[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 141 (Friday, July 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43217-43219]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18037]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62524; File No. SR-BATS-2010-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto,
To Amend BATS Rules 2.5 and 17.2 To Establish a Registration
Requirement for Principals

July 16, 2010.

I. Introduction

    On April 9, 2010, BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
amend its registration requirements in Rules 2.5 and 17.2. The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on April
29, 2010.\3\ The Commission received one comment letter on the
proposal.\4\ The Exchange responded on June 29, 2010.\5\ On June 30,
2010, the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.\6\ This order approves the proposed rule change as modified by
Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61960 (April 22,
2010), 75 FR 22668.
    \4\ See letter from Joan C. Conley, Senior Vice President and
Corporate Secretary, Nasdaq OMX, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated May 20, 2010 (``Nasdaq Comment Letter'').
    \5\ See letter from Eric J. Swanson, Senior Vice President and
General Counsel, BATS Exchange, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 29, 2010 (``BATS Response
Letter'').
    \6\ Amendment No. 1 is a technical amendment and thus not
subject to notice and comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    BATS proposes to amend BATS Rule 2.5, entitled ``Restrictions,'' to
require each Exchange member to register with the Exchange: (i) At
least two principals to supervise Authorized Traders of the member
(subject to certain exceptions), one of whom must be the member's chief
compliance officer, and (ii) at least one financial and operations
principal.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange also proposes a technical amendment to BATS
Rule 17.2(g)(4) to eliminate language that will become unnecessary
due to the changes to BATS Rule 2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BATS Rule 2.5

    BATS Rule 2.5 states that the General Securities Representative
exam (``Series 7'') is required for registration with the Exchange as
an Authorized Trader. The term ``Authorized Trader'' is defined as ``a
person who may submit orders (or who supervises a routing engine that
may automatically submit orders) to the Exchange's trading facilities
on behalf of his or her member or sponsored participant.'' Accordingly,
all traders that participate in the routing of orders to the Exchange,
including proprietary traders, are required to be registered with the
Exchange and Series 7 qualified. The term Authorized Trader includes a
trader that submits orders, or supervises a routing engine that
automatically submits orders, to the Exchange's equities platform,
options platform, or both.
    With this rule change, BATS proposes to require each member to
register with the Exchange at least two principals qualified as General
Securities Principals \8\ (``Series 24'') (subject to certain
exceptions) to supervise the member's Authorized Traders and one
principal qualified as a Limited Principal--Financial and Operations
(``Series 27'') to supervise the financial and operational activities
of the member (``FINOP''). In addition, the proposal would require each
chief compliance officer designated on Schedule A of

Form BD to register with the Exchange as a Series 24 qualified
principal.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In order to register as a principal, one must first be
registered as a representative.
    \9\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange amended this portion of its
rule to more closely mirror the rules of other SROs that require the
chief compliance officers of their members to be registered. See,
e.g., NASDAQ Rule 1022(a); NASDAQ BX Rule 1022(a); FINRA Rule
1022(a); NYSE Arca Equities Rule 6.18(d). The amendment also deleted
a definition of ``customer'' for purposes of proposed paragraph (g)
that would have permitted a firm to have broker-dealer customers and
still qualify as a ``proprietary trading firm'' for the purpose of
the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BATS proposes certain exceptions to the requirements that a member
register two Series 24 qualified principals and one Series 27 qualified
principal. First, the Exchange proposes that any member with 25 or
fewer Authorized Traders that meets the definition of a ``proprietary
trading firm,'' have at least one Series 24 registered principal.
Second, under the proposed rule, the Exchange may waive the requirement
to register two Series 24 qualified principals if the member can
conclusively indicate that a waiver is warranted under the
circumstances. With respect to the FINOP requirement, the Exchange may
waive the requirement to register a Series 27 qualified FINOP if such
registration is not required by the member's designated examining
authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ BATS indicated that it did not want to independently
require a member to have a FINOP. All members of BATS must be
members of another SRO. See BATS Rule 2.5(4). The Commission
understands that the vast majority of BATS members are also members
of FINRA. All members of FINRA that are subject to Rule 15c3-1 under
the Act must have a FINOP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BATS Rule 17.2

    Any member that conducts business on the Exchange as an Options
Member is required by BATS Rules 17.1(b) and 17.2(g) to register an
Options Principal with the Exchange who is responsible for that
Member's options related activities on the Exchange. The Options
Principal must qualify by passing the Registered Options Principal exam
(``Series 4''). Accordingly, the proposed rule makes clear that
paragraph (d) does not apply to a member that solely conducts business
on the Exchange as an Options Member, and thus, that such a member is
not also required to register Series 24 qualified principals with the
Exchange.
    In addition to adopting the principal registration requirements
described above, the Exchange proposes modifications to Interpretation
and Policy .02, which currently requires Authorized Traders to complete
continuing education requirements similar to those required by other
national securities exchanges. Due to the addition of the principal
registration requirements described above and the recent addition of an
options principal requirement, the Exchange proposes to clarify that
all Authorized Traders, principals, financial/operations principals and
options principals are subject to continuing education requirements in
order to maintain registration with the Exchange.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Exchange thus proposes to delete language from BATS
Rule 17.2(g)(4) that states that an options principal is subject to
continuing education requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deadline for Compliance

    The Exchange has proposed a compliance date of September 30, 2010.

III. Comment Letter and BATS's Response

    The Commission received one comment letter on the proposed rule
change.\12\ The commenter believed that BATS's requirement to register
Authorized Traders is narrower than FINRA Rule 1031 which addresses
registration of representatives. The commenter expressed concern that
BATS's registration requirements for Authorized Traders excepted other
associated persons that FINRA requires to be registered, and that only
those persons supervising Authorized Traders would be required to
register as a principal. The commenter also questioned BATS's
requirement to register at least one FINOP, citing FINRA Rule 1022(b)
which requires any person with a FINOP's responsibilities to register,
including the chief financial officer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the BATS Response Letter,\13\ BATS explained that its
registration rules, in particular, were tailored to ensure the
qualification and competence of individuals responsible for sending
orders to BATS and their supervisors. However, BATS stated that its
rules, overall, apply to its members and their associated persons, not
just Authorized Traders and those supervising them. In addition, BATS
explained that, under its proposed rule, a FINOP is responsible for
ensuring that a member firm complies with applicable financial and
operational requirements, including those relating to the submission of
financial reports and the maintenance of books and records. BATS stated
that it is not requiring the chief financial officer to assume this
responsibility as this person may not be the best person suited to be a
FINOP, and is instead allowing the member firm to decide who needs to
be registered as a FINOP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes it is reasonable for BATS to limit the
application of its registration, examination, and continuing education
requirements to those associated persons who conduct a securities
business through BATS or who supervise such activity. BATS has
represented that the scope of these requirements encompasses all
associated persons entering orders at BATS, which the Commission
believes provides appropriate breadth of coverage.

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\14\
Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ which requires, among other things,
that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to, and perfect
the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The
Commission believes that the proposed rule change is also consistent
with Section 6(c)(3)(B) of the Act,\16\ which authorizes exchanges to
prescribe standards of training, experience and competence for persons
associated with exchange members, and gives exchanges the authority to
bar a natural person from becoming a member or a person associated with
a member, if the person does not meet the standards of training,
experience and competence prescribed in the rules of the exchange. The
Commission believes that the changes proposed by BATS to its rules will
enhance the ability of member firms to comply with the Exchange's rules
as well as with the Federal Securities laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(c)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, broker-dealers are required to supervise the
activities of their associated persons.\17\ The associated persons of
broker-dealers must register with the exchanges. Broker-dealers and
exchanges have responsibilities under the Act with respect to
statutorily disqualified

persons who seek to associate with a member firm.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Section 15(b)(4)(E) of the Act.
    \18\ See Section 6(c)(2) of the Act and Rule 19h-1 under the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to meet its obligations under Section 6 of the Act \19\ to
enforce compliance by member firms and their associated persons with
the Act, the rules thereunder, and the exchange's own rules, an
exchange must have baseline registration and examination or
qualification requirements for all persons conducting business on an
exchange, as well as for those supervising such activity. In addition,
most SROs have continuing education requirements for registered persons
which help ensure that associated persons are up to date on changes to
rules and regulations that govern their activities. Furthermore, an
exchange must know if an associated person of a member firm is subject
to a statutory disqualification.\20\ This information is elicited by
the Uniform Application for Securities Industry Registration or
Transfer (``Form U4''), which is used by most exchanges and FINRA to
register associated persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Section 6 requires exchanges to have the ability to enforce
compliance by their members and associated persons with the federal
securities laws and with their own rules. 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \20\ In addition, the Commission believes that it is important
to ensure that information, such as whether an associated person is
subject to a statutory disqualification, is available to exchanges
and other regulators, including the Commission and the state
securities regulators, through FINRA's Central Registration
Depository System (``WebCRD'') as well as members of the public
through BrokerCheck, which derives information from WebCRD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the requirement that firms have a
minimum of two principals responsible for oversight of Authorized
Traders and activity on BATS who must be registered and pass the Series
24 exam should help BATS strengthen the regulation of its member firms.
Requiring a minimum of two persons, both of whom meet specified
proficiency standards, should help ensure that member firms have
adequate supervision, and that those overseeing member firms are
prepared for the responsibility. The nature of the firm, however, may
dictate that more than two principals are needed to provide appropriate
supervision. In addition, the Commission believes that requiring chief
compliance officers and any employee operating in the capacity of a
FINOP to register with the Exchange as principals and take either the
Series 24 or Series 27, respectively, is appropriate based on the
heightened level of accountability inherent in the duty of overseeing
compliance by an Exchange member, and in the oversight and preparation
of financial reports and the oversight of those employed in the
financial and operational capacities at each firm.
    The Commission believes BATS's proposed exceptions from the above
requirements are appropriate. The Commission notes that a member
seeking a waiver from BATS's FINOP requirement must prove that it has
satisfied the financial and operational requirements of its designated
examining authority applicable to registration.\21\ Additionally, any
member seeking an exception from BATS's requirement that each firm have
two principals must provide evidence that conclusively indicates to the
Exchange that only one principal is necessary. The Commission expects
this authority to be used sparingly as principals are charged with
oversight of the operations of member firms, and provide the first line
of defense in ensuring that member firms are complying with the rules
of the exchange as well as the federal securities laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See footnote 10 infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change
is consistent with the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \22\ of the Act
in that it seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and dealers
and among exchange markets. The Commission believes that the proposed
rule will promote uniformity of regulation across markets, thus
reducing opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. BATS' proposed rule
change helps ensure that all persons conducting a securities business
through BATS are appropriately supervised, as the Commission expects of
all SROs. In addition, the exceptions to the general rules in BATS's
proposed rule change are substantively the same as exceptions provided
to similar rules at other SROs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission believes that the compliance date proposed
by the Exchange of September 30, 2010 will provide the Exchange's
members adequate time to pass any qualification examinations necessary
to become compliant with the proposed rules.

VI. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\23\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BATS-2010-008), as modified
by Amendment No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-18037 Filed 7-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 13 (Thursday, January 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3624-3625]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-2657-000]

Milford Wind Corridor Phase II, LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

January 12, 2011.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
Milford Wind Corridor Phase II, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket

authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities
and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is February 1, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also 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>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-1104 Filed 1-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 213 (Friday, November 4, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66623-66625]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23808]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1407; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-01043-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. This proposed AD
was prompted by reports of potential foreign object debris (FOD)
contamination of the thermal relief valve (TRV). This proposed AD would
require replacement of affected auxiliary power unit (APU) low pressure
(LP) shut-off valves (SOVs), an inspection to detect fuel leaks of
affected engine LP SOVs and APU isolation shut-off valves (ISOVs), and
applicable corrective actions, and would prohibit installation of
affected parts, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation by reference (IBR). The
FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by December
19, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-1407; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR)
in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne,
Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; website
easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
ad.easa.europa.eu.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hassan Ibrahim, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-1407; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-01043-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Hassan Ibrahim, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA,
International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any
commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated
as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2022-0157, dated August 4, 2022
(EASA AD 2022-0157) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes.
The MCAI states that reports have been received from the manufacturer
of the APU, the engine LP SOV, and the APU ISOV of potential FOD
contamination of the TRV, which was generated by a quality escape
during the manufacturing assembly process. Results of the technical
investigation determined that FOD in the TRV may lead to a fuel leakage
through the valve. This condition, if not detected and corrected,
could, in case of an APU or engine fire, contribute to an uncontrolled
fire, possibly resulting in loss of control of the airplane.
    The MCAI requires replacement of affected APU LP SOVs, a special
detailed inspection (SDI) of affected engine LP SOVs and APU ISOVs to
detect fuel leaks through the valve and, depending on findings,
replacement with a serviceable engine LP SOV or APU ISOV.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-1407.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2022-0157 specifies procedures for replacement of affected
APU LP SOVs with serviceable parts, a special detailed inspection of
affected engine LP SOVs and APU ISOVs for discrepancies (leaks), and
replacement of discrepant engine LP SOVs and APU ISOVs with serviceable
parts. EASA AD 2022-0157 also prohibits installation of an affected APU
LP SOV, engine LP SOV, or APU ISOV. This material 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.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
described above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2022-0157 described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2022-0157 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2022-0157 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same, as the heading
of a particular section in EASA AD 2022-0157 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2022-
0157. Service information required by EASA AD 2022-0157 for compliance
will be available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-1407
after the FAA final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 69 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 15 work-hours x $85 per hour = $585....................              $0             $585          $40,365
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                                     Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Labor cost                                       Parts cost                        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 7 work-hours x $85 per hour = $595.......  Up to $18,000..................................         $18,595
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would 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.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator,

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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:

Airbus SAS Airplanes: Docket No. FAA-2022-1407; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-01043-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by December 19, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of potential foreign object
debris (FOD) contamination of the thermal relief valve (TRV). The
FAA is issuing this AD to address potential FOD contamination, which
could lead to a fuel leak. The unsafe condition, if not addressed,
could result in an auxiliary power unit (APU) or engine fire and
contribute to an uncontrolled fire, possibly resulting in loss of
control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: Comply
with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2022-0157, dated August 4, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-0157).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022-0157

    (1) Where EASA AD 2022-0157 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2022-0157 specifies ``any
discrepancy'' this AD defines discrepancy as leaks of the APU, the
engine low pressure (LP) shut-off valve (SOV), and the APU isolation
shut-off valve (ISOV).
    (3) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2022-0157 does not apply
to this AD.
    (4) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2022-
0157 specifies to scrap certain parts, send those parts to the
manufacturer, or check spares, this AD does not include that
requirement.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2022-0157
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

 (j) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation 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 responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified
in paragraph (k) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests that are not identified 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 procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC
require approval of an AMOC.

(k) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Hassan Ibrahim,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(l) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2022-0157,
dated August 4, 2022.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2022-0157, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA
AD on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, 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, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on October 27, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-23808 Filed 11-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: May 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 101)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 29273-29276]
[DOCID:fr25my07-11]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0130-200714(a); FRL-8317-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: State of
Florida; Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements for Power
Plants Subject to the Florida Power Plant Siting Act

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On February 3, 2006, the State of Florida, through a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal addressing New Source Review (NSR)
Reform requirements, requested that EPA grant it full approval to
implement the State's Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program for electric power plants
subject to the Florida Electrical Power Plant Siting Act. EPA is
proposing to approve this specific request under section 110 of the
Act. EPA intends to take action on all other portions of Florida's
February 3, 2006, NSR Reform SIP submittal in a future rulemaking.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective July 24, 2007 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 25, 2007.
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2006-0130, by one of the following methods:

    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0130'', Air Permits Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Kelly Fortin, Air Permits Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during
the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``EPA-R04-OAR-
2006-0130''. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI

or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov website is an

``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kelly Fortin, Air Permits Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Ms. Fortin can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Part C of the CAA establishes the PSD program, the preconstruction
review program that applies to areas of the country that have attained
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). CAA sections 160-
169, 42 U.S.C. 7470-7479. In such areas, a major stationary source may
not begin construction or undertake certain modifications without first
obtaining a PSD permit. In broad overview, the program (1) limits the
impact of new or modified major stationary sources on ambient air
quality and (2) requires the application of state-of-the-art pollution
control technology, known as best available control technology. CAA
section 165, 42 U.S.C. 7475.
    EPA has promulgated two largely identical sets of regulations to
implement the PSD program. One set, at 40 CFR 52.21, contains EPA's own
federal PSD program under which EPA is the permitting authority in
states operating without an EPA-approved state program. The other set
of regulations contain minimum requirements that state PSD programs
must meet to be approved by EPA as part of a SIP. 40 CFR 51.166. Over
time, most states have received EPA approval for their PSD programs.
    In order to comply with the established minimum requirements of the
CAA, the State of Florida adopted its own PSD regulations on June 10
and October 28, 1981. The Florida PSD program was initially approved by
EPA into the Florida SIP on December 22, 1983. 48 FR 52713. The
approval transferred to the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP) the legal authority to process and issue PSD permits
to sources in Florida that are required to obtain PSD permits.
    One category of sources not covered by EPA's 1983 approval of
Florida's PSD program was electric power plants. This was because, at
the time, a separate Florida law known as the Florida Electrical Power
Plant Siting Act (PPSA) required permits for electric power plants to
be issued solely by the PPSA's Site Certification Board, rather than by
FDEP. Such a conflict between the PPSA and Florida's PSD program
created impediments to implementation and enforcement of the State's
PSD program by FDEP for such power plants and precluded EPA's SIP-
approval of Florida's PSD program as to these sources. As a result, for
electric power plants subject to the PPSA, FDEP has been operating
under either a partial or full delegation of authority to implement the
federal PSD program since 1983, while various attempts to amend the
PPSA to correct the conflict were made. Currently, FDEP is operating
under a full delegation of authority to implement the federal PSD
program for electric power plants, following further amendments to the
PPSA in 1993.
    In light of the 1993 amendments to the PPSA, the State has
requested, through its February 3, 2006, NSR Reform SIP submittal, that
EPA grant Florida SIP-approval to implement the State's PSD program for
electric power plants subject to the PPSA. EPA is approving this
specific request under section 110 of the Act because there is no
longer a conflict between the State's PSD regulations and the PPSA and
because FDEP now has adequate and effective procedures for full
implementation of the State's PSD program for sources in Florida,
including electric power plants.

II. Analysis of State's Request

    The statutory amendments to the PPSA made by the Florida
legislature in 1993 form the basis of the State's request for SIP-
approval of its PSD program for sources subject to the PPSA.

Those amendments, which took effect on April 22, 1993, expressly
provide that the ``[D]epartment's action on a federally required new
source review or prevention of significant deterioration permit shall
differ from the actions taken by the siting board regarding the
certification if the federally approved state implementation plan
requires such a different action to be taken by the department. Nothing
in this part [the PPSA] shall be construed to displace the department's
authority as the final permitting entity under the federally approved
permit program.'' The amendments make clear that FDEP is the final
permitting authority for PSD and new source review permits and can act
in a manner different from the PPSA Siting Board if Florida's PSD or
new source review regulations require such a different action.
    In addition, subsequent to the State's February 3, 2006, NSR Reform
SIP submittal, the PPSA was again amended (on June 19, 2006), to among
other things, wholly extricate the PSD permitting process from the PPSA
process. See, Florida Public Health Code 403.0872. Specifically,
language requiring that a PPSA application for certification include
``documents necessary for the department to render a decision on any
permit required pursuant to any federally delegated or approved permit
program'' was deleted from the PPSA; language requiring that FDEP's
action on a PSD permit be based on the recommended order of the PPSA
certification hearing was removed; and requirements that administrative
procedures used in the issuance of PSD and operating permits follow the
administrative procedures of the PPSA were also removed.
    EPA has reviewed the 1993 and June 19, 2006 amendments to the PPSA
and concludes that they provide FDEP the authority to fully implement
and enforce Florida's PSD program for electric power plants located
within the State.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the aforementioned change to the Florida SIP. This
approval means that Florida's SIP-approved PSD program includes
coverage of electric power plants in the State. EPA is not, in this
rulemaking, taking any other action on Florida's February 3, 2006 NSR
Reform SIP submittal. EPA intends to take action on the remaining
portions of Florida's February 3, 2006, NSR Reform SIP submittal in a
future rulemaking. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal
because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and
anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision
should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective July 24,
2007 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments
by June 25, 2007.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on July 24, 2007 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. 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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 24, 2007. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: May 16, 2007.
Russell L. Wright, Jr.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart K--Florida

0
2. Section 52.530 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read
as follows:

Sec.  52.530  Significant deterioration of air quality.

    (a) EPA approves the Florida Prevention of Significant
Deterioration program, as incorporated into this chapter, for power
plants subject to the Florida Power Plant Siting Act.
    (b) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-10061 Filed 5-24-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 128 (Monday, July 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38505-38506]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16494]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2015-38 ]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR). The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's
awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of the FAA's regulatory
activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or
omission of information in the summary is intended to affect the legal
status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATE:  Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before July 16, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by docket number FAA-2014-
1042 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments digitally.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.

     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published
on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deana Stedman, ANM-113, Federal
Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Sandra K. Long,
ARM-200, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2015.
Brenda D. Courtney,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2014-1042
    Petitioner: The Boeing Company
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 25.981(a)(3)
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner seeks an exemption
from the requirements of Amendment 25-125, in accordance with FAA
Policy PS-ANM-25.981-02 dated June 24, 2014, with respect to fuel tank
ignition prevention for 737-7, 737-8, and 737-9 airplanes.
[FR Doc. 2015-16494 Filed 7-2-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P