000]

Terra-Gen Dixie Valley, LLC; TGP Dixie Development Company, LLC;
New York Canyon, LLC; Notice of Filing

December 30, 2009.
    Take notice that on December 24, 2009, Terra-Gen Dixie Valley, LLC,
TGP Dixie Development Company, LLC and New York Canyon, LLC
(``Petitioners''), pursuant to section 207 of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207
(2009), filed a petition for declaratory order requesting that the
Commission confirm Petitioners firm transmission rights to 360 MW of
capacity in the Dixie Valley 212-mile long 230 kV radial generator tie-
line to interconnect Petitioners' existing and planned geothermal
projects to the integrated transmission system.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 25, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-62 Filed 1-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10711-10712]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03069]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 97

[FRL-9959-26-OAR]

Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Allowances From New
Unit Set-Asides for the 2016 Compliance Year

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of data availability (NODA).

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing notice
of emission allowance allocations to certain units under the new unit
set-aside (NUSA) provisions of the Cross-

State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) federal implementation plans (FIPs).
EPA has completed final calculations for the second round of NUSA
allowance allocations for the 2016 compliance year of the CSAPR
NOX Annual, SO2 Group 1, and SO2 Group
2 Trading Programs. EPA has posted spreadsheets showing the second-
round 2016 NUSA allocations of CSAPR NOX Annual,
SO2 Group 1, and SO2 Group 2 allowances to new
units as well as the allocations to existing units of the remaining
CSAPR NOX Annual, SO2 Group 1, and SO2
Group 2 allowances not allocated to new units in either round of the
2016 NUSA allocation process. EPA will record the allocated CSAPR
NOX Annual, SO2 Group 1, and SO2 Group
2 allowances in sources' Allowance Management System (AMS) accounts by
February 15, 2017.

DATES: February 15, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning this action
should be addressed to Robert Miller at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or to Kenon Smith at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the CSAPR FIPs, a portion of each
state budget for each of the CSAPR trading programs is reserved as a
NUSA from which allowances are allocated to eligible units through an
annual one- or two-round process. EPA has described the CSAPR NUSA
allocation process in five NODAs previously published in the Federal
Register: 81 FR 33636 (May 27, 2016); 81 FR 50630 (August 2, 2016); 81
FR 63156 (September 14, 2016); 81 FR 80593 (November 16, 2016) and 81
FR 89035 (December 9, 2016). In the most recent of these previous
NODAs, EPA provided notice of preliminary lists of new units eligible
for second-round 2016 NUSA allocations of CSAPR NOX Annual,
SO2 Group 1, and SO2 Group 2 allowances and
provided an opportunity for the public to submit objections.
    EPA received no objections to the preliminary lists of new units
eligible for second-round 2016 NUSA allocations of CSAPR NOX
Annual, SO2 Group 1, or SO2 Group 2 allowances
whose availability was announced in the December 9 NODA. EPA is
therefore making second-round 2016 NUSA allocations of CSAPR
NOX Annual, SO2 Group 1, and SO2 Group
2 allowances to the new units identified on these lists in accordance
with the procedures set forth in 40 CFR 97.412(a)(9) and (12),
97.612(a)(9) and (12), and 97.712(a)(9) and (12).
    As described in the December 9 NODA, any allowances remaining in
the CSAPR NOX Annual, SO2 Group 1, and
SO2 Group 2 NUSAs for a given state and control period after
the second round of NUSA allocations to new units is completed are to
be allocated to the existing units in the state according to the
procedures set forth in 40 CFR 97.412(a)(10) and (12), 97.612(a)(10)
and (12), and 97.712(a)(10) and (12). EPA has determined that CSAPR
NOX Annual, SO2 Group 1, and SO2 Group
2 allowances do remain in the NUSAs for a number of states following
completion of second-round 2016 NUSA allocations; accordingly, EPA is
allocating these allowances to existing units. The NUSA allowances are
generally allocated to the existing units in proportion to the
allocations previously made to the existing units under 40 CFR
97.411(a)(1), 97.611(a)(1), and 97.711(a)(1), adjusted for rounding.
    Under 40 CFR 97.412(b)(10), 97.612(b)(10), and 97.712(b)(10), any
allowances remaining in the CSAPR NOX Annual, SO2
Group 1, and SO2 Group 2 Indian country NUSAs for a given
state and control period after the second round of Indian country NUSA
allocations to new units are added to the NUSA for that state or are
made available for allocation by the state pursuant to an approved SIP
revision. No new units eligible for allocations of CSAPR NOX
Annual, SO2 Group 1, and SO2 Group 2 allowances
from any 2016 Indian country NUSA have been identified, and no state
has an approved SIP revision governing allocation of 2016 CSAPR NUSA
allowances. The Indian country NUSA allowances are therefore being
added to the NUSAs for the respective states and are included in the
pools of allowances that are being allocated to existing units under 40
CFR 97.412(b)(10) and (12), 97.612(b)(10) and (12), and 97.712(b)(10)
and (12).
    The final unit-by-unit data and allowance allocation calculations
are set forth in Excel spreadsheets titled
``CSAPR_NUSA_2016_NOx_Annual_2nd_Round_Final_Data_New_Units'',
``CSAPR_NUSA_2016_SO2_2nd_Round_Final_Data_New_Units'',
``CSAPR_NUSA_2016_NOx_Annual_2nd_Round_Final_Data_Existing_Units'', and
``CSAPR_NUSA_2016_SO2_2nd_Round_Final_Data_Existing_Units'', available
on EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/csapr/csapr-compliance-year-2016-nusa-nodas.
    Pursuant to CSAPR's allowance recordation timing requirements, the
allocated NUSA allowances will be recorded in sources' AMS accounts by
February 15, 2017. EPA notes that an allocation or lack of allocation
of allowances to a given unit does not constitute a determination that
CSAPR does or does not apply to the unit. EPA also notes that NUSA
allocations of CSAPR NOX Annual, SO2 Group 1, and
SO2 Group 2 allowances are subject to potential correction
if a unit to which NUSA allowances have been allocated for a given
compliance year is not actually an affected unit as of January 1 of the
compliance year.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 40 CFR 97.411(c), 97.611(c), and 97.711(c).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Authority: 40 CFR 97.411(b), 97.611(b), and 97.711(b).

    January 27, 2017.
Richard Haeuber,
Acting Director, Clean Air Markets Division, Office of Atmospheric
Programs, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2017-03069 Filed 2-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 141 (Wednesday, July 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 42785]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17300]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL14-72-000]

UNS Electric, Inc.; Notice of Institution of Section 206
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On July 17, 2014, the Commission issued an order in Docket No.
EL14-72-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16
U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into the justness and
reasonableness of UNS Electric, Inc.'s (UNS Electric) lack of formula
rate protocols under UNS Electric's Open Access Transmission Tariff.
UNS Electric, Inc., 148 FERC ] 61,032 (2014).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL14-72-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Dated: July 17, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-17300 Filed 7-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


References Related to Human Health Effects Associated with Exposure to
Molds

(12/8/10)

Andriessen,  J.W., Brunekreef, B., Roemer, W. (1998) Home dampness and
respiratory health status in European children. Clin Exp Allergy
28(10):1191-200.

Antova, T., Pattenden, S., Brunekreef, B., Heinrich, J., Rudnai, P.,
Forastiere, F., Luttmann-Gibson, H., Grize, L., Katsnelson, B.,
Moshammer, H., Nikiforov, B., Slachtova, H., Slotova, K., Zlotkowska,
R., and Fletcher, T. (2008) Exposure to indoor mould and children's
respiratory health in the PATY study. J Epidemiol Community Health
62(8):708-14.

Anyanwu, E., Campbell, A.W., Vojdani, A., Ehiri, J.E., and Akpan, A.I.
(2003a) Biochemical changes in the serum of patients with chronic
toxigenic mold exposures: a risk factor for multiple renal dysfunctions.
Scientific World Journal 3:1058-64.

Anyanwu, E., Campbell, A.W., Jones, J., Ehiri, J.E., and Akpan, A.I.
(2003b) The neurological significance of abnormal natural killer cell
activity in chronic toxigenic mold exposures. Scientific World Journal
3:1128-37.

Auger, L. (1999) Chronic Toxic Encephalopathies Apparently Related to
Exposure to Toxigenic Fungi. In: Johanning, E. ed. Bioaerosols, fungi
and mycotoxins: health effects, assessment, prevention, and control.
Albany, NY: Eastern New York Occupational and Environmental Health
Center.

Baldo, J.V., Ahmad, L., and Ruff, R. (2002) Neuropsychological
performance of patients following mold exposure. Appl Neuropsychol
9(4):193-202.

Beijer, L., Thorn, J., Rylander, R. (2003) Mould exposure at home
relates to inflammatory markers in blood. Eur Respir J 21(2):317-22.

Bonner, S., Matte, T.D., Fagan, J., Andreopoulos, E., and Evans, D.
(2006) Self-reported moisture or mildew in the homes of Head Start
children with asthma is associated with greater asthma morbidity. J
Urban Health 83(1):129-37.

Brasel, T.L., Martin, J.M., Carriker, C.G., Wilson, S.C. and Straus,
D.C.  Detection of airborne Stachybotrys chartarum macrocyclic
trichothecene mycotoxins on particulates smaller than conidia.  Appl and
Environ Microbiol Jan 2005;71:115-122.

Brasel, T.L., Martin, J.M., Carriker, C.G., Wilson, S.C. and Straus,
D.C.  Detection of airborne Stachybotrys chartarum macrocyclic
trichothecene mycotoxins in the indoor environment. Appl and Environ
Microbiol Nov 2005;71:7376-7388.

Bush, R.K., Portnoy, J.M., Saxon, A., Terr, A.I., and Wood R.A. (2006)
The medical effects of mold exposure. J Allergy Clin Immunol 117:326-33.

Campbell, A.W., Thrasher, J.D., Madison, R.A., Vojdani, A., Gray, M.R.,
and Johnson, A. (2003) Neural autoantibodies and neurophysiologic
abnormalities in patients exposed to molds in water-damaged buildings.
Arch Environ Health 58(8):464-74.

Cho, S.-H., Reponen, T., LeMasters, G., Levin, L., Huang, J., Meklin,
T., Ryan, P., Villareal, M., and Bernstein, D. (2006) Mold damage in
homes and wheezing in infants. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 97(4):
539–545.

Cooley, J.D., Wong, W.C., Jumper, C.A., Straus, D.C. (1998) Correlation
between the prevalence of certain fungi and sick building syndrome.
Occup Environ Med. 55(9):579-84.

Crago, B.R., Gray, M.R., Nelson, L.A., Davis, M., Arnold, L., and
Thrasher, J.D. (2003) Psychological, neuropsychological, and
electrocortical effects of mixed mold exposure.  Arch Environ Health
58(8):452-63.

Dales, R., Miller, D., White, J., Dulberg, C., Lazarovits, A.I. (1998)
Influence of residential fungal contamination on peripheral blood
lymphocyte populations in children. Arch Environ Health 53(3):190-5.

Davis, P.J. (2001) Molds, Toxic Molds, and Indoor Air Quality.  Prepared
at the Request of Assemblymember Alan Lowenthal.  CRB Note. 8(1): 2.
ISBN: 1-58703-133-7.

Douwes, J., Zuidhof, A., Doekes, G., van der Zee, S.C., Wouters, I.,
Boezen, M.H., Brunekreef, B. (2000) (1-->3)-beta-D-glucan and endotoxin
in house dust and peak flow variability in children. Am J Respir Crit
Care Med 162(4 Pt 1):1348-54.

Douwes, J. and Pearce, N. (2003) Invited commentary: is indoor mold
exposure a risk factor for asthma? Am J Epidemiol 158(3):203-6.

Edmondson, D.A., Nordness, M.E., Zacharisen, M.C., Kurup, V.P., Fink,
J.N. (2005) Allergy and "toxic mold syndrome". Annals of Allergy,
Asthma, & Immunology 94(2): 234-239.

Elidemir, O., Colasurdo, G.N., Rossmann, S.N., Fa,n L.L. (1999)
Isolation of Stachybotrys from the lung of a child with pulmonary
hemosiderosis. Pediatrics 104(4 Pt 1):964-6.

Emenius, G., Svartengren, M., Korsgaard, J., Nordvall, L., Pershagen,
G., and Wickman, M. (2004) Indoor exposures and recurrent wheezing in
infants: A study in the BAMSE cohort. Acta Paediatr 93(7):899-905.

Flappan, S.M., Portnoy, J., Jones, P., Barnes, C. (1999) Infant
pulmonary hemorrhage in a suburban home with water damage and mold
(Stachybotrys atra). Environ Health Perspect. 107(11):927-30.

Fung, F., Tappen, D., Wood, G. (2000) Alternaria-associated asthma. Appl
Occup Environ Hyg. 15(12):924-7.

Garrett, M.H., Rayment, P.R., Hooper, M.A., Abramson, M.J., Hooper, B.M.
(1998) Indoor airborne fungal spores, house dampness and associations
with environmental factors and respiratory health in children, Clin Exp
Allergy 28(4):459-67.

Gelincik, A.A., Bueyuekoeztuerk, S., Guel, H., Guengoer, G., Issever,
H., and Cagatay, A. (2005) The Effect of Indoor Fungi on the Symptoms of
Patients with Allergic Rhinitis in Istanbul. Indoor and Built
Environment 14(5): 427-432.

Gent, J.F., Ren, P., Belanger, K., Triche, E., Bracken, M.B., Holford,
T.R., Leaderer, B.P. (2002) Levels of household mold associated with
respiratory symptoms in the first year of life in a cohort at risk for
asthma. Environ Health Perspect 110(12):A781-6.

Gordon, W.A., Johanning, E., Haddad, L. (1999) Cognitive Impairment
Associated with Exposure to Toxigenic Fungi. In: Johanning, E. ed.
Bioaerosols, fungi and myotoxins: health effects, assessment,
prevention, and control.  Albany, NY: Eastern New York Occupational and
Environmental Health Center.

Green, B.J., Sercombe, J.K. and Tovey, E.R.  Fungal fragments and
undocumented conidia function as new aeroallergen sources. J Allergy
Clin Immunol May 2005;115:1043-1048

Green, B.J., Tovey, E.R., Sercombe, J.K., Blachere, F.M., Beezhold, D.H.
and Schmechel, D. Airborne fungal fragments and allergenicity. Med
Mycology Sept 2006;44:S245-S255.

Hagmolen of ten Have, W., van den Berg, N.J, van der Palen, J., van
Aalderen, W.M., and Bindels, P.J. (2007) Residential exposure to mould
and dampness is associated with adverse respiratory health. Clin Exp
Allergy 37(12):1827-32. Epub 2007 Oct 3.

Haverinen, U., Husman, T., Toivola, M., Suonketo, J., Pentti, M.,
Lindberg, R., Leinonen, J., Hyvarinen, A., Meklin, T., Nevalainen, A.
(1999) An approach to management of critical indoor air problems in
school buildings. Environ Health Perspect 107 Suppl 3:509-14.

Hessel, P.A., Klaver, J., Michaelchuk, D., McGhan, S., Carson, M.M., and
Melvin, D. (2001) The epidemiology of childhood asthma in Red Deer and
Medicine Hat, Alberta. Can Respir J 8(3):139-46.

Hirvonen. M.R., Ruotsalainen, M., Roponen, M., Hyvarinen, A., Husman,
T., Kosma, V.M., Komulainen, H., Savolainen, K., Nevalainen, A. (1999)
Nitric oxide and proinflammatory cytokines in nasal lavage fluid
associated with symptoms and exposure to moldy building microbes. Am J
Respir Crit Care Med. 160(6):1943-6.

Hodgson, M.J., Morey, P., Leung, W.Y., Morrow, L., Miller, D., Jarvis,
B.B., Robbins, H., Halsey, J.F., Storey, E. (1998) Building-Associated
Pulmonary Disease from Exposure to Stachybotrys chartarum and
Aspergillus versicolor. Journal of Occupational and Environmental
Medicine 40(3): 241-249.

Hyvärinen, A., Husman, T., Laitinen, S., Meklin, T., Taskinen, T.,
Korppi, M., and Nevalainen, A. (2003) Microbial exposure and
mold-specific serum IgG levels among children with respiratory symptoms
in 2 school buildings. Arch Environ Health 58(5):275-83.

Immonen, J., Taskinen, T., Pekkanen, J., and Korppi, M. (2004) Bronchial
reactivity in students from moisture and mold-damaged schools: Changes
in relation to changes in exposure. Pediatric Asthma, Allergy &
Immunology 17(2): 116-125.

Iossifova, Y.Y., Reponen, T., Ryan, P.H., Levin, L., Bernstein, D.I.,
Lockey, J.E., Hershey, G.K., Villareal, M., and LeMasters, G. (2009)
Mold exposure during infancy as a predictor of potential asthma
development. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 102(2):131-7.

Islam, Z., Harkema, J.R., and Pestka, J.J. (2006) Satratoxin G from the
black mold Stachybotrys chartarum evokes olfactory sensory neuron loss
and inflammation in the murine nose and brain. Environ Health
Perspectives 114(7):1099-107.

Issever, H., Gul, H., Erelel, M. Erkan, F., and Gungor, G.Y. (2002)
Health Problems of Garbage Collectors in Istanbul. Indoor and Built
Environment 11(5):293-301.

Jaakkola, M.S., Laitinen, S., Piipari, R., Uitti, J., Nordman, H.,
Haapala, A.M., and Jaakkola, J.J. (2002a) Immunoglobulin G antibodies
against indoor dampness-related microbes and adult-onset asthma: a
population-based incident case-control study. Clin Exp Immunol
129(1):107-12.

Jaakkola, M.S., Nordman, H., Piipari, R., Uitti, J., Laitinen, J.,
Karjalainen, A., Hahtola, P., and Jaakkola, J.J. (2002b) Indoor Dampness
and Molds and Development of Adult-onset Asthma: A Population-based
Incident Case-control Study. Environ Health Perspect 110(5):543-547.

Jacob, B., Ritz, B., Gehring, U., Koch, A., Bischof, W., Wichmann, H.E.,
and Heinrich, J. (2002) Indoor exposure to molds and allergic
sensitization. Environmental Health Perspectives 110(7).

Jacobs, R.L., Andrews, C.P. (2003) Hypersensitivity
pneumonia-nonspecific interstitial pneumonia/fibrosis histopathologic
presentation: a study in diagnosis and long-term management. Ann Allergy
Asthma Immunol 90(2):265-70.

Johanning, E., Biagini, R., Hull, D., Morey, P., Jarvis, B.,
Landsbergis, P. (1996) Health and immunology study following exposure to
toxigenic fungi (Stachybotrys chartarum) in a water-damaged office
environment. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 68(4):207-18.

Katz, Y., Verleger, H., Barr, J., Rachmiel, M., Kiviti, S., Kuttin, E.S.
(1999) Indoor survey of moulds and prevalence of mould atopy in Israel.
Clin Exp Allergy 29(2):186-92.

Koskinen, O.M., Husman, T.M., Meklin, T.M., Nevalainen, A.I. (1999) The
relationship between moisture or mould observations in houses and the
state of health of their occupants. Eur Respir J. 14(6):1363-7.

Koskinen, O., Husman, T., Hyvarinen, A., Reponen, T., Ruuskanen, J.,
Nevalainen, A. (1995) Respiratory symptoms and infections among children
in a day-care center with mold problems. Indoor Air 5:3-9.

Kuhn, D. M.,Ghannoum, M.A. (2003) Indoor Mold, Toxigenic Fungi, and
Stachybotrys chartarum: Infectious Disease Perspective.  Clinical
Microbiology Reviews 16(1):146.

Li, C.S., Hsu, C.W,, Tai, M.L. (1997) Indoor pollution and sick building
syndrome symptoms among workers in day-care centers. Arch Environ Health
52(3):200-7.

Ly, N.P., Soto-Quirós, M.E., Avila, L., Hunninghake, G.M., Raby, B.A.,
Laskey, D., Sylvia, J.S., and Celedón, J.C. (2008) Paternal asthma,
mold exposure, and increased airway responsiveness among children with
asthma in Costa Rica. Chest 133(1):107-14. Epub 2007 Nov 7.

Mazur, L.J., Kim, J. and the Committee on Environmental Health. (2006)
Spectrum of noninfectious health effects from molds. Pediatrics 118:
e1909-e1926.

McNeel, S.V., Kreutzer, R. (1996) Fungi & Indoor Air Quality.  Health &
Envir. Digest 10(2):9-12.

Miller, J.D., Rand, T.G. and Jarvis BB. Stachybotrys chartarum: Cause of
Human Disease or media darling? Med Mycol 2003;41:271-291.

Newman, L.S., Rose, C.S., Bresnitz, E.A., Rossman, M.D., Barnard, J.,
Frederick, M., Terrin, M.L., Weinberger, S.E., Moller, D.R., McLennan,
G., Hunninghake, G., DePalo, L., Baughman, R.P., Iannuzzi, M.C., Judson,
M.A., Knatterud, G.L., Thompson, B.W., Teirstein, A.S., Yeager, H. Jr,
Johns, C.J., Rabin, D.L., Rybicki, B.A., and Cherniack, R. (2004) A case
control etiologic study of sarcoidosis: environmental and occupational
risk factors. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 170(12):1324-30. Epub 2004 Sep
3.

Novotny, W.E., Dixit, A. (2000) Pulmonary hemorrhage in an infant
following 2 weeks of fungal exposure. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.
154(3):271-5.

Osborne, M., Reponen, T., Adhikari, A., Cho, S.-H., Grinshpun, S.A.,
Levin, L., Bernstein, D.I., and LeMasters, G. (2006) Specific fungal
exposures, allergic sensitization, and rhinitis in infants. Pediatr
Allergy Immunol 17(6): 450–457.

Ozdilli, K., Issever, H., Oezyildirim, B.A., Hapcioglu, B., Ince, N.,
Ince, H.,Yegenoglu, Y., Susever, S., Erelel, M., Isik, E., and
Gedikoglu, G. (2007) Biological hazards in tannery workers. Indoor and
Built Environment 16 (4): 349-357.

Piipari, R., and Keskinen, H. (2005) Agents causing occupational asthma
in Finland in 1986-2002: Cow epithelium bypassed by moulds from
moisture-damaged buildings. Clin Exp Allergy 35(12):1632-7.

Pirhonen, I., Nevalainen, A., Husman, T., Pekkanen, J. (1996) Home
dampness, moulds and their influence on respiratory infections and
symptoms in adults in Finland. Eur Respir J 9(12):2618-22.

Rao, C.Y., Kurukularatne, C., Garcia-Diaz, J.B., Kemmerly, S.A., Reed,
D., Fridkin, S.K., and Morgan, J. (2007) Implications of detecting the
mold Syncephalastrum in clinical specimens of New Orleans residents
after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. J Occup Environ Med 49(4):411-6.

Rea, WJ, Didriksen, N, Simon, TR, Pan, Y, Fenyves, EJ, Griffiths, B.
(2003) Effects of toxic exposure to molds and mycotoxins in
building-related illnesses. Archives of Environmental Health 58(7):
399-405.

Rudich, R., Santilli, J., Rockwell, W.J. (2003) Indoor mold spore
exposure: a possible factor in the etiology of multifocal choroiditis.
Am J Ophthalmol 135(3):402-4.

Rydjord, B., Eduard, W., Stensby, B., Sandven, P., Michaelsen, T.E., and
Wiker, H.G. (2007) Antibody response to long-term and high-dose
mould-exposed sawmill workers. Scandinavian Journal of Immunology
66(6):711-718.

Savilahti, R., Uitti, J., Roto, P., Laippala, P., Husman, T. (2001)
Increased prevalence of atopy among children exposed to mold in a school
building. Allergy 56(2):175-9.

Savilahti, R., Uitti, J., Laippala, P., Husman, T., Roto, P. (2002)
Respiratory morbidity among children following renovation of a
water-damaged school. Arch Environ Health 55(6):405-10.

Sigsgaard, T., Jensen, H.L.C., Nichum, E. Gravesen, S., Larsen, M.,
Hansen, B. (1999) Symptoms Associated to Work in a Water Damaged School
Building. In: Johanning, E. ed. Bioaerosols, fungi and myotoxins: health
effects, assessment, prevention, and control.  Albany, NY: Eastern New
York Occupational and Environmental Health Center.

Smedbold, H.T., Ahlen, C., Unimed, S., Nilsen, A.M., Norbäck, D, and
Hilt, B. (2002) Relationships between Indoor Environments and Nasal
Inflammation in Nursing Personnel. Arch Environ Health 57(2):155-161.

Stark, P.C., Burge, H.A., Ryan, L.M., Milton, D.K., Gold, D.R. (2003)
Fungal levels in the home and lower respiratory tract illnesses in the
first year of life. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 168(2):232-7. Epub 2003
Apr 30.

Stark, P.C., Celedón, J.C., Chew, G.L., Ryan, L.M., Burge, H.A.,
Muilenberg, M.L., Gold, D.R. (2005) Fungal levels in the home and
allergic rhinitis by 5 years of age. Environ Health Perspect
113(10):1405-9.

Sudakin, D.L. (1998) Toxigenic fungi in a water-damaged building: an
intervention study. Am J Ind Med 34(2):183-90.

Tariq, S.M., Matthews, S.M., Stevens, M., Hakim, E.A. (1996)
Sensitization to Alternaria and Cladosporium by the age of 4 years. Clin
Exp Allergy 26(7):794-8.

Taskinen ,T., Hyvarinen, A., Meklin, T., Husman, T., Nevalainen, A.,
Korppi, M. (1999) Asthma and respiratory infections in school children
with special reference to moisture and mold problems in the school. Acta
Paediatr 88(12):1373-9.

Thorn, J., Rylander, R. (1998) Airways inflammation and glucan in a
rowhouse area. Am J Respir Crit Care Med157(6 Pt 1):1798-803.

Thorn, J., Brisman, J., Toren, K. (2001) Adult-onset asthma is
associated with self-reported mold or environmental tobacco smoke
exposures in the home. Allergy 56(4):287-92.

Vesper, S., McKinstry, C., Haugland, R., Neas, L., Hudgens, E.,
Heidenfelder, B., and Gallagher, J. (2008) Higher Environmental Relative
Moldiness Index (ERMI SUP s SUP m) values measured in Detroit homes of
severely asthmatic children. Sci Total Environ 394(1):192-6. Epub 2008
Feb 15.

Vojdani, A., Campbell, A.W., Kashanian, A., and Vojdani, E. (2003a)
Antibodies against molds and mycotoxins following exposure to toxigenic
fungi in a water-damaged building. Arch Environ Health 558(6):324-36.

Vojdani, A., Thrasher, J.D., Madison, R.A., Gray, M.R., Heuser, G.,
Campbell, A.W. (2003b) Antibodies to molds and satratoxin in individuals
exposed in water-damaged buildings. Arch Environ Health 58(7):421-32.

 PAGE

 PAGE   7


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 168 (Thursday, August 31, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41331-41333]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18392]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0559; Product Identifier 2017-NM-013-AD; Amendment
39-19014; AD 2017-18-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-
200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of damage found at the
lower trailing edge panels of the left wing and a broken fuse pin of
the landing gear beam end fitting. This AD requires repetitive
replacement or inspection of certain fuse pins, and applicable on-
condition actions. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 5, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 5,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-
227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0559.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0559; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office
(phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F,
747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 20, 2017 (82 FR 28023).
The NPRM was prompted by a report of damage found at the lower trailing
edge panels of the left wing and a broken fuse pin of the landing gear
beam end fitting. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive replacement
or inspection of certain fuse pins, and applicable on-condition
actions. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the
fuse pin of the wing landing gear beam end fitting. A broken fuse pin
will not support the wing landing gear beam, causing damage to the
surrounding structure, including flight control cables and hydraulic
systems, which could result in loss of controllability of the airplane.

Comment

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this final rule. We have considered the comment received. Boeing
supported the NPRM.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this final rule as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We
have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2360, dated
January 20, 2017. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive replacement or inspection of certain fuse pins, and
applicable on-condition actions. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 158 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                   Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuse pin replacement \1\........  Up to 46 work-      Up to $15,150.....  Up to $19,060 per   Up to $3,011,480
                                   hours x $85 per                         replacement cycle.  per replacement
                                   hour = $3,910 per                                           cycle.
                                   replacement cycle.
Magnetic particle inspection \1\  Up to 48 work-      $0................  Up to $4,080 per    Up to $644,640 per
                                   hours x $85 per                         inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                   hour = $4,080 per
                                   inspection cycle.
Surface inspection \1\..........  Up to 10 work-      $0................  Up to $850 per      Up to $134,300 per
                                   hours x $85 per                         inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                   hour = $850 per
                                   inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Operators may choose which action they want to use.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
replacements:

                                               On-condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                        Labor cost               Parts cost            Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuse pin replacement.................  46 work-hours x $85 per  Up to $15,150..........  Up to $19,060.
                                        hour = $3,910.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2017-18-05 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19014; Docket No. FAA-
2017-0559; Product Identifier 2017-NM-013-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 5, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-
100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400,
747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of damage found at the lower
trailing edge panels of the left wing and a broken fuse pin of the
landing gear beam end fitting. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking in the fuse pin of the wing landing gear beam end
fitting. A broken fuse pin will not support the wing landing gear
beam, causing damage to the surrounding structure, including flight
control cables and hydraulic systems, which could result in loss of
controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Actions Required for Compliance

    Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2360, dated January 20, 2017,
do all applicable actions identified as required for compliance
(``RC'') in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2360, dated January 20,
2017.

(h) Exception to the Service Information

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2360, dated January
20, 2017, specifies a compliance time ``after the original issue
date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires

compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, to make those findings. To be approved,
the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) For service information that contains steps that are labeled
as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs
(i)(4)(i) and (i)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Bill Ashforth,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
425-917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2360, dated January 20,
2017.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 21, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-18392 Filed 8-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P