[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 155 (Monday, August 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45762-45764]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17434]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2021-0005]

LabTest Certification Inc.: Application for Recognition

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the application of LabTest
Certification, Inc. (LCI), for recognition as a Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratory (NRTL) and presents the agency's preliminary finding
to grant this recognition.

DATES: Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this
notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on
or before September 15, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at: https://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Documents in the docket are
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some
information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to
read or download through the website. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection through the OSHA
Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY
(877) 889-5627) for assistance in locating docket submissions.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and the
OSHA docket number for this Federal Register notice (OSHA-2017-0014).
OSHA will place comments and requests to speak, including personal
information, in the public docket, which may be available online.
Therefore, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting personal
information such as Social Security numbers and birthdates. For further
information on submitting comments, see the ``Public Participation''
heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of
the comment period on or before September 15, 2021 to the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW, Room N-3653, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-
1644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, telephone:
(202) 693-2110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Many of OSHA's workplace standards require that a NRTL test and
certify certain types of equipment as safe for use in the workplace.
NRTLs are independent laboratories that meet OSHA's requirements for
performing safety testing and certification of products used in the
workplace. To obtain and retain OSHA recognition, the NRTLs must meet
the requirements in the NRTL Program regulations at 29 CFR 1910.7. More
specifically, to be recognized by OSHA, an organization must: (1) Have
the appropriate capability to test, evaluate, and approve products to
assure their safe use in the workplace; (2) be completely independent
of employers subject to the tested equipment requirements, and
manufacturers and vendors of products for which OSHA requires
certification; (3) have internal programs that ensure proper control of
the testing and certification process; and (4) have effective reporting
and complaint handling procedures. Recognition is an acknowledgement by
OSHA that the NRTL has the capabilities to perform independent safety
testing and certification of the specific products covered within the
NRTL's scope of recognition and is not a delegation or grant of
government authority. Recognition of a NRTL by OSHA also allows
employers to use products certified by that NRTL to meet those OSHA
standards that require product testing and certification.

    The agency processes applications for initial recognition following
requirements in Appendix A of 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires
OSHA to publish two notices in the Federal Register in processing an
application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the application,
provides its preliminary findings, and solicits comments on its
preliminary findings. In the second notice, the agency provides its
final decision on the application and sets forth the NRTL's scope of
recognition.

II. Notice of the Application for Recognition

    OSHA is providing notice that LabTest Certification, Inc., (LCI) is
applying for recognition as a NRTL. According to public information
(see https://labtestcert.com/about-labtest/) LCI states that it is an
internationally accredited testing laboratory. In its application, LCI
lists the current address of its headquarters as: LabTest
Certification, Inc., 205--8291 92 Street, Delta, BC Canada V4G 0A4.
OSHA has determined preliminarily that LCI has the capability to
perform as a NRTL as outlined in 29 CFR 1910.7.
    Each NRTL's scope of recognition has two elements: (1) The type(s)
of products the NRTL may test, with each type specified by its
applicable test standard; and (2) the recognized site(s) that have the
technical capability to perform the product-testing and product-
certification activities for the applicable test standards within the
NRTL's scope of recognition. LCI applied on January 29, 2016, for one
recognized site (OSHA-2021-0005-0001). This application was amended on
June 10, 2021, to remove three of the eight standards requested in the
original application. LCI's original application also requested that
supplemental programs be included in their recognition. However, on
October 1, 2019, OSHA published an update to the NRTL Program Policies,
Procedures and Guidelines Directive, CPL 01-00-004, which eliminated
supplemental programs from the NRTL Program. Therefore, OSHA does not
grant recognition to NRTL applicants for supplemental programs. The
following sections set forth the requested scope of recognition
included in LCI's application that OSHA has considered.

A. Standards Requested for Recognition

    Table 1 below lists the appropriate test standards included in
LCI's amended application for testing and certification of products
under the NRTL Program.

  Table 1--Proposed List of Appropriate Test Standards for Inclusion in
                     LCI's NRTL Scope of Recognition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Test standard                     Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 1598...........................  Luminaires.
UL 60079-0........................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 0:
                                     Equipment--General Requirements.
UL 60079-1........................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 1:
                                     Equipment Protection by Flameproof
                                     Enclosures ``d''.
UL 60079-11.......................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 11:
                                     Equipment Protection by Intrinsic
                                     Safety ``i''.
UL 60079-15.......................  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 15:
                                     Equipment Protection by Type of
                                     Protection ``n''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Sites Requested for Recognition

    The current address of the LCI site included in its application for
recognition as a NRTL is:
    1. LabTest Certification, Inc., 205--8291 92 Street, Delta, BC
Canada V4G 0A4. The NRTL Program requires that to be a recognized site,
the site listed above must have the capability to conduct product
testing in accordance with the appropriate test standard for the
equipment or material being tested and certified.

IV. Preliminary Finding on the Application for Recognition as a NRTL

    OSHA's NRTL Program recognition process involves a thorough
analysis of a NRTL applicant's policies and procedures, and a
comprehensive on-site review of the applicant's testing and
certification activities to ensure that the applicant meets the
requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. OSHA staff performed a detailed analysis
of LCI's application packet and reviewed other pertinent information.
OSHA staff also performed a comprehensive on-site assessment of LCI's
testing facility, at LCI Delta Canada on December 11-12, 2018. An
overview of OSHA's assessment of the four requirements for recognition
(i.e., capability, control procedures, independence, and credible
reports and complaint handling) is provided below.

A. Capability

    Section 1910.7(b)(1) states that, for each specified item of
equipment or material to be listed, labeled, or accepted, the NRTL must
have the capability (including proper testing equipment and facilities,
trained staff, written testing procedures, and calibration and quality-
control programs) to perform appropriate testing. OSHA staff performed
a detailed analysis of LCI's application packet and reviewed other
pertinent information to assess its capabilities to perform testing and
certification activities. OSHA preliminarily determined that LCI has
demonstrated these capabilities through the following:
     LCI's facility has adequate test areas, energy sources,
and procedures for controlling incompatible activities.
     LCI provided a detailed list of its testing equipment.
Review of the application shows that the equipment listed is available
and adequate for the standards for which it seeks recognition.
     LCI has detailed procedures for conducting testing,
review, and evaluation, and for capturing the test and other data
required by the test standards for which it seeks recognition.
     LCI has detailed procedures addressing the maintenance and
calibration of equipment, and the types of records maintained for, or
supporting laboratory activities.
     LCI has sufficient qualified personnel to perform the
proposed scope of testing based on their education, training, technical
knowledge, and experience.
     LCI has an adequate quality-control system in place to
conduct internal audits, as well as track and resolve nonconformances.
    OSHA's on-site assessment of LCI's facility confirmed the
capabilities described in its application packet. The assessors found
some nonconformances with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. LCI
addressed these issues sufficiently to meet the applicable NRTL
requirements.

B. Control Procedures

    Section 1910.7(b)(2) requires that the NRTL provide controls and
services, to the extent necessary, for the particular equipment or
material to be listed, labeled, or accepted. These controls and
services include procedures for identifying the listed or labeled
equipment or materials, inspections of production runs at factories to
assure conformance with test standards, and

field inspections to monitor and assure the proper use of identifying
marks or labels. OSHA staff performed a detailed analysis of LCI's
application packet and reviewed other pertinent information to assess
its control procedures. OSHA preliminarily determined that LCI has
demonstrated these capabilities through the following:
     LCI has a quality-control manual and detailed procedures
to address the steps involved to list and certify products.
     LCI has a registered certification mark.
     LCI has certification procedures to address the
authorization of certifications and audits of factory facilities. The
audits apply to both the initial evaluations and the follow-up
inspections of manufacturers' facilities.
    OSHA's on-site assessment of LCI's facility confirmed the
capabilities described in its application packet. The assessors found
some nonconformances with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. LCI
addressed these issues sufficiently to meet the applicable NRTL
requirements.

C. Independence

    Section 1910.7(b)(3) requires that the NRTL be completely
independent of employers that are subject to the testing requirements,
and of any manufacturers or vendors of equipment or materials tested
under the NRTL Program. The revised NRTL Program Policies, Procedures
and Guidelines Directive, CPL-01-00-004, allows NRTLs to comply with
the requirement in the NRTL Program regulation that NRTLs be
``completely independent of employers subject to the tested equipment
requirements, and of any manufacturers or vendors of equipment or
materials being tested for these purposes'' (29 CFR 1910.7(b)(3)) by
meeting the minimum performance standards of Annex B of the NRTL
Program Directive, CPL-01-00-004, with respect to impartiality. The
revised policy focuses on the NRTL's ability to effectively identify,
eliminate and control any risk to its impartiality.
    This policy provides for the NRTL to identify risks to impartiality
on an ongoing basis and when risks to impartiality are identified, and
for the NRTL to demonstrate how it eliminates or minimizes such risks.
OSHA staff performed a detailed analysis of LCI's application packet
and reviewed other pertinent information to assess its independence.
OSHA preliminarily determined that LCI has demonstrated independence
through the following:
     LCI is a privately-owned organization, and OSHA found no
information regarding ownership that would qualify as a conflict under
OSHA's independence policy.
     LCI showed that it has none of the relationships described
in OSHA's independence policy or any other relationship that could
subject it to undue influence when testing for product safety.
     LCI has policies and procedures in place to identify risks
to impartiality and when risks to impartiality are found, LCI has
policies and procedures to eliminate or minimize such risks.

D. Credible Reports and Complaint Handling

    Section 1910.7(b)(4) specifies that a NRTL must maintain effective
procedures for producing credible findings and reports that are
objective and free of bias. The NRTL must also have procedures for
handling complaints and disputes under a fair and reasonable system.
OSHA staff performed a detailed analysis of LCI's application packet
and reviewed other pertinent information to assess its ability to
produce credible results and handle complaints. OSHA preliminarily
determined that LCI has demonstrated these capabilities through the
following:
     LCI has detailed procedures describing the content of test
reports, and other detailed procedures describing the preparation and
approval of these reports.
     LCI has procedures for recording, analyzing, and
processing complaints from users, manufacturers, and other parties in a
fair manner.
    OSHA's on-site assessments of LCI's facilities confirmed the
capabilities described in its application packet. The assessors found
some nonconformances with the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7. LCI
addressed these issues sufficiently to meet the applicable NRTL
requirements.
    OSHA's review of the application file and pertinent documentation,
as well as the results of the on-site assessments, indicate that LCI
can meet the requirements prescribed by 29 CFR 1910.7 for recognition
as a NRTL for its site located in Delta, BC Canada.
    OSHA's preliminary finding does not constitute an interim or
temporary approval of LCI's application.
    OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether LCI meets the
requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for recognition as a NRTL. Comments
should consist of pertinent written documents and exhibits. Commenters
needing more time to comment must submit a request in writing, stating
the reasons for the request, for an extension by the due date for
comments. OSHA will limit any extension to 10 days unless the requester
justifies a longer time period. OSHA may deny a request for an
extension if it is not adequately justified. To review copies of the
exhibits identified in this notice, as well as comments submitted to
the docket, contact the Docket Office, Room N-3653, Occupational Safety
and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, at the above
address. Please note: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Docket Office
is closed to the public at this time but can be contacted at (202) 693-
2350. These materials also are generally available online at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. OSHA-2021-0005. All documents in
the docket (including this Federal Register notice) are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g.,
copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download
through the website. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection through the OSHA Docket Office.
    OSHA staff will review all comments submitted to the docket in a
timely manner and, after addressing the issues raised by these
comments, will make a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for
Occupational Safety and Health regarding LCI's application for
recognition as a NRTL. The Assistant Secretary will make the final
decision on granting the application. In making this decision, the
Assistant Secretary may undertake other proceedings prescribed in
Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7.
    OSHA will publish a public notice of this final decision in the
Federal Register.

IV. Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this
notice. Accordingly, the agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29
U.S.C. 657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393,
September 18, 2020) and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on August 6, 2021.
James S. Frederick,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2021-17434 Filed 8-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 183 (Friday, September 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 53098]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20695]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4521-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Nebraska; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Nebraska (FEMA-4521-DR), dated April 4, 2020, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued August 5, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
dated April 4, 2020 for the State of Nebraska is hereby amended to
include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    All areas within the State of Nebraska are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-20695 Filed 9-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 155 (Monday, August 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48920-48922]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19406]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70124; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2013-78]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.3(i)(1)(i) To Specify the Procedures To Be Followed if
a Listed Derivative Securities Product or a Listed Structured Product
Is Based on an Index or Portfolio of Securities and Such Index or
Portfolio Is Modified or Replaced

August 6, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on July 25, 2013, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.3(i)(1)(i)
to specify the procedures to be followed if a listed Derivative
Securities Product or a listed Structured Product is based on an index
or portfolio of securities and such index or portfolio is modified or
replaced. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to clarify Exchange
policies with respect to changes in the index or portfolio on which a
listed security is based. The proposed rule change is consistent with
the policies currently applied under existing Exchange rules. In
particular, the Exchange proposes to adopt specific procedures to be
followed when a Derivative Securities Product \4\ or a Structured
Product \5\ based on an index or portfolio of securities is listed on
the Exchange and: (1) The value of such index or portfolio is no longer
calculated or available and a new index or portfolio is substituted; or
(2) such index or portfolio is replaced with a new index or portfolio
from the same or a different index provider; or (3) the index or
portfolio is significantly modified (including, but not limited to, a
significant modification to the index methodology, a change in the
index provider or a change in control of the index provider) (each of
(1), (2) and (3), a ``Material Index or Portfolio Change'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Derivative Securities Products'' are (i) investment
company units listed under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3)
Commentary .01(a)(A)(1) and (ii) securities defined in Section 2 of
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.
    \5\ Pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.1(b)(17), the term
``Structured Products'' means products that are derived from and/or
based on a single security or securities, a basket of stocks, an
index, a commodity, debt issuance and/or a foreign currency, among
other things. Structured Products include index and equity linked
notes, term notes and units generally consisting of a contract to
purchase equity and/or debt securities at a specified time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is the Exchange's long-standing policy to require the issuer of
any Derivative Securities Product or Structured Product to submit an
executed Supplemental Listing Application and to obtain authorization
from NYSE Regulation prior to the effective date of any change in the
index or portfolio on which such security is based. Generally, NYSE
Regulation requires at least two weeks to review and to approve a
Supplemental Listing Application. The Exchange reminds issuers of this
policy in an annual reminder letter sent to all listed issuers which
summarizes important Exchange corporate governance and notice
requirements. This current policy is appropriate in light of NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.3(i)(1)(i)(N), which requires listed issuers to
``provide

sufficient advance application for the listing of securities in
substitution for securities, the obligations, rights or privileges of
which have been altered by merger, acquisition, consolidation or other
corporate action, unless specifically exempted by the [Exchange].'' The
Exchange also has the authority to require this notice pursuant to NYSE
Arca Equities Rule 5.3(i)(1)(i)(O), which requires listed issuers to
furnish any information concerning their businesses as the Exchange may
reasonably require.
    The Exchange notes that a Derivative Securities Product or
Structured Product based on an index or portfolio of securities that is
listed under a generic listing standard or pursuant to a rule filing
approved by the Commission is authorized for continued listing only so
long as it meets the terms of the applicable generic listing standard
or rule filing. In the event that a Material Index or Portfolio Change
causes the applicable security to cease to be qualified for listing
under the applicable generic listing standard or rule filing, then the
Exchange does not have the authority to continue its listing unless
such continued listing is authorized pursuant to a rule filing declared
immediately effective or approved by the Commission.\6\ Similarly, the
Exchange is required to file a Form 19b-4(e) with the Commission
whenever it lists a new Derivative Securities Product or Structured
Product under a generic listing standard and it is the Exchange's
existing practice to file a new Form 19b-4(e) if there is a Material
Index or Portfolio Change in relation to such security in cases where
the security as modified still meets the applicable generic listing
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ There can be no assurance that the Commission will approve a
rule filing with respect to any specific Material Index or Portfolio
Change. In the event that any such rule filing is not approved, the
security in question will be delisted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add a new paragraph (P) to NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.3(i)(1)(i) to provide additional clarity to issuers of
Derivative Securities Products and Structured Products with respect to
Exchange rules and policy applicable in the event of any change in the
index or portfolio on which a security is based would specify. If a
Material Index or Portfolio Change occurs with respect to a listed
security, the Exchange will not continue the listing of such security
unless the new (or modified) index or portfolio meets the requirements
for listing of the rule under which such security was originally
listed, either pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act (including the
filing of a Form 19b-4(e) with the Commission) or by Commission
approval or immediate effectiveness of a filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Act. In such circumstances, the Exchange will have sole
discretion as to whether it chooses to submit a rule filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1). If an issuer of a listed Derivative Securities
Product or listed Structured Product effectuates a Material Index or
Portfolio Change with respect to which approval of a rule filing
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) is required and such rule filing has not
yet been approved or is not immediately effective, then the Exchange
will immediately halt trading in the applicable security until such
rule filing is approved. If at any time it becomes clear, in the
opinion of the Exchange, that such rule filing will not be approved by
the Commission or become immediately effective, or the Exchange decides
in its sole discretion to withdraw or not file such rule filing, the
Exchange will immediately commence delisting procedures with respect to
such security.
    Proposed NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.3(i)(1)(i)(P) would also require
the issuer of any listed Derivative Securities Product or Structured
Product to notify the Exchange no fewer than ten business days in
advance of the effective date of any change or modification to the
index or portfolio associated with such security and, if required by
the Exchange, to make application for the continued listing of the
security as so changed and to announce such change via a method
acceptable under the Exchange's rule with respect to material news
dissemination, NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.3(i)(2). The proposed rule
will advise issuers to consult with NYSE Regulation in advance of any
Material Index or Portfolio Change which could cause the applicable
security to cease to be qualified for continued listing without the
approval or immediate effectiveness of a rule filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1), in which case the proposed rule will advise issuers
to provide adequate notice to the Exchange to provide sufficient time
to submit an appropriate rule change prior to implementation of the
Material Index or Portfolio Change, thereby avoiding any disruption in
trading.
    The proposed rule change is intended to ensure that the Exchange
has appropriate notice of modifications to the index or portfolio on
which a security is based that would give rise to the requirement to
submit a new rule filing or to file a Form 19b-4(e). The proposal to
require 10 business days' notice of a modification of the index or
portfolio on which a security is based is consistent with the
Exchange's longstanding policy requiring the issuer of any Derivative
Securities Product or Structured Product to submit an executed
Supplemental Listing Application and to obtain authorization from NYSE
Regulation prior to the effective date of any change in the index or
portfolio on which such security is based. Generally, NYSE Regulation
requires at least two weeks to review and to approve a Supplemental
Listing Application. The Exchange reminds issuers of this policy
annually in a letter summarizing important Exchange corporate
governance and notice requirements disseminated to all listed issuers.
The Exchange believes that this current policy is appropriate in light
of NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.3(i)(1)(i)(N), which requires listed
issuers to ``provide sufficient advance application for the listing of
securities in substitution for securities, the obligations, rights or
privileges of which have been altered by merger, acquisition,
consolidation or other corporate action, unless specifically exempted
by the [Exchange].'' The Exchange also believes that it has the
authority to require this notice pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.3(i)(1)(i)(O), which requires listed issuers to furnish any
information concerning their businesses as the Exchange may reasonably
require.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) \7\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(1)
of the Act,\9\ in particular in that it is designed to comply, and to
ensure that the Exchange enforces listed company compliance, with the
Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment is
consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act in that it simply clarifies
the framework under which the Exchange will handle a Material Index or
Portfolio Change in relation to a Derivative Securities Product or
Structured Product. Pursuant to the Act, the Exchange does not have
authority to continue listing a security that ceases to be qualified
for listing under an applicable generic listing standard or rule
filing. In the event that a security ceases to so qualify, the proposed
rule change merely sets forth the framework for how the Exchange will
rectify the

deficiency or ultimately commence delisting proceedings. In this
regard, the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(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. The sole purpose of the
proposed rule filing is to enable the Exchange to effectively comply
with its obligations under the Act and Commission rules with respect to
the listing of Derivative Securities Products and Structured Products
in the event of a Material Index or Portfolio Change and it therefore
imposes no burden on competition.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
Because the 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 prior to
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, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \12\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\13\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to give the Commission written
notice of the Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \14\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2013-78 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-NYSEARCA-2013-78. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet 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 Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; 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-NYSEARCA-2013-78 and should
be submitted on or before September 3, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-19406 Filed 8-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 86)]
[Notices]
[Page 20969]
[DOCID:fr06my09-89]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1834-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]

Arkansas; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1834-DR), dated April 27,
2009, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: April 27, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated April 27, 2009, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the Stafford Act), as
follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Arkansas resulting from severe storms and tornadoes on April 9,
2009, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major
disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (``the Stafford
Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in
the State of Arkansas.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance designated
areas, Hazard Mitigation throughout the State, and any other forms
of assistance under the Stafford Act that you deem appropriate.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs. If Public Assistance is later
requested and warranted, Federal funds provided under that program
will also be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that W. Michael Moore, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal
Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Arkansas have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Miller, Polk, and Sevier Counties for Individual Assistance.
    All counties within the State of Arkansas are eligible to apply
for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Nancy Ward,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-10439 Filed 5-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									     OFFICE OF

									AIR AND RADIATION

7/23/15

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Test Procedure Review with Cummins, Volvo, Navistar, Paccar,
Eaton and Allison

FROM: James Sanchez

TO:  Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards
for Medium- and

Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles - Phase 2 - Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827

This memo documents communication on July 23rd, 2015 between
representatives of Cummins, Navistar, Paccar, Eaton, Allison, and EPA to
discuss heavy-duty test procedures proposed in the Phase 2 greenhouse
gas and fuel efficiency standards for heavy-duty vehicles notice of
proposed rulemaking.

Participants:

Cummins – Jackie Yeager, Anand Puranik

Eaton – Erik Dykes

EPA – Houshun Zhang, James Sanchez

Navistar – David Gardner, Cortney Guzlas

PACCAR – Erin Luke, Dan Kieffer, Tom Sloane

Allison – Mike Howenstein, Jeff Shultz, Jed

Discussion and follow-up items (with owner's name in bold):

Summary of completed and planned testing

Houshun and James provided an overview of testing at SwRI, ORNL, and EPA
labs (see slides from Houhsun)

Future testing includes additional engines and child ratings;
alternative maps, steady state maps, powertrain maps; investigation of
“hybrid” (mixed mode) mapping

Generating engine cycles from GEM

Another version of GEM source code will be posted soon with engine
cycles as an output

“Hybrid” concept of alt map + ss map

Ran out of time to discuss so will keep on agenda for next call

Consider “hybrid” concept of using alternative mapping for ARB
transient cycle and smaller steady state map on 55, 65 mph cruise cycles
as way of reducing test time, for discussion on next call – All

Other

Consider if companies should submit written comments on alternative
mapping and powertrain test procedures as a group – All


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 44903]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18913]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP11-504-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC; Notice of Request
Under Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on June 30, 2011, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line
Company, LLC (Transco), Post Office Box 1396, Houston, Texas 77251-
1396, filed in Docket No. CP11-504-000, a prior notice request pursuant
to sections 157.205 and 157.216 of the Commission's regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Transco seeks authorization to abandon its
Compressor Station 20 located in Refugio County, Texas. Transco
proposes to perform these activities under its blanket certificate
originally issued in Docket No. CP82-426-000 [20 FERC ] 62,420 (1982)],
all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with
the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Specifically, the facilities at issue are three 1,600 horsepower
compressor units, two 1,760 horsepower compressor units, and a
compressor building and foundation, located at milepost 170.25 on
Transco's Mainline A in Refugio County, Texas. In addition, Transco
intends to abandon metering facilities, suction and discharge piping,
and other appurtenances.
    The filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Nan
Miksovsky, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC, Post Office Box
1396, Houston, Texas 77251-1396, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>
(telephone).
    Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of
the Commission's Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest
to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed
therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized
effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is
filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for
filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an
application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link. Persons unable
to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the
protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Dated: July 13, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-18913 Filed 7-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 169)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 50292-50294]
[DOCID:fr31au07-23]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-29087; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-094-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800
and -900 Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800 and -900 series
airplanes. This proposed AD would require repetitive lubrication of the
left and right main landing gear (MLG) forward trunnion pins. This
proposed AD would also require an inspection for discrepancies of the
transition radius of the MLG forward trunnion pins, and repair or
replacement if necessary. This proposed AD would also require a one-
time inspection for discrepancies of the lead-in chamfer and cross-bolt
bore, and repair or replacement if necessary. Doing the applicable
inspections and repairs/replacements, or overhauling the trunnion pins
ends the repetitive lubrication requirements of this proposed AD. This
proposed AD results from a report that the protective finishes on the
forward trunnion pins for the left and right MLG might have been
damaged during final assembly. We are proposing this AD to prevent
cracking of the forward trunnion pin, which could result in fracture of
the pin and consequent collapse of the MLG.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 15,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     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.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor 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.
    Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this
proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6440; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2007-
29087; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-094-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is located on the
ground floor of the West Building at the street address stated in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after the Docket Management System receives them.

Discussion

    We have received a report indicating that the protective finishes
on the forward trunnion pins for the main landing gear (MLG) might have
been damaged during final assembly of Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800 and -900 series airplanes. The protective coating could be
damaged at two locations because of the use of an unauthorized process,
and damaged at one location because the pin was not handled correctly.
Therefore, it is possible that these trunnion pins have been delivered
to operators with compromised corrosion protection in these critical
areas:
     The cross-bolt bore and outer diameter surface.
     The lead-in chamfer and outer diameter surface.
     The transition radius between the chrome-plated outer
diameter and the spherical ball bearing surface.
    Damage to the protective finish puts the base metal of the trunnion
pin at risk from corrosion pitting. This condition, if not corrected,
could lead to cracking of the forward trunnion pin, which could result
in fracture of the pin and consequent collapse of the MLG.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 1,
dated March 19, 2007. The service bulletin describes procedures for
repetitive lubrication of the MLG forward trunnion pins. The service
bulletin states that accomplishing the inspections and applicable
repairs/replacements described below, or overhauling the trunnion pins
in accordance with Boeing 737 Component Maintenance Manual 57-15-01,
eliminates the need for the repetitive lubrication.
    The service bulletin also describes procedures for an inspection
for discrepancies (corrosion, finish damage, surface deformation, or
scratches) of the transition radius. If any discrepancy is found, the
service bulletin specifies repairing or replacing the trunnion pin, as
applicable, depending on the type of discrepancy found. The repair
includes blending and restoring the protective finish. If the trunnion
pin is not replaced, the service bulletin specifies an additional
inspection for discrepancies of the lead-in chamfer and the cross-bolt
bore. If any discrepancy is found, the service bulletin specifies
repairing or replacing the trunnion pin, as applicable, depending on
the type of discrepancy found.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously, except as discussed under
``Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin.''

Difference Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin

    Although Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 1, dated
March 19, 2007, specifies to send inspection reports to the
manufacturer, this proposed AD would not require that action.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 890 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate
is $80 per work hour.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                      Work                                        U.S.-
              Action                 hours      Parts      Cost per airplane    registered       Fleet cost
                                                                                airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repetitive lubrication...........          1         $0  $80, per lubrication          300  $24,000, per
                                                          cycle.                             lubrication cycle.
Inspections......................          4          0  320.................          300  $96,000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 have 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 that the 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. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2007-29087; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
094-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October
15, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800
and -900 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 1, dated
March 19, 2007.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report that the protective finishes
on the forward trunnion pins for the left and right main landing
gear (MLG) might have been damaged during final assembly. We are
issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the forward trunnion pin,
which could result in fracture of the pin and consequent collapse of
the MLG.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Lubrication or Overhaul

    (f) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD:
Lubricate the left and right MLG forward trunnion pins in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
32-1376, Revision 1, dated March 19, 2007. Repeat the lubrication at
intervals not to exceed 30 days until all applicable requirements of
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD have been accomplished.
Overhauling the trunnion pin as given in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 1,
ends the repetitive lubrication requirements of this paragraph for
that pin.

Inspection and Corrective Actions

    (g) Within 60 months after the date of issuance of the original
standard airworthiness certificate or date of issuance of the
original standard export certificate of airworthiness, or within 6
months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later:
Do a detailed inspection for discrepancies (corrosion, finish
damage, surface deformation, or scratches) of the transition radius
of the left and right MLG trunnion pin; and if any discrepancy is
found, repair or replace the trunnion pin before further flight. Do
all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 1, dated March 19,
2007.
    (h) For any airplane on which a trunnion pin is not replaced in
accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD, within 96 months after the
date of issuance of the original standard airworthiness certificate
or date of issuance of the original standard export certificate of
airworthiness, or within 12 months after the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later: Do a detailed inspection for
discrepancies of the lead-in chamfer and cross-bolt bore; and if any
discrepancy is found, repair or replace the trunnion pin before
further flight. Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 1,
dated March 19, 2007.

No Report Required

    (i) Although Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 1,
dated March 19, 2007, specifies to send inspection reports to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

Credit for Actions Done Using Previous Issue of Service Information

    (j) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, dated May 12,
2005, are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions
of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 17, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-17285 Filed 8-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Rock Ridge Vapor, LLC
05/27/14

Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305)
Food and Drug Administration
5630 Fishers Lane
Room 1061
Rockville, MD 20852
Re: Request for Extension of Comment Period: Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0189

We,
 Rock Ridge Vapor, LLC
have conducted preliminary review of your lengthy proposed
regulations
and respectfully request
that the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)
extend the comment period for the proposed rule entitled “Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and
Tobacco Control Act; Regulations on the Sale and Distribution of Tobacco Products and
Required Warning Statements for Tobacco Products.”
We, Rock Ridge Vapor, LLC
, are small electronic cigarette
manufacturer/ retailer
employing fewer than 350 people
.
[Rock Ridge Vapor, LLC provides quality vapor Products, and USA made E-Liquid)]
As explained further below;  the initial 75-day comment period does not provide
enough time for small companies like us
(Rock Ridge Vapor, LLC)
to adequately analyze the entire proposal and
provide substantive comments on the many questions posed by the agency. We
need more time to address this 240-page document whose contents will deal a devastating economic blow to our
business. A business in which, my wife and I believe in, and have
 poured our heart and soul into, (as well as our nest egg).
The preamble to the proposed rule identifies approximately 70 topics and issues
the agency has requested comments on.
Many of these issues are complex, and difficult,and relate to
an extremely diverse array of products.
Clearly, the lengthy time period
that the Agency required to propose these regulations
is evidence that the issues addressed in the proposal are
multi-faceted and challenging..

FDA cannot expect any interested party, and in particular, any
manufacturer, to conduct a meaningful review
and analysis of these issues
and provide detailed
and thoughtful comment, a75-day period.There are so many products,
and variants of those products, that it would be a futile effort.
Therefore, we, at Rock Ridge Vapor, LLC,
again
respectfully requests that FDA
extend the comment period by 105
days and agree to accept comments filed to the docket on or before
October 22, 2014.
This will help ensure that the final rule is based on
an adequate and meaningful administrative record.

Thank you in advance
for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,
W, David Chumbley, 3rd
Owner/operator, Rock Ridge Vapor, LLC