Three tables showing exhibit numbers with corresponding submitters for
the hexavalent chromium docket (OSHA-H054A-2006-0064).

Table 1) in alphabetical order by organization

Table 2) in chronological number order

Table 3) in alphabetical order by submitter


C:\ dmautop\ temp\ dwcgi 7150 1077817275 710138000. wpd MEMORANDUM July 7, 2003 To: Docket File From: Rebecca L. Nicholson Subject: Telephone Conference between Rebecca L. Nicholson ( RTI), Phil Ferguson ( International Paper) and David Word ( NCASI) on AF& PA Comments on Proposed Plywood and Composite Wood Products MACT Mr. Ferguson asked Ms. Nicholson whether EPA was considering incorporating the AF& PA comments concerning the use of zeros for non detect measurements of hazardous air pollutants ( HAP). ( The proposed rule would require sources to treat all non detect measurements as being equal to one half the detection limit.) Ms. Nicholson replied that EPA was considering all of the comments. She restated EPA's historical concerns regarding the use of zeros for nondetect measurements, namely that testing contractors may set the detection limits during testing at inappropriately high levels ( resulting in non detect measurements at sources with detectable emissions) and that emission reduction efficiency measurements across control devices would be artificially elevated ( e. g., if outlet emissions considered " zero" then calculated control efficiency would be 100 percent). Mr. Ferguson and Dr. Word responded that, from their perspective, the request by AF& PA to use zero for non detect measurements was intended for uncontrolled sources only ( i. e., uncontrolled sources that would be complying with production based compliance options or uncontrolled sources that would be part of an emissions averaging plan). Therefore, they argued that the issue regarding calculation of elevated control efficiencies would not apply in this case. Regarding the potential for test contractors to set unacceptably high detection limits, Dr. Word suggested that EPA could only allow sources to claim non detect data as " zero" if the detection limit during the testing was set at some maximum value ( e. g., 1 ppm). He noted that, for the pollutants of interest, the detection limits achievable with FTIR are around 1 ppm, and the detection limits achievable with the NCASI method are between 0.33 and 0.5 ppm. He further noted that EPA Method 0011 can achieve even lower detection limits; however, this method is only valid for measuring formaldehyde. Dr. Word also pointed out that the AF& PA comments included an alternative to the " non detect equals zero" recommendation whereby the non detect value would be treated as one half the detection limit ( as proposed), but then a 90 percent reduction would be applied to that value, in keeping with how the productionbased compliance options were developed. Ms. Nicholson stated that EPA would consider all of the options recommended by AF& PA in their comments, including the revised option for treating non detect as zero discussed during the teleconference ( i. e., adding a cap on the detection limit). She noted that, to assist EPA with their decision on this issue, RTI would perform calculations using actual emissions data to show/ compare the effect of each method on the calculated emissions rate.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 179 (Monday, September 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 63980]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20126]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2018-0005]

Whistleblower Stakeholder Meeting: Outreach and Training

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is
announcing a public meeting to solicit comments and suggestions from
stakeholders on its outreach and training efforts in support of the
whistleblower laws it enforces.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on October 24, 2023, from 1:00
p.m. to 4:00 p.m., ET via Zoom. Persons interested in attending the
meeting must register by October 17, 2023. In addition, comments
relating to the ``Scope of Meeting'' section of this document must be
submitted by November 7, 2023.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit materials, including attachments,
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking portal. Follow the on-line instructions for submissions.
All comments should be identified with Docket No. OSHA-2018-0005.
    Registration to Attend and/or to Participate in the Meeting: If you
wish to attend the public meeting, make an oral presentation at the
meeting, or participate in the meeting, you must register using this
link: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/whistleblower-stakeholder-meeting-tickets-706733548067 or this link for registration in Spanish https://www.eventbrite.com/e/entradas-reunion-para-partes-interesadas-sobre-los-denunciantes-que-son-trabajadores-706736506917 by close of business
on October 17, 2023. Each participant will be allowed to speak for up
to 5 minutes. There is no fee to register for the public meeting. After
reviewing the requests to present, OSHA will contact each participant
prior to the meeting to inform them of the speaking order. We will
provide Spanish-language translation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For press inquiries: Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of
Communications, U.S. Department of Labor; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].
    For general information: Ms. Meghan Smith, Program Analyst, OSHA
Directorate of Whistleblower Protection Programs, U.S. Department of
Labor; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Scope of Meeting

    OSHA is interested in obtaining information from the public on key
issues facing the agency's whistleblower program. This meeting is part
of an ongoing series of meetings requesting public input on this
program. The agency is seeking suggestions on how it can improve its
outreach and training efforts in the Whistleblower Protection Program.
Please note that the agency does not have the authority to change the
statutory language and requirements of the laws it enforces. In
particular, the agency invites input on the following:
    1. How can OSHA deliver better whistleblower customer service?
    2. What kind of assistance can OSHA provide to help explain the
agency's whistleblower laws to employees and employers?

B. Request for Comments

    Regardless of attendance at the public meeting, interested persons
may submit written or electronic comments (see ADDRESSES above).
Electronic comments include recorded oral comments. Comments may be
submitted in any language. To permit time for interested persons to
submit data, information, or views on the issues in the ``Scope of
Meeting'' section of this notice, please submit comments by November 7,
2023 and include Docket No. OSHA-2018-0005. If you have questions
regarding how to submit comments, please contact [email protected] or
202-693-2199.

C. Access to the Public Record

    Electronic copies of this Federal Register notice are available at:
http://www.regulations.gov. This notice, as well as news releases and
other relevant information, is also available on the Directorate of
Whistleblower Protection Programs' web page at: http://www.whistleblowers.gov.

Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Occupational
Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this notice under the
authority granted by section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 660(c)); Secretary's Order 08-2020 (May
15, 2020).

James. S. Frederick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2023-20126 Filed 9-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33124-33125]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15248]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0580]
RIN 100-AA08

Special Local Regulations; Annual Les Cheneaux Islands Antique
Wooden Boat Show; Hessel, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is adding a special local regulation to
increase safety in the navigable waters of Marquette Bay, Hessel, MI
during the annual Les Cheneaux Islands Antique Wooden Boat Show held
annually in mid-August. The regulation will add a no wake zone to be
enforced in the area around the show from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

DATES: This regulation is effective August 11th, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket go to http://www.regulations.gov type USCG-
2018-0580 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Chief Steven Durden, Waterways Management, Coast Guard
Sector Sault Sainte Marie, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Les Cheneaux Antique Wooden Boat Show was founded in 1978 and
the event is held every year in mid-August. During this event, a
variety of vessel traffic is attracted to the area in and surrounding
the Hessel Marina. A commercial ferry vessel, jet skis, kayaks, paddle
boards, sail and power vessels all use this this waterway to view the
show and to transit the area. This mix of vessels in close proximity to
each other warrants additional safety measures. In response, the Coast
Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on June 18th,
2018. There, we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on
our proposed regulatory action related to this no wake zone. During the
comment period that ended July 9th, 2018, we received no comments.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective
date of this rule would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to provide
for the public's safety during the August 11th, 2018 Les Cheneaux
Islands Antique Wooden Boat Show.
    The legal basis for this final rulemaking is found at 33 U.S.C.
1233.

III. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Rule

    We received no comments from the NPRM published June 18th, 2018.
There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the
proposed rule in the NPRM. The Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie
(COTP) has determined that adding the Annual Les Cheneaux Islands
Antique Wooden Boat Show to the list of Special Local Regulations to
establish a no wake zone in the navigable waters of Marquette Bay near
Hessel, MI is necessary to ensure the safety of the boating public.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day for the no wake zone. Vessel
traffic will be able to safely transit through the no wake zone which
will impact a small designated area within the COTP zone for a short
duration of time. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice
to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
no wake zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This rule involves creating a no wake
zone for one day each year in a small area. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1
of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record
of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.922 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.922   Special Local Regulations; Annual Les Cheneaux Islands
Antique Wooden Boat Show; Hessel, MI.

    (a) Regulated area. These Special Local Regulations apply to all
U.S. navigable waters of Marquette Bay, Hessel, MI, within an area
bordered by a line from the crib piles charted in position
45[deg]59'59'' N, 084[deg]25'10'' W to Red Buoy ``8'' charted in
position 45[deg]59'46'' N, 084[deg]25'37'' W to Red Buoy ``6'' charted
in position 45[deg]59'58'' N, 084[deg]25'53'' W to Red Buoy ``4''
charted in position 45[deg]59'57'' N, 084[deg]26'23'' W to Green Buoy
``5'' charted in position 46[deg]00'13'' N, 084[deg]26'10'' W to land
in position 46[deg]00'18'' N, 084[deg]26'04'' W.
    (b) Enforcement period. These special local regulations are
effective for one day in mid-August. The Coast Guard will issue a
notice of enforcement with the exact time and date this regulated area
will be enforced.
    (c) Special local regulation. While in the regulated area all
vessels will operate at a no wake speed and follow the directions of
the on-scene patrol commander.

    Dated: July 12, 2018.
M.R. Broz,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie.
[FR Doc. 2018-15248 Filed 7-16-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 127 (Monday, July 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 39321]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16100]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Air Traffic Procedures Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Categorical Exclusion from Further Environmental
Review for Standard Instrument Departures at La Guardia Airport.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of its
environmental review of four standard instrument departure procedures
at LaGuardia International Airport (LGA). As required by the National
Environmental Policy Act, an evaluation has been performed on the four
proposed standard instrument departure procedures to determine the
level of environmental review warranted. The FAA has elected to
``Categorically Exclude from further environmental review'' the four
proposed departure procedures identified as GLDMN FOUR (RNAV) Runway
13, NTHNS TWO (RNAV) Runway 13, HOPEA ONE (RNAV) Runway 22, and JUTES
ONE (RNAV) Runway 22.

DATES: Effective upon publication. A Categorical Exclusion (Cat Ex)
from environmental review does not require a formal public hearing or a
formal public comment period prior to the Cat Ex becoming effective.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lee Kyker, Environmental
Specialist, Air Traffic Eastern Service Center, Operations Support
Group, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 30337.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the FAA has
elected to ``Categorically Exclude from further environmental review''
the proposed RNAV departure procedures as follows: GLDMN FOUR (RNAV)
Runway 13, NTHNS TWO (RNAV) Runway 13, HOPEA ONE (RNAV) Runway 22, and
JUTES ONE (RNAV) Runway 22. Project: Publish GLDMN FOUR (RNAV) Runway
13, NTHNS TWO (RNAV) Runway 13, HOPEA ONE (RNAV) Runway 22, and JUTES
ONE (RNAV) Runway 22.
    Location: LaGuardia International Airport (LGA).
    This project consists of publishing RNAV departure procedures
identified as the GLDMN FOUR (RNAV) Runway 13, NTHNS TWO (RNAV) Runway
13, HOPEA ONE (RNAV) Runway 22, and JUTES ONE (RNAV) Runway 22. RNAV
facilitates more efficient design of airspace and procedures which
collectively result in improved safety, access, predictability, and
operational efficiency. Improved access and flexibility for point-to-
point operations help enhance reliability and reduce delays by defining
more precise terminal area procedures. The altitude restrictions in the
GLDMN will permit LGA to land Runway 4 and make right turns with Runway
13 departures. LGA's Runway 22 is used under very limited conditions,
such as when required by weather or when Runway 13/31 is closed. The
conditions of use of Runway 22 will not change, however use of the
HOPEA ONE and JUTES ONE procedures will provide for greater efficiency
under these limited use conditions. The review process indicated that
the proposed project will not adversely impact the environment.
Consequently, the FAA has elected to ``Categorically Exclude from
further environmental review'' the proposed RNAV Standard Instrument
Departure procedures (SIDS), based upon compliance with FAA Order
1050.1E, Sec.  311(i).

    Issued in Atlanta, GA, on June 18, 2012.
Barry A. Knight,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, FAA, Air Traffic, Eastern
Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-16100 Filed 6-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 65)]
[Notices]
[Page 15802-15803]
[DOCID:fr07ap09-133]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59660; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2009-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NYSE Amex LLC Deleting Rule
936C, Cancellation and Adjustment of Index Option Transactions

March 31, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on March 20, 2009, NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective
upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to delete Rule 936C governing the
Cancellation and Adjustment of Index Options Contracts. The text of the
proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 5 to the 19b-4 form. A copy
of this filing is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://
www.nyse.com, at the Exchange's principal office 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange recently received approval of SR-NYSEALTR-2008-14 ,\5\
which proposed new Rule Section 900NY for the trading of options
contracts, and also filed as immediately effective SR-NYSEALTR-2009-17
,\6\ which deleted certain rules that were no longer relevant or were
superseded by Rules in Section 900NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Exchange Act Release No. 34-59472 (February 27, 2009),
74 FR 9843.
    \6\ See Exchange Act Release No. 34-59454 (February 25, 2009),
74 FR 9461.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SR-NYSEALTR-2009-17 inadvertently omitted deleting Rule 936C,
Cancellation and Adjustment of Index Options Contracts, which has been
replaced by Rule 975NY, Obvious Errors and Catastrophic Errors. Rule
975NY governs Obvious Errors and Catastrophic Errors in all options
products, including options on indexes, exchange-traded funds, and
trust issued receipts.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \7\ of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''), in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \8\ in particular in that it is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of
a free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    (ii) Impose any significant burden on competition; and
    (iii) 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, it
has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \9\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the self-regulatory organization to submit to the
Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule
change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule
change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay to the extent that such action is necessary to clarify
the applicable rule in cases of Obvious Errors and Catastrophic Errors
involving options on indexes, exchange-traded funds, and trust issued
receipts. The Commission hereby grants the Exchange's request.\11\ The
Commission believes that such action is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest because the Exchange is merely
deleting an obsolete rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-03. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-03 and should be submitted on or before
April 28, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-7831 Filed 4-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14405-14406]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05084]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0023]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 3 individuals for
exemption from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in
one eye for various reasons. The exemptions will enable these
individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate
commerce without meeting the prescribed vision requirement in one eye.
If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals to qualify as
drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 4, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0023 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on December
29, 2010 (75 FR 82132), or you may visit http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12-29/pdf/2010-32876.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for a 2-year period
if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety
that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved
absent such exemption.'' FMCSA can renew exemptions at the end of each
2-year period. The 3 individuals listed in this notice have each
requested such an exemption from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce.
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting an exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.

Qualifications of Applicants

David Doub

    Mr. Doub, 68, has had a retinal detachment in his right eye since
2009. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/400, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2012, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``Has sufficient vision left eye to operate commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Doub reported that he has driven tractor-trailer
combinations for 31 years, accumulating 621,000 miles. He holds an
operator's license from Indiana. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Gregory S. Engleman

    Mr. Engleman, 43, has had optic neuritis in his right eye since
2001. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted,
``It is my opinion that Mr. Engleman has sufficient vision to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Engleman reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 7 years, accumulating 245,000 miles, tractor-trailer
combinations for 19 years, accumulating 2.1 million miles. He holds a
Class D Commercial Driver's License (CDL) from Kentucky. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes but one conviction for
moving violations in a CMV; he violated the 14 hour rule.

Gale Smith

    Mr. Smith, age 45, has a prosthetic left eye due to a traumatic
incident during childhood. The best corrected visual acuity in his
right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following
an examination in 2013, his

optometrist noted, ``He is of no danger to drive a commercial vehicle
from an ocular standpoint and is certified by me to meet all standards
for a commercial driver's license.'' Mr. Smith reported that he has
driven tractor-trailer combinations for 16 years, accumulating 1.6
million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. The Agency will consider all comments
received before the close of business April 4, 2013. Comments will be
available for examination in the docket at the location listed under
the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency will file comments
received after the comment closing date in the public docket, and will
consider them to the extent practicable.
    In addition to late comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in
the public docket, relevant information that becomes available after
the comment closing date. Interested persons should monitor the public
docket for new material.

    Issued on: February 27, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
 Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-05084 Filed 3-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: January 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 14)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 4129-4131]
[DOCID:fr23ja09-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0625; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-069-AD;
Amendment 39-15789; AD 2009-01-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional
Jet Series 700, 701, and 702) Airplanes; CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet
Series 705) Airplanes; and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900)
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

    During a pre-delivery flight of a CL-600-2C10 aircraft, the AC
essential bus did not come on-line following deployment of the Air
Driven Generator (ADG). Following investigation, it was determined
that a specific batch of contactors in the ADG Power Center (ADGPC)
is susceptible to failure due to low contact pressure. * * *

The unsafe condition is a malfunction of the emergency AC generation
and control system that supplies emergency AC power to essential flight
instruments, including the flap and slat system, pitch trim system, and
hydraulic pump 3B. Loss of essential flight instruments could prevent
continued safe flight and landing of the airplane. We are issuing this
AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective February 27, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of February 27,
2009.

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

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on June 9, 2008 (73 FR
32493). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    During a pre-delivery flight of a CL-600-2C10 aircraft, the AC
essential bus did not come on-line following deployment of the Air
Driven Generator (ADG). Following investigation, it was determined
that a specific batch of contactors in the ADG Power Center (ADGPC)
is susceptible to failure due to low contact pressure. This
directive mandates inspection of the ADGPC and replacement of any
contactors in the suspect batch. It also prohibits future
installation of ADGPCs and contactors that have not been inspected
per this directive.

The unsafe condition is a malfunction of the emergency AC generation
and control system that supplies emergency AC power to essential flight
instruments, including the flap and slat system, pitch trim system, and
hydraulic pump 3B. Loss of essential flight instruments could prevent
continued safe flight and landing of the airplane. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received from a single commenter.

Request To Reduce Compliance Time

    The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) supports the intent of the
NPRM, but recommends that the compliance time allowed for the proposed
actions be shortened from 24 months to 3 months. ALPA states that
although its review of available fleet data did not reveal any
incidents of full electrical failures in Bombardier airplanes, the ADG
is the only remaining source of electrical power sustaining the
batteries and flight-critical electrical systems if all other
generators fail or are unavailable. ALPA adds that, under certain
circumstances, there are procedures for deferring activation of an
engine-driven or auxiliary power unit (APU) generator; however, the ADG
is a non-deferrable item. ALPA notes that, given the potential
consequences of a full electrical system failure, particularly in the
low visibility weather conditions in which these airplanes routinely
operate, the compliance time should be reduced.
    We do not agree to reduce the compliance time specified in
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. In developing the compliance time for this
AD action, we considered not only the safety implications of the
identified unsafe condition, but the average utilization rate of the
affected fleet, the practical aspects of an orderly inspection of the
fleet during regular maintenance periods, and the availability of
replacement parts. In addition, we also considered the manufacturer's
recommendation for an appropriate compliance time. After considering
all the available information, we determined that performing the
actions within 5,000 flight hours or 24 months, whichever occurs first,
represents an appropriate interval of time in which the required
actions can be performed in a timely manner within the affected fleet,
while still maintaining an adequate level of safety. We have made no
change to the AD in this regard.

Request To Limit Special Flight Permit

    ALPA also recommends that no flights be allowed with a non-
operating engine-driven or APU generator unless the AD has been
complied with.
    We do not agree to limit flights as ALPA recommends. In the event
of failure of an ADG and one engine driven generator (EDG), the
airplane can be powered by one EDG and the APU generator. If both the
ADG and APU generator fail, the airplane AC buses can be powered by
both EDGs. Based on these factors, we have determined that such a
limitation is not necessary. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Conclusion

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

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 306 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 9 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $0 per product.
Where the service information lists required parts costs that are
covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge
for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected
parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based
on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators
to be $220,320, or $720 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2009-01-10 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): Amendment 39-15789.
Docket No. FAA-2008-0625; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-069-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective February
27, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional
Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10004 and
subsequent; Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes
and Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial
numbers 15002 and subsequent; certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24:
Electrical power.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    ``During a pre-delivery flight of a CL-600-2C10 aircraft, the AC
essential bus did not come on-line following deployment of the Air
Driven Generator (ADG). Following investigation, it was determined
that a specific batch of contactors in the ADG Power Center (ADGPC)
is susceptible to failure due to low contact pressure. This
directive mandates inspection of the ADGPC and replacement of any
contactors in the suspect batch. It also prohibits future
installation of ADGPCs and contactors that have not been inspected
per this directive.''

The unsafe condition is malfunction of the emergency AC generation
and control system that supplies emergency AC power to essential
flight instruments, including the flap and slat system, pitch trim
system, and hydraulic pump 3B. Loss of essential flight instruments
could prevent continued safe flight and landing of the airplane.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For Model CL-600-2C10 airplanes having serial numbers 10004
through 10265, and Model CL-600-2D15 and CL-600-2D24 airplanes
having serial numbers 15002 through 15162: Within 5,000 flight hours
or 24 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
first, inspect for the serial number of the installed ADGPC and, as

applicable, for the serial numbers of installed contactors K117,
K147 and K153, in accordance with Part A of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-24-021, Revision
A, dated December 11, 2006. If the serial number of the ADGPC is in
the range 134 through 250, and any installed contactor has a serial
number in the range 411 through 777, before further flight, replace
the affected contactor in accordance with Part B of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 670BA-24-021, Revision A, dated December 11, 2006.
    (2) Previous inspection of the ADGPC, and replacement of
contactors, before the effective date of this AD, in accordance with
Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-24-021, dated May 30, 2005, meets
the requirements of paragraphs (f)(1) of this AD if the ADGPC has
not been replaced since accomplishment of Bombardier Service
Bulletin 670BA-24-021, Revision A, dated December 11, 2006.
    (3) A review of the aircraft maintenance records to determine
the ADGPC and contactor serial numbers also meets the inspection
requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.

Parts Installation

    (g) As of the effective date of this AD: No replacement/spare
ADGPC having part number 781GA01Y00, with a serial number in the
range 134 through 250, is permitted to be installed on any aircraft,
unless the ADGPC has been modified according to paragraph (f)(1) of
this AD.
    (h) As of the effective date of this AD: No replacement/spare
ADGPC contactor having part number 995CA01Y00, with a serial number
in the range 411 through 777, is permitted to be installed on any
aircraft, unless the ADGPC contactor is identified with two labels,
as specified in Zodiac ECE Service Bulletin 995CA01Y-24-001, dated
May 3, 2005.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (i) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Wing Chan, Aerospace
Engineer, Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York
ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any
approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your
appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards
District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2008-14,
dated February 19, 2008; Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-24-021,
Revision A, dated December 11, 2006; and Zodiac ECE Service Bulletin
995CA01Y-24-001, dated May 3, 2005; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-24-021,
Revision A, dated December 11, 2006; and Zodiac ECE Service Bulletin
995CA01Y-24-001, dated May 3, 2005; as applicable; to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information that is
incorporated by reference at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221 or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 18, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
 [FR Doc. E9-28 Filed 1-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P