[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 239 (Friday, December 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80225-80227]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27258]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0091; Notice 1]

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Mercedes-Benz AG (``MBAG'') and Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC,
(``MBUSA'') (collectively, ``Mercedes-Benz'') have determined that
certain model year (MY) 2019-2021 Mercedes-Benz motor vehicles do not
fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems. Mercedes-Benz filed a noncompliance
report dated August 14, 2020. Mercedes-Benz subsequently petitioned
NHTSA on September 4, 2020, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This notice announces receipt of Mercedes-Benz's petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before January 11, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except for Federal holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the

Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the docket. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Overview: Mercedes-Benz has determined
that certain MY 2019-2021 Mercedes-Benz A-Class, CLA-Class, GLA-Class,
and GLB-Class motor vehicles do not fully comply with the requirements
of paragraph S5.1.2 of FMVSS No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems (49
CFR 571.135). Mercedes-Benz filed a noncompliance report dated August
14, 2020, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. Mercedes-Benz subsequently petitioned NHTSA
on September 4, 2020, for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556,
Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
    This notice of receipt of Mercedes-Benz's petition is published
under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any Agency
decision or other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the
petition.
    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 56,223 of the following MY
2019-2021 Mercedes-Benz A-Class, CLA-Class, GLA-Class, and GLB-Class
motor vehicles, manufactured between October 8, 2018, and July 27,
2020, are potentially involved:

 2020 Mercedes-Benz A35 AMG
 2020 Mercedes-Benz CLA45 AMG
 2021 Mercedes-Benz GLA250
 2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz A220
 2020-2021 Mercedes-Benz CLA250
 2020 Mercedes-Benz CLA35 AMG
 2021 Mercedes-Benz GLA45 AMG
 2021 Mercedes-Benz GLA35 AMG
 2020 Mercedes-Benz GLB250
    III. Noncompliance: Mercedes-Benz explains that the noncompliance
is that the subject vehicles are not equipped with an acoustic or
optical device that warns the driver when the rear brake lining
requires replacement, and therefore, does not meet the requirements
specified in paragraph S5.1.2 of FMVSS No. 135. Specifically, the
subject vehicles do not have an electrical sensor to measure the
thickness of the rear brake pads.
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.1.2 of FMVSS No. 135 includes
the requirements relevant to this petition. The wear condition of all
service brakes shall be indicated by either acoustic or optical devices
warning the driver at his or her driving position when lining
replacement is necessary or by way of visually checking the degree of
brake lining wear, from the outside or underside of the vehicle,
utilizing only the tools or equipment normally supplied with the
vehicle. The removal of wheels is permitted for this purpose.
    V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's Petition: The following views and
arguments presented in this section, ``V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's
Petition'', are the views and arguments provided by Mercedes-Benz. They
have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the views of
the Agency. Mercedes-Benz described the subject noncompliance and
stated their belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, Mercedes-Benz submitted the following
reasoning:

    1. In the affected vehicles, the front service brakes use an
electrical brake pad sensor to monitor the thickness of the front
brake pads. Once the front brakes reach a thickness of \1/8\ inch or
3 mm, a warning lamp will automatically display in the instrument
cluster and will remain permanently illuminated until the vehicle is
serviced. In addition, the message appears in the instrument cluster
and communicates the brake pad wear status to the driver.
    2. The brake warning indicator and in-vehicle message will
display at each ignition cycle until the brake pads are replaced.
The warning lamp cannot be extinguished unless new brake pads are
installed. While the driver could manually extinguish the warning
message, it will automatically reappear at each ignition cycle.
    3. Depending on the vehicle platform, the brake force
distribution is in a range of 71.9%-75.5% (front)/28.1%-24.5%
(rear). This means that between nearly 72% to more than 75% of the
vehicle's braking force is generated by the front brake pads.
Because of the brake force distribution, the front brake pads will
always initially wear out faster than the brake pads on the rear
wheels. Indeed, the front brake pads will then continue to wear out
at a faster pace than the rear brake pads, approximately 1 \1/2\ to
2 times more frequently depending on the operator's driving style.
    4. Once the front brake pads reach a thickness of approximately
3 mm, both the warning lamp and the warning message are
automatically triggered, and the consumer is advised to visit the
workshop to have the front brake pads replaced. Any time one set of
brake pads is inspected at a Mercedes-Benz workshop, the standard
work instructions direct the technician to also inspect and evaluate
the status of all other sets of brake pads. (This inspection is
carried out visually with the tire and wheel on the vehicle. In
exceptional circumstances, the technician may need to remove the
wheel to conduct the inspection and measurement. The technician does
not use the gauge tool discussed in this petition in either
scenario.) The workshop instructions provide that the technician is
to assess the remaining braking distance for each axle based on the
thickness of the brake pad that is most heavily worn. If the
remaining thickness of the brake pads is not sufficient to make it
to the next service interval, the customer will be advised to
replace the brake pads. However, if the wear limit has already been
reached, the technician will automatically replace the brake pads.
Thus, at every Mercedes-Benz workshop visit, all four sets of brake
pads will be inspected for wear. The customer will be advised of the
remaining thickness and individual brake pads are replaced
automatically if needed. Because the front brakes wear faster than
the rear due to the brake force distribution, the vehicle's rear
brakes will be inspected by a trained professional technician a
number of times before they ever need to be replaced.
    5. Even if the vehicle were taken to an independent repair
facility that did not follow Mercedes-Benz's comprehensive brake

pad inspection protocols, there is not an increased safety risk due
to the vehicle being operated with worn rear brake pads. In the
worst case, if a vehicle with fully worn brake pads on the rear axle
continued to operate, given the brake force distribution and the
performance of the rear brakes, the vehicle would continue to meet
the braking distance requirement of FMVSS No. 135. Furthermore, the
brakes on the rear axle will continue to operate, even with
completely worn rear brake pads, the driver will hear the
unmistakable sound of metal being pressed against the brake discs.
Moreover, the ABS and ESC functionality is not affected by worn rear
brake pads and will continue to function normally, as needed.
    6. Mercedes-Benz is not aware of any reports or complaints about
the issue from the field and it has corrected the condition in
production.

    Mercedes-Benz concluded by expressing the belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that Mercedes-Benz
no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve
vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer
for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after
Mercedes-Benz notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.
    (Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-27258 Filed 12-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29072-29073]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13389]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14826-000]

Merchant Hydro Developers, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On January 18, 2017, Merchant Hydro Developers, LLC, filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Hudson Hill Pumped Storage Hydro Project to be located near Jackson
Township in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. The sole purpose of a
preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority
to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary
permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-
disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by
others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A new
upper reservoir with a surface area of 70 acres and a storage capacity
of 1,050 acre-feet at a surface elevation of approximately 2,150 feet
above mean sea level (msl) created through construction of a new
roller-compacted concrete or rock-fill dam; (2) a new lower reservoir
with a surface area of 36 acres and a storage capacity of 1,260 acre-
feet at a surface elevation of 1,550 feet msl; (3) a new 1,448-foot-
long, 48-inch-diameter penstock connecting the upper and lower
reservoirs; (4) a new 150-foot-long, 50-foot-wide, 25-foot-high
powerhouse containing two turbine-generator units with a total rated
capacity of 52 megawatts; (5) a new 7,920-foot-long transmission line
connecting the powerhouse to the Laurel Hill 230-kilovolt transmission
circuit owned by Pennsylvania Electric Company; and (6) appurtenant
facilities. The proposed project would have an annual generation of
188,518 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Adam Rousselle, Merchant Hydro Developers, LLC,
5710 Oak Crest Drive, Doylestown, PA 18902; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Woohee Choi; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14826-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14826) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: June 21, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-13389 Filed 6-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 4, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 85)]
[Notices]
[Page 23760-23761]
[DOCID:fr04my10-81]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R03-OW-2009-0985; FRL-9144-7]

Notice of Public Hearing Regarding Environmental Protection
Agency Region III's Proposed Determination To Prohibit, Restrict, or
Deny the Specification, or the Use for Specification (Including
Withdrawal of Specification), of an Area as a Disposal Site; Spruce No.
1 Surface Mine, Logan County, WV

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: On April 2, 2010, EPA Region III published its Proposed
determination to Prohibit, Restrict, or Deny the Specification, or the
Use for Specification (including Withdrawal of Specification), of an
Area as a Disposal Site; Spruce No. 1 Surface Mine, Logan County, West
Virginia in the Federal Register soliciting comments from the public.
The permittee is Mingo Logan Coal Company. That notice can be found at
http://www.regulations.gov (search for EPA-R03-OW-2009-0985). Relevant
documents are also available on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/
region3/mtntop/spruce1.html. EPA has decided that it would be in the
public interest to conduct a public hearing on the Proposed 404(c)
Determination for the Spruce No. 1 Surface Mine.
    Date and Location: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, (EPA) will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, May 18, 2010, at 7
p.m. at the Charleston Civic Center (South Hall), located at 200 Civic
Center Drive, Charleston, WV 25301. Registration will begin at 5 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding this notice
of a public hearing, contact the Office of Environmental Programs;

Environmental Assessment and Innovation Division; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III; 1650 Arch Street; Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number for information about this
hearing and to sign up to give oral comments is<PHONE_NUMBER>. The EPA
office can also be reached via electronic mail at R3_Spruce_Surface_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>This mailbox is for information on the notice only and is
not the official comment submission forum. If you would like to submit
written comments you may do so at the public hearing or on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov (search for EPA-R03-OW-2009-0985). For those
who have special needs and require auxiliary aids and/or services to
fully participate in the public hearing, please call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The purpose of the public hearing is to obtain public testimony or
comment on EPA's proposed 404(c) action on the Spruce No. 1 Mine
project. The Regional Administrator will designate the official
(Presiding Officer) who will preside at the public hearing. Any person
may appear at the hearing and submit oral and/or written statements or
data and may be represented by counsel or other authorized
representatives.
    In anticipation of a large turnout for the hearing, advanced sign-
up is recommended for all, but especially for those planning to make
oral comments due to time and capacity limitations. The following
information is requested for sign-up: First name, Last name, City,
State, Email address, and Phone number. To sign up, go to http://
www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/spruce1hearing.html and click on the link,
``Registering ahead of time is recommended.'' You may also sign up by
phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. You will receive confirmation that your
registration has been received. Speakers will be on a first-registered
basis, followed by those who sign up for public comment on-site the day
of the public hearing. Audio-visual equipment will not be provided. If
you would like to submit written comments you may do so at the public
hearing or on-line at http://www.regulations.gov (search for EPA-R03-
OW-2009-0985).
    To maximize the number of individuals who are able to speak at the
hearing, oral statements will be limited to two minutes per person. The
Presiding Officer will establish other reasonable limits on the nature
and length of time for oral presentation. There will be no direct
questioning of any hearing participant, although the Presiding Officer
may make appropriate inquiries of any such participant. EPA will not
respond to questions/comments during the hearing. EPA will consider the
comments received at the public hearing and other comments submitted
pursuant to the instructions set forth in the public notice at http://
www.regulations.gov (search for EPA-R03-OW-2009-0985) when it develops
its Final Determination to Prohibit, Restrict, or Deny the
Specification, or the Use for Specification (including Withdrawal of
Specification), of an Area as a Disposal Site; Spruce No. 1 Surface
Mine, Logan County, West Virginia.

    Dated: April 28, 2010.
Shawn M. Garvin,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region III.
[FR Doc. 2010-10415 Filed 5-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 116 (Monday, June 17, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28119-28120]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12656]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86084; File No. SR-NYSE-2019-33]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 7.31 Relating to the Yielding Modifier

June 11, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on June 4, 2019, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' 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 self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31 relating to the Yielding
Modifier. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31(i)(5) relating to the
Yielding Modifier. The Exchange recently amended its Pillar platform
trading rules to provide for the Yielding Modifier.\4\ Separately,
before that proposed rule change was approved, the Exchange filed to
amend Rule 7.31 to make the Minimum Trade Size (``MTS'') Modifier
available for additional non-displayed orders.\5\ The Exchange has
announced that the changes described in both the Yielding Filing and
the MTS Filing will be implemented on the same day, currently scheduled
for June 17, 2019.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85158 (February 15,
2019), 84 FR 5794 (February 22, 2019) (SR-NYSE-2018-52) (Approval
Order) (``Yielding Filing'').
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85071 (February 7,
2019), 84 FR 3843 (February 13, 2019) (SR-NYSE-2019-01) (Notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness) (``MTS Filing''). Prior to this
proposed rule change, the MTS Modifier was available only for Limit
IOC Orders and MPL Orders.
    \6\ See Trader Update dated April 16, 2019, available here:
https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/Revised_Pillar_Migration_Timeline.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the Yielding Filing was filed before the MTS Filing, then-
proposed Rule 7.31(i)(5) did not reflect the change described in the
MTS Filing to extend the availability of the MTS Modifier to additional
non-displayed order types. The Exchange now proposes to update a
reference to the MTS Modifier in Rule 7.31(i)(5)(B)(i) to reflect the
changes described in the MTS Filing.
    Specifically, Rule 7.31(i)(5)(B)(i) describes the circumstances
when an Aggressing Yielding Order with a limit price equal to the limit
price of a same-side resting order could trigger such resting order to
become an Aggressing Order. Two exceptions are if the contra-side
resting order is either an MPL-ALO Order or an MPL Order with an MTS
Modifier.\7\ As described in the Yielding Filing, a contra-side resting
MPL Order with an MTS Modifier may not be eligible to trade at the
price of the Yielding Order, which is why neither the Aggressing
Yielding Order nor the resting order on the same side as the Yielding
Order will trade.\8\ Because the MTS Modifier will be available to
additional non-displayed order types and because any order with an MTS
Modifier would be subject to the same conditions as described in the
Yielding Filing for MPL Orders with an MTS Modifier, the Exchange
proposes to amend Rule 7.31(i)(5)(B)(i) to replace the term ``MPL Order
with an MTS Modifier'' with the term ``order with an MTS Modifier.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Rule 7.31(i)(5)(B) and subparagraph (i) provide that ``An
Aggressing Yielding Order to buy (sell) with a limit price equal to
the limit price of a resting order to buy (sell) will either: (i)
Trigger such resting order to become an Aggressing Order, unless the
order to sell (buy) buy is an MPL ALO or MPL Order with an MTS
Modifier, in which case neither the Yielding Order nor the same-side
resting order will trade . . . .'' (emphasis added).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84806 (December 12,
2018), 83 FR 64913, 64919 (December 18, 2018) (SR-NYSE-2018-52)
(Notice of Filing of Yielding Filing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\9\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\10\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to amend Rule
7.31(i)(5)(B)(i) would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system because it would
update the rule relating to the Yielding Modifier to reflect changes
made to the MTS Modifier as described in the MTS Filing. The rationale
for referencing MPL Orders with an MTS Modifier in Rule
7.31(i)(5)(B)(i), as described in the Yielding Filing, is equally
applicable to any order with an MTS Modifier: Because of the MTS, such
order may not be eligible to trade at the price of the Yielding Order.
Accordingly, to ensure that all orders with an MTS Modifier would be
treated similarly under these circumstances, the Exchange proposes to
amend Rule 7.31(i)(5)(B)(i) to replace the term ``MTS [sic] Order with
an MTS Modifier'' with the term ``order with an MTS Modifier.''

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any competitive issues, but rather, would
update the rule relating to Yielding Orders to reflect changes to the
MTS Modifier as described in the MTS Filing.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \12\ thereunder
because the proposal does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden
on competition; and (iii) by its terms, become operative for 30 days
from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to
give the Commission written notice of the Exchange's 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 of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as
designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \14\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay period. The Exchange states
that the proposed rule change would update the rule relating to the
Yielding Modifier to reflect changes already made to the MTS Modifier
as described in the MTS Filing. The Commission believes that waiver of
the 30-day operative delay period is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and designates the proposed rule
change operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\16\ If the
Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2019-33 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2019-33. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2019-33 and should be submitted on
or before July 8, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-12656 Filed 6-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 24, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32639-32641]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11955]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31073; Amdt. No. 3693]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain
airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption
of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the
National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective May 24, 2016. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of May 24, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to
register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part Sec.  97.20. The
applicable FAA forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A,
and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex
nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the
Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use
the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead
refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of
aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by
reference are realized and publication of the complete description of
each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their
applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport
and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff
Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part
97 of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less
than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary
to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C 553(d),
good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(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); and
(3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 22, 2016.
John S. Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114,
40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

* * * Effective 26 MAY 2016

Aniak, AK, Aniak, ILS/DME RWY 10, Amdt 7E, CANCELED
Aniak, AK, Aniak, ILS OR LOC RWY 11, Orig
Aniak, AK, Aniak, LOC/DME RWY 10, Amdt 3D, CANCELED
Aniak, AK, Aniak, NDB/DME RWY 29, Amdt 4
Aniak, AK, Aniak, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Amdt 1
Aniak, AK, Aniak, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 2
Aniak, AK, Aniak, Takeoff Minimums and ODP, Amdt 3
Los Angeles, CA, Los Angeles Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 24L, Amdt 26C
Los Angeles, CA, Los Angeles Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 24L, Amdt 4
Los Angeles, CA, Los Angeles Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 24L, Amdt 1D
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 8L, Amdt 9B
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 26R, Amdt 4A
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8R, Amdt 1C
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 8L, Amdt 1D
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 26L, Amdt 1B
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 26R, Amdt 1B
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 8L, Orig-D
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 26L, Orig-D
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 26R, Orig-D
Ontario, CA, Ontario Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 9
Pagosa Springs, CO, Stevens Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig
Pagosa Springs, CO, Stevens Field, RNAV (GPS)-A, Amdt 1, CANCELED
Tallahassee, FL, Tallahassee Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2
Tallahassee, FL, Tallahassee Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 2
Pohnpei Island, FM, Pohnpei Intl, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 9, Amdt 1
Pohnpei Island, FM, Pohnpei Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 9, Amdt 1
Metter, GA, Metter Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 1
Metter, GA, Metter Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Amdt 1
Sioux City, IA, Sioux Gateway/Col Bud Day Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 13,
Amdt 2C
Sioux City, IA, Sioux Gateway/Col Bud Day Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 31,
Amdt 25D
Sioux City, IA, Sioux Gateway/Col Bud Day Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13,
Orig-D
Sioux City, IA, Sioux Gateway/Col Bud Day Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17,
Amdt 1
Sioux City, IA, Sioux Gateway/Col Bud Day Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31,
Orig-D
Sioux City, IA, Sioux Gateway/Col Bud Day Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35,
Orig
Sioux City, IA, Sioux Gateway/Col Bud Day Field, Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3A
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, ILS OR LOC RWY 14L, Orig-G
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, ILS OR LOC RWY 14R, Orig-F
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, ILS OR LOC RWY 32R, Orig-H
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 32L, Amdt 2
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, RADAR-1, Orig
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14L, Orig-A
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14R, Orig-E
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32L, Orig-E
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32R, Orig-C
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, TACAN RWY 14R, Amdt 1B
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, TACAN RWY 32L, Amdt 1B
Belleville, IL, Scott AFB/MidAmerica, TACAN-A, Orig
Terre Haute, IN, Sky King, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig
Terre Haute, IN, Sky King, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4
Caro, MI, Tuscola Area, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Amdt 1
Caro, MI, Tuscola Area, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 1
Caro, MI, Tuscola Area, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2
Caro, MI, Tuscola Area, VOR/DME-A, Amdt 6
Forsyth, MT, Tillitt Field, NDB RWY 27, Amdt 5
Forsyth, MT, Tillitt Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 2
Forsyth, MT, Tillitt Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Miles City, MT, Frank Wiley Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 3
Miles City, MT, Frank Wiley Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig
Miles City, MT, Frank Wiley Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 1
Miles City, MT, Frank Wiley Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig
Miles City, MT, Frank Wiley Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 1
Miles City, MT, Frank Wiley Field, VOR RWY 4, Amdt 13
Miles City, MT, Frank Wiley Field, VOR/DME RWY 22, Amdt 9
Minot, ND, Minot Intl, LOC/DME BC RWY 13, Amdt 8A
Newport, NH, Parlin Field, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig
Newport, NH, Parlin Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Caldwell, NJ, Essex County, LOC RWY 22, Amdt 4
Caldwell, NJ, Essex County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 2
Moriarty, NM, Moriarty, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Orig
Moriarty, NM, Moriarty, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Orig
Moriarty, NM, Moriarty, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Elko, NV, Elko Rgnl, GPS RWY 5, Orig, CANCELED
Elko, NV, Elko Rgnl, LDA/DME RWY 24, Amdt 6
Elko, NV, Elko Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig
Elko, NV, Elko Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 1
Elko, NV, Elko Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 6
Elko, NV, Elko Rgnl, VOR-A, Amdt 6
Elko, NV, Elko Rgnl, VOR/DME-B, Amdt 5
Reno, NV, Reno/Tahoe Intl, ILS RWY 16R, Amdt 10F, CANCELED
Reno, NV, Reno/Tahoe Intl, ILS X OR LOC X RWY 16R, Orig
Reno, NV, Reno/Tahoe Intl, ILS Y RWY 16R, Orig
Reno, NV, Reno/Tahoe Intl, ILS Z OR LOC Z RWY 16R, Orig
Reno, NV, Reno/Tahoe Intl, LOC RWY 16R, Amdt 7, CANCELED
Reno, NV, Reno/Tahoe Intl, LOC Y RWY 16R, Orig
White Plains, NY, Westchester County, ILS OR LOC RWY 16, ILS RWY 16
(SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16 (CAT II), Amdt 25A

Dayton, OH, James M Cox Dayton Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 6L, ILS RWY 6L
(CAT II), ILS RWY 6L (CAT III), Amdt 10
Dayton, OH, James M Cox Dayton Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 24L, Amdt 10
Dayton, OH, James M Cox Dayton Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 24R, Amdt 10
Dayton, OH, James M Cox Dayton Intl, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 24R, Amdt 2
Fostoria, OH, Fostoria Metropolitan, NDB RWY 27, Amdt 5A, CANCELED
Norman, OK, University of Oklahoma Westheimer, ILS OR LOC RWY 18,
Amdt 2
Norman, OK, University of Oklahoma Westheimer, LOC RWY 3, Amdt 4
Norman, OK, University of Oklahoma Westheimer, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3,
Amdt 2B
Norman, OK, University of Oklahoma Westheimer, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18,
Amdt 2
Norman, OK, University of Oklahoma Westheimer, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36,
Orig-B
Oklahoma City, OK, Sundance Airpark, LOC RWY 17, Orig-F, CANCELED
Tipton, OK, Tipton Muni, GPS RWY 17, Orig-A, CANCELED
Tipton, OK, Tipton Muni, VOR/DME RWY 17, Orig-B, CANCELED
Tulsa, OK, Richard Lloyd Jones Jr, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19R, Orig
Klamath Falls, OR, Crater Lake-Klamath Rgnl, HI ILS OR LOC RWY 32,
Amdt 6
Klamath Falls, OR, Crater Lake-Klamath Rgnl, HI TACAN RWY 14, Amdt
3A
Klamath Falls, OR, Crater Lake-Klamath Rgnl, HI TACAN RWY 32, Amdt 5
Erie, PA, Erie Intl/Tom Ridge Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 6, Amdt 18
Erie, PA, Erie Intl/Tom Ridge Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 24, Amdt 10
Erie, PA, Erie Intl/Tom Ridge Field, NDB RWY 6, Amdt 2, CANCELED
Erie, PA, Erie Intl/Tom Ridge Field, NDB RWY 24, Amdt 20
Hazleton, PA, Hazleton Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 2
Hazleton, PA, Hazleton Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Amdt 1
Martin, SD, Martin Muni, GPS RWY 32, Orig-C, CANCELED
Martin, SD, Martin Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig
Martin, SD, Martin Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Jack Brooks Rgnl, VOR-A, Amdt 6B, CANCELED
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Jack Brooks Rgnl, VOR-B, Amdt 6B, CANCELED
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Jack Brooks Rgnl, VOR-C, Amdt 5B, CANCELED
Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX, Jack Brooks Rgnl, VOR/DME-D, Amdt 2A,
CANCELED
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 13, Amdt 28
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, LOC RWY 31, Amdt 9
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, RNAV (GPS) X RWY 31, Orig
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 13, Amdt 2
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 31, Amdt 4
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 13, Amdt 1
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 31, Amdt 1
Corpus Christi, TX, Corpus Christi Intl, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 3
Mineola, TX, Mineola Wisener Field, VOR-A, Amdt 6
Terrell, TX, Terrell Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Cheyenne, WY, Cheyenne Rgnl/Jerry Olson Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 27,
Amdt 35
Cheyenne, WY, Cheyenne Rgnl/Jerry Olson Field, NDB RWY 27, Amdt 15A,
CANCELED

    RESCINDED: On March 24, 2016 (81 FR 15630), the FAA published an
Amendment in Docket No. 31067, Amdt No. 3687, to Part 97 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations, under section 97.20 and 97.33. The
following entries for Morris, IL effective May 26, 2016, are hereby
rescinded in their entirety:

Morris, IL, Morris Muni--James R Washburn Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18,
Amdt 1
Morris, IL, Morris Muni--James R Washburn Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36,
Amdt 2
Morris, IL, Morris Muni--James R Washburn Field, Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1

[FR Doc. 2016-11955 Filed 5-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 15, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71152-71155]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27134]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0691; FRL-9273-01-OCSPP]

MCPA; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation modifies existing tolerances for residues of
MCPA in or on clover, forage and clover, hay. The Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 15, 2021. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 14, 2022
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0691, is available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Due to the public health emergency, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC)
and Reading Room is closed to visitors with limited exceptions. The
staff continues to provide customer service via email, phone, and
webform. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services, docket
access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, Acting Director,
Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Office of the
Federal Register's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0691 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 14, 2022. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0691, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting

comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to
be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of June 28, 2021 (86 FR 33922) (FRL-10025-
08) EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
0E8864) by IR-4, North Carolina State University, 1730 Varsity Drive,
Venture IV, Suite 210, Raleigh, NC 27606. The petition requested that
40 CFR 180.339 be amended by revising tolerances for residues of the
herbicide MCPA ((4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acid), both free and
conjugated, resulting from the direct application of MCPA or its
sodium, dimethylamine salts or its 2-ethylhexyl ester in or on the raw
agricultural commodities clover, forage at 0.1 parts per million (ppm),
and clover, hay at 0.1 ppm. The petitioned-for tolerances are lower
than the existing tolerances for these commodities due to the results
from clover residue data that were generated by IR-4 which indicated
that lower tolerances were appropriate for clover, forage and clover,
hay. Previously, no clover-specific data had been generated. That
document referenced a summary of the petition, which is available in
the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments
received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing the tolerances at different levels than petitioned for.
Additionally, the tolerance expression is being modified to be
consistent with Agency policy. A discussion of these modifications can
be found in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified therein, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and
other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for MCPA including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures
and risks associated with MCPA follows.
    In an effort to streamline its publications in the Federal
Register, EPA is not reprinting sections that repeat what has been
previously published for tolerance rulemaking of the same pesticide
chemical. Where scientific information concerning a particular chemical
remains unchanged, the content of those sections would not vary between
tolerance rulemaking, and EPA considers referral back to those sections
as sufficient to provide an explanation of the information EPA
considered in making its safety determination for the new rulemaking.
    EPA has previously published a tolerance rulemaking for MCPA in
which EPA concluded, based on the available information, that there is
a reasonable certainty that no harm would result from aggregate
exposure to MCPA and established tolerances for residues of that
chemical. EPA is incorporating previously published sections from that
rulemaking as described further in this rulemaking, as they remain
unchanged.
    Toxicological profile. For a discussion of the Toxicological
Profile of MCPA, see Unit III.A. of the MCPA tolerance rulemaking
published in the Federal Register of April 13, 2021 (86 FR 19145) (FRL-
10020-79).
    Toxicological points of departure/Levels of concern. For a summary
of the Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern for MCPA
used for human risk assessment, please reference Unit III.B. of the
April 13, 2021 rulemaking.
    Exposure assessment. The new use on clover does not impact the
dietary assessment, because the clover use does not result in a
significant increase in dietary exposure. For a description of the
approach to and assumptions for the exposure assessment, including with
respect to estimated drinking water concentrations, non-occupational
exposure, and cumulative exposure, please reference Unit III.C. of the
April 13, 2021 rulemaking.
    Safety factor for infants and children. EPA continues to conclude
that there are reliable data to support the reduction of the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) safety factor from 10X to 1X, except for
acute dietary (general population, including infants and children) and
inhalation scenarios where a 10X safety factor is retained as a lowest-
observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) to no-observed-adverse-effect-
level (NOAEL) extrapolation factor. See Unit III.D. of the April 13,
2021 rulemaking for a discussion of the Agency's rationale for that
determination.
    Aggregate risks and determination of safety. EPA determines whether
acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing
aggregate exposure estimates to the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD). Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the
appropriate points of departure to ensure that an adequate margin of
exposure (MOE) exists. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the
lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate
exposure.
    Acute dietary risks are below the Agency's level of concern of 100%
of the aPAD; they are 29% of the aPAD for all infants less than 1 year
old, the group with the highest exposure. Chronic dietary risks are
below the Agency's level of concern of 100% of the cPAD; they are 28%
of the cPAD for all infants less than 1 year old, the group with the
highest exposure. EPA has concluded the combined short-term food,
water, and residential exposures result in aggregate margins of
exposure at or above the level of concern of 100 for all scenarios
assessed and are not of concern. An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however, MCPA is not registered for any use patterns
that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure. EPA relies
on the

chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk
for MCPA, which is below the Agency's level of concern. MCPA is
classified as ``Not Likely to Be Carcinogenic to Humans''; therefore,
EPA does not expect MCPA exposures to pose an aggregate cancer risk.
    Therefore, based on the risk assessments and information described
above, EPA concludes there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to the general population, or to infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to MCPA residues. More detailed information on this
action can be found in the document titled ``MCPA. Human Health Risk
Assessment in Support of a Section 3 Registration for Use of MCPA on
Clover'' in docket ID EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0691.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    For a discussion of the available analytical enforcement method,
see Unit IV.A. of the April 13, 2021 rulemaking.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4).
    Currently, there are no Codex MRLs for residues of MCPA in or on
clover. Therefore, harmonization is not an issue.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    All residues at or below the limit of quantitation (LOQ) equate to
a recommended LOQ tolerance level of 0.05 ppm for both clover, forage
and clover, hay, as opposed to the tolerances that were proposed (0.1
ppm for both clover, forage and clover, hay). The tolerances include
residues of parent (MCPA) and metabolite 2-HMCPA [(4-chloro-2-
hydroxymethylphenoxy)acetic acid]. However, MCPA is the only residue of
concern for tolerance enforcement purposes. In addition, EPA is
modifying the tolerance expression to use the Chemical Abstracts
Service (CAS) name for consistency with other tolerance expressions.
    Finally, EPA has revised the tolerance expression to clarify (1)
that, as provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance covers
metabolites and degradates of MCPA not specifically mentioned; and (2)
that compliance with the specified tolerance levels is to be determined
by measuring only the specific compound mentioned in the tolerance
expression.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are modified for residues of MCPA in or on
Clover, forage from 0.5 ppm to 0.05 ppm, and Clover, hay from 2.0 ppm
to 0.05 ppm and the tolerance expression is updated.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action modifies tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), or to Executive Order 13045,
entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it
require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the
basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances
in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    Pursuant to the CRA (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General
of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides, and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 9, 2021.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter 1 as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. Revise Sec.  180.339, to read as follows:

Sec.  180.339  MCPA; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
herbicide MCPA, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in table 1 to this paragraph (a). Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified in Table 1 to this paragraph (a) is to be

determined by measuring only MCPA, 2-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic
acid, in or on the commodity.

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa, forage.............................................         0.5
Alfalfa, hay................................................         2.0
Barley, grain...............................................         1.0
Barley, hay.................................................          40
Barley, straw...............................................          25
Cattle, fat.................................................         0.1
Cattle, meat................................................         0.1
Cattle, meat byproducts.....................................         0.1
Clover, forage..............................................        0.05
Clover, hay.................................................        0.05
Flax, seed..................................................         0.1
Goat, fat...................................................         0.1
Goat, meat..................................................         0.1
Goat, meat byproducts.......................................         0.1
Grain, aspirated fractions..................................         3.0
Grass, forage...............................................         300
Grass, hay..................................................          20
Hog, fat....................................................         0.1
Hog, meat...................................................         0.1
Hog, meat byproducts........................................         0.1
Horse, fat..................................................         0.1
Horse, meat.................................................         0.1
Horse, meat byproducts......................................         0.1
Lespedeza, forage...........................................         0.5
Lespedeza, hay..............................................         2.0
Milk........................................................         0.1
Oat, forage.................................................          20
Oat, grain..................................................         1.0
Oat, hay....................................................         115
Oat, straw..................................................          25
Pea, dry....................................................         0.1
Pea, field, hay.............................................         0.1
Pea, field, vines...........................................         0.1
Pea, succulent..............................................         0.1
Rye, forage.................................................          20
Rye, grain..................................................         1.0
Rye, straw..................................................          25
Sheep meat..................................................         0.1
Sheep meat byproducts.......................................         0.1
Sheep, fat..................................................         0.1
Tea, dried..................................................         0.3
Trefoil, forage.............................................         0.5
Trefoil, hay................................................         2.0
Vetch, forage...............................................         0.5
Vetch, hay..................................................         2.0
Wheat, forage...............................................          20
Wheat, grain................................................         1.0
Wheat, hay..................................................         115
Wheat, straw................................................          25
Wheatgrass, intermediate, forage............................          50
Wheatgrass, intermediate, grain.............................         0.2
Wheatgrass, intermediate, hay...............................          50
Wheatgrass, intermediate, straw.............................          50
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b)-(d) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2021-27134 Filed 12-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 39011]
[FR Doc No: 2010-16394]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL10-72-000]

Puget Sound Energy, Inc.; Notice of Petition for Declaratory
Order

June 29, 2010.
    Take notice that on June 11, 2010, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of
the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission), 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2010), Puget Sound
Energy, Inc. filed a Petition for Declaratory Order requesting that the
Commission confirm its firm priority rights to use the capacity on
generator lead lines that will connect the Lower Snake River Project to
the integrated transmission system of the Bonneville Power
Administration.
    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 July 12, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-16394 Filed 7-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P