[Federal Register: December 29, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 249)]
[Notices]
[Page 77228-77230]
[DOCID:fr29de05-112]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53014; File No. SR-NYSE-2005-89]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Extend the Pilot for NYSE Direct+[reg] Until December 23, 2006

December 22, 2005.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 13, 2005, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by NYSE. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    This proposal is to extend until December 23, 2006, the
effectiveness of the pilot (the ``Pilot'') for NYSE Direct+[supreg]
(``Direct +''). The Pilot was approved initially on a one-year basis
and extended for several additional years, and now expires on December
23, 2005.

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 Exchange 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 these 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 aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    In light of the fact that the Commission is still considering the
Exchange's filing on proposed enhancements to NYSE Direct+[supreg] (the
NYSE HYBRID MARKETS SM--``Hybrid Market'') as described in
SR-NYSE-2004-05 and subsequent amendments thereto \3\, the Exchange
hereby is filing to renew its Pilot, as it currently operates, for an
additional year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50173 (August 10,
2004), 69 FR 50407 (August 16, 2004) (Amendment No. 1 to SR-NYSE-
2004-05); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50667 (November 15,
2004), 69 FR 67980 (November 22, 2004) (Amendment Nos. 2 and 3 to
SR-NYSE-2004-05); (The Exchange withdrew Amendment No. 4 and
replaced it with Amendment No. 5); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 51906 (June 22, 2005), 70 FR 37463 (June 29, 2005) (Amendment
No. 5 to SR-NYSE-2004-05). See also Amendment No. 6 to SR-NYSE-2004-
05 (September 16, 2005) and Amendment No. 7 to SR-NYSE-2004-05
(October 11, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    NYSE Direct+[supreg] was originally approved as a one-year pilot in
SR-NYSE-2000-18,\4\ ending on December 21, 2001. The Exchange then
extended the Pilot for an additional one-year, ending December 23,
2002.\5\ The Pilot was subsequently extended for an additional one-
year, ending December 23, 2003.\6\ It was again extended for two
additional one-year periods and now expires on December 23, 2005.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43767 (December 22,
2000), 66 FR 834 (January 4, 2001) (SR-NYSE-2000-18).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45331 (January 24,
2002), 67 FR 5024 (February 1, 2002) (SR-NYSE-2001-50).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46906 (November 25,
2002), 67 FR 72260 (December 4, 2002) (SR-NYSE-2002-47).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48772 (November 12,
2003), 68 FR 65756 (November 21, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2003-30). See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50828 (December 9, 2004), 69 FR
75579 (December 17, 2004) (SR-NYSE-2004-66).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE Direct+[supreg] pilot provides for the automatic execution
of limit orders of 1,099 shares or less (``auto ex'' orders) against
trading interest reflected in the Exchange's published quotation. It is

not mandatory that all limit orders of 1,099 shares be entered as auto
ex orders; rather, the member organization entering the order, or its
customer if enabled by the member organization, can choose to enter an
auto ex order when such member organization (or customer) believes that
the speed and certainty of an execution at the Exchange's published bid
or offer price is in its customer's best interest.
    The Exchange proposes to extend this Pilot for an additional year
(from December 24, 2005 until December 23, 2006). Five filings which
impact NYSE Direct+[supreg] have been filed with or approved by the
Commission during the current Pilot are now part of the Pilot.\8\ These
include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See telephone conversation between Steve L. Kuan, Special
Counsel, Division of Market Regulation (``Divison''), Commission,
and Jeffrey Rosenstrock, Principal Rule Counsel, NYSE, on December
21, 2005. In addition, SR-NYSE-2003-20 proposed to disengage NYSE
Direct+[supreg] in five-actively traded stocks. However, this pilot
expired on June 20, 2003 and therefore, does not impact the Pilot as
proposed to be extended. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
47965 (June 2, 2003), 68 FR 34691 (June 10, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2003-20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) A filing which amended Rule 1000 to provide that NYSE
Direct+[supreg] executions will not be available if the resulting trade
would be more than five cents away from the last sale.\9\ The amendment
also provided that during the process for completing Rule 127
transactions, the specialist should publish a bid and/or offer that is
more than five cents away from the last reported transaction price in
the subject security on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47463 (March 7,
2003), 68 FR 12122 (March 13, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2002-44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) A filing which amended Exchange Rules 13 and 1005 in order to
eliminate size and frequency restrictions for orders entered through
NYSE Direct+[reg] (``Direct +'') in Investment Company Units, as
defined in paragraph 703.16 of the Listed Company Manual, Trust Issued
Receipts (such as HOLDRs), as defined in Rule 1200, and
streetTRACKS[reg] Gold Shares, as defined in Rule 1300, (collectively
``ETFs'').\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52160 (July 28,
2005), 70 FR 44963 (August 4, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2005-49).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) A filing which amended Rule 1002 to include ETFs and HOLDRs and
provide that ETFs trade until 4:15 p.m. and amended Rule 1005 to
reflect that the rule applies to ETFs and HOLDRs.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47024 (December 18,
2002), 67 FR 79217 (December 27, 2002) (SR-NYSE-2002-37). The
expansion of the Direct+ order size eligibility described in this
filing (for up to 10,000 shares) was superseded by SR-NYSE-2005-49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) A filing which amended Rule 1005 to permit entry of limit
orders up to 1,099 shares within 30 seconds for an account in which the
same person has an interest, provided that the orders are entered from
different terminals and that the member or member organization
responsible for the entry of the orders to the trading floor
(``Floor'') has procedures to monitor compliance with the separate
terminal requirement.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47353 (February 12,
2003), 68 FR 8318 (February 20, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2002-58).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) A filing which amended Rules 1000 and 1001 in connection with
the NYSE LiquidityQuoteSM initiative.\13\ In conjunction
with autoquoting of bids and offers, Rule 1000 has been amended to
provide that a NYSE Direct+[supreg] order equal to or greater than the
size of the published bid/offer exhausts the entire bid/offer, rather
than decreases it to 100 shares.\14\ Rule 1001(c) provided that if
executions of auto ex orders have traded with all trading interest
reflected in the Exchange's published bid or offer, the Exchange will
disseminate a bid or offer at that price of 100 shares until the
specialist requotes that market. Rule 1001(c) has been deleted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47614 (April 2,
2003), 68 FR 17140 (April 8, 2003) (SR-NYSE-2002-55).
    \14\ See telephone conversation between Steve L. Kuan, Special
Counsel, Division, Commission, and Jeffrey Rosenstrock, Principal
Rule Counsel, NYSE, on December 21, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The above-mentioned filings became part of the NYSE Direct+[supreg]
rules and were incorporated into the Pilot upon their respective filing
or approval by the Commission.\15\ Therefore, they are extended as part
of the Pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If, however, the Commission approves the Hybrid Market proposal
during the extension of the Pilot period (December 24, 2005-December
23, 2006), the Hybrid Market proposal would supersede this filing.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \16\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \17\ in particular, because it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The Exchange also believes that the
proposed rule change is designed to support the principles of Section
11A(a)(1) of the Act \18\ in that it seeks to assure economically
efficient execution of securities transactions, makes it practicable
for brokers to execute investors' orders in the best market and
provides an opportunity for investors' orders to be executed without
the participation of a dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule 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, provided that the self-regulatory
organization has given the Commission written notice of its intent to
file 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 proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \19\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\20\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of
such 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.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange requests that the Commission waive the five business
days pre-filing requirement and the 30-day operative delay under Rule
19b-4(f)(6)(iii).\22\ The Exchange believes that the continuation of
the Pilot is in the public interest as it will avoid

inconvenience and interruption to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiver of the 30 day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest,\23\ because it will allow the Exchange to continue, without
interruption, the existing operation of the Pilot for an additional
year, while the Commission considers the Hybrid Market. Accordingly,
the Commission designates that the proposal shall become operative as
of the date of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSE-2005-89 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2005-89. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the 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-NYSE-2005-89 and should be submitted on or before
January 19, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-8066 Filed 12-28-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12825-12826]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05556]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 49

[EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0847; FRL-9943-54-Region 10]

Announcement of the Delegation of Partial Administrative
Authority for Implementation of Federal Implementation Plan for the
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Delegation of authority; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action announces that on October 26, 2015, EPA Region 10
and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, entered into a
Partial Delegation of Administrative Authority agreement to carry out
certain day-to-day activities associated with implementation of the
Federal Implementation Plan for the Colville Reservation (Colville
FIP). A note of this partial delegation is being added to the Colville
FIP in the Code of Federal Regulations.

DATES: This rule is effective March 11, 2016.
    The partial delegation of administrative authority was effective
October 26, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0847. The delegation agreement and other
docket materials are available electronically at the EPA's electronic
public docket and comment system, found at http://www.regulations.gov
or in hard copy from Andra Bosneag, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics,
AWT-150, EPA Region 10, Suite 900, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA
98101, or via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Additional information
may also be obtained from the Colville Tribe by contacting Kris Ray,
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, P.O. Box 150,
Nespelem, WA 99155 or via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    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
the disclosure of which 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 during normal business hours
at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andra Bosneag at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the EPA Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of this action is to announce
that on October 26, 2015, EPA Region 10, delegated partial
administrative authority for implementation of certain provisions of
the Colville FIP to the Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation. See 40 CFR part 49, subpart M, sections 9951 through 9960,
as authorized by 40 CFR 49.122 of the Federal Air Rules for
Reservations (FARR), 40 CFR part 49, subpart C.

I. Authority To Delegate

    Federal regulations at 40 CFR 49.122 provide the EPA authority to
delegate to Indian Tribes partial administrative authority to implement
provisions of the FARR, 40 CFR part 49, subpart C. Tribes must submit a
request to the Regional Administrator that meets the requirements of 40
CFR 49.122.

II. Request for Delegation

    On May 21, 2014, Chaitna Sinha of the Office of the Reservation
Attorney of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
submitted to the Regional Administrator a request for delegation of
certain provision of the Colville FIP. That request included all the
information and demonstrations required by the FARR for delegation. A
copy of all documentation is on file at the EPA Region 10, Seattle,
Washington office (see addresses above).
    The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation requested
delegation for the following provisions: 40 CFR 49.9960(b) Rule for
limiting visible emissions, 40 CFR 49.9960(i) General rule for open
burning, and 40 CFR 49.9960(k) Rule for air pollution episodes.

III. EPA Response to the Request for Delegation

    The EPA and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
signed a delegation agreement that specifies the provisions and
authorities delegated. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation are delegated the following provisions; 40 CFR 49.9960(b)
Rule for limiting visible emissions, 40 CFR 49.9960(i) General rule for
open burning, and 40 CFR 49.9960(k) Rule for air pollution episodes. In
addition, the agreement delegates to the Tribe authority to investigate
complaints and assist the EPA in inspections. The agreement also
includes terms and conditions applicable to the delegation. A copy of
the agreement is kept at EPA Region 10 at the address above.
    Prior to entering into the Delegation Agreement, the EPA solicited
by letter, advice and insight on the proposed delegation from Okanogan
County, Ferry County, City of Okanogan, Town of Nespelem, Town of
Coulee Dam, Electric City, City of Omak, Lake Roosevelt National
Recreation Area, Bureau of Land Management, and the United States
Forest Service. One comment supporting delegation was received.
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary
to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing
notice and an opportunity for public comment. The EPA has determined
that there is good cause for making today's rule final without prior
proposal and opportunity for comment because the EPA is merely
informing the public of partial delegation of administrative authority
to the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and making a
technical amendment to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) by adding
a note announcing the partial delegation. Thus, notice and public
procedure are unnecessary. The EPA finds that this constitutes good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
    Moreover, since today's action does not create any new regulatory
requirements, the EPA finds that good cause exists to provide for an
immediate effective date pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), 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
makes a technical amendment and gives notice of a partial delegation of
administrative authority. 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.). This rule 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).
    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000),
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that
have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and
the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal government and Indian tribes.'' Under section 5(b)
of Executive Order 13175, the EPA may not issue a regulation that has
tribal implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs,
and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal government
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs
incurred by tribal governments, or the EPA consults with tribal
officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
Under section 5(c) of Executive Order 13175, the EPA may not issue a
regulation that has tribal implications and that preempts tribal law,
unless the Agency consults with tribal officials early in the process
of developing the regulation. The EPA has concluded that this rule may
have tribal implications. The EPA's action fulfills a requirement to
publish a notice announcing partial delegation of administrative
authority to the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and
noting the partial delegation in the CFR. However, it will neither
impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor
preempt tribal law. Thus, the requirements of sections 5(b) and 5(c) of
the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
    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 technical amendment merely notes that partial
delegation of administrative authority to the Confederated Tribes of
the Colville Reservation is in effect. 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.
    This action does not involve technical standards; 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. The 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 10, 2016. 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 49

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Indians, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 29, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:

PART 49--INDIAN COUNTRY; AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

0
1. The authority citation for part 49 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart M--Implementation Plans for Tribes--Region X

0
2. Section 49.9960 is amended by adding a note to the end of the
section to read as follows:

Sec.  49.9960  Federally-promulgated regulations and Federal
implementation plans.

* * * * *

    Note to Sec.  49.9960: The EPA entered into a Partial Delegation
of Administrative Authority with the Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation on October 26, 2015 for the rules listed in
paragraphs (b), (i), and (k) of this section.

[FR Doc. 2016-05556 Filed 3-10-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 210)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 64282-64284]
[DOCID:fr29oc08-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1138; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-059-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Aircraft Industries a.s. (Type
Certificate G60EU Previously Held by LETECK[Eacute] Z[Aacute]VODY a.s.
and LET Aeronautical Works) Model L 23 Super Blanik Sailplane

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed 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:

    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is prompted by the discovery
on L 23 SUPER-BLANIK sailplanes of cracks in zones where the front
and aft control levers attach the connecting rod designated as
``control bridge'' on the relevant Illustrated Parts Catalogues
(IPC). If left uncorrected cracks could propagate and lead to the
breakage of the connecting rod with subsequent loss of control of
the sailplane.

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 28,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-20**-****;
Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-059-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent

for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD No.
2007-0261, dated October 2, 2007 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is prompted by the discovery
on L 23 SUPER-BLANIK sailplanes of cracks in zones where the front
and aft control levers attach the connecting rod designated as
``control bridge'' on the relevant Illustrated Parts Catalogues
(IPC). If left uncorrected cracks could propagate and lead to the
breakage of the connecting rod with subsequent loss of control of
the sailplane.

    For the reasons described above, this AD requires an inspection
for cracks of the control bridge and its replacement, as necessary.
In addition, this AD requires an update of the aircraft Maintenance
Manual (MM) to incorporate repetitive inspections of the control
bridge.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    LET Aircraft Industries, a.s. has issued Mandatory Bulletin MB No.
L23/050a Revision No. 2, dated September 12, 2007. The actions
described in this service information are intended to correct the
unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Differences Between This Proposed 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 proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 105 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 2 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $16,800, or $160 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 7 work-hours and require parts costing $2,000, for a cost of
$2,560 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
products that may need these actions.

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 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. 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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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

    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]

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

Aircraft Industries a.s. (Type Certificate G60EU previously held by
LETECK[Eacute] Z[Aacute]VODY a.s. and LET Aeronautical Works):
Docket No. FAA-2008-1138; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-059-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by November 28, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model L 23 Super Blanik sailplanes, all
serial numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 27: Flight
Controls.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is prompted by the discovery
on L 23 SUPER-BLANIK sailplanes of cracks in zones where the front
and aft control levers attach the connecting rod designated as
``control bridge'' on the relevant Illustrated Parts Catalogues
(IPC). If left uncorrected cracks could propagate and lead to the
breakage of the connecting rod with subsequent loss of control of
the sailplane.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires an inspection
for cracks of the control bridge and its replacement, as necessary.
In addition, this AD requires an update of the aircraft Maintenance
Manual (MM) to incorporate repetitive inspections of the control
bridge.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:

    (1) Within the next 3 months after the effective date of this AD
and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12 months,
visually inspect the control bridge in areas of juncture with the
two control sticks for cracks. Do the inspection following paragraph
A of LET Aircraft Industries, a.s. Mandatory Bulletin MB No. L23/
050a Revision No. 2, dated September 12, 2007, except use a 10X
magnifier and do a dye penetrant inspection following the procedures
in chapter 5, section 5, of FAA Advisory Circular AC 43.13-1B CHG 1,
dated September 27, 2001.
    (2) If cracks are found in the control bridge bedding during any
inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further
flight, replace the defective control bridge bedding, Dwg. No. A740
371N, in the control bridge assembly, Dwg. No. A740 370N, following
LET Aircraft Industries, a.s. Mandatory Bulletin MB No. L23/050a
Revision No. 2, dated September 12, 2007; and Appendix No. 1,
``Replacement of Bearings 608 CSN 024630 at Control Bridge Dwg. No.
A740 370N in a Bedding Dwg. No. A740 371N,'' to LET Aircraft
Industries, a.s. Mandatory Bulletin MB No. L23/050a Revision No. 2,
dated September 12, 2007.
    (3) Doing the replacement required in paragraph (f)(2) of this
AD terminates the 12-month repetitive inspection required in
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. After the replacement required in
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, perform subsequent inspections on the
new control bridge assembly according to LET Aircraft Industries,
a.s. Documentation Bulletin No.: L23/020 d, dated August 6, 2007.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
    1. The service information requires a visual inspection with a
6X magnifier. We are requiring a dye penetrant inspection and a 10X
magnifier to detect cracks that could go undetected using only a 6X
magnifier.
    2. The MCAI requires updating the maintenance manuals to add
repetitive inspections of the control bridge. Since the maintenance
manual is only one way of establishing a maintenance program, the
only way we can mandate these repetitive inspections is through an
AD action.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, 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: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using
any approved AMOC on any sailplane 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 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.
2007-0261, dated October 2, 2007; LET Aircraft Industries, a.s.
Mandatory Bulletin MB No. L23/050a Revision No. 2, dated September
12, 2007; Appendix No. 1, ``Replacement of Bearings 608 CSN 024630
at Control Bridge Dwg. No. A740 370N in a Bedding Dwg. No. A740
371N,'' to LET Aircraft Industries, a.s. Mandatory Bulletin MB No.
L23/050a Revision No. 2, dated September 12, 2007; and LET Aircraft
Industries, a.s. Documentation Bulletin No.: L23/020 d, dated August
6, 2007, for related information.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 21, 2008.
John R. Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-25661 Filed 10-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P