[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 83 (Monday, May 3, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23301-23304]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08747]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0259; Project Identifier AD-2020-01128-E]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; CFM International, S.A. Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2013-26-01, which applies to all CFM International, S.A. (CFM) CFM56-3
and CFM56-7B model turbofan engines with a certain accessory gearbox
assembly (AGB) not equipped with a handcranking pad oil dynamic seal
assembly. AD 2013-26-01 requires an independent inspection to verify
re-installation of the handcranking pad cover after removal of the pad
cover for maintenance. Since the FAA issued AD 2013-26-01, a dual-
engine oil loss event occurred, prompting CFM to revise its service
information to provide procedures for reworking and reidentifying the
AGB. The FAA has also evaluated the requirement to install a redesigned
handcranking pad oil dynamic seal assembly in response to the dual-
engine oil loss event. This proposed AD would continue to require
independent inspection to verify re-installation of the AGB
handcranking pad cover after maintenance. This proposed AD would
require the replacement of the affected AGB as a terminating action to
the inspection requirement. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 17,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact CFM
International, S.A., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D
Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0259; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher McGuire, Aviation Safety
Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0259; Project
Identifier AD-2020-01128-E'' at the beginning of your comments. The
most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the final rule,
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting
data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend this NPRM because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://

www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Christopher McGuire, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2013-26-01, Amendment 39-17710 (78 FR 79295,
December 30, 2013), (AD 2013-26-01), for all CFM CFM56-3 and CFM56-7B
model turbofan engines equipped with a certain AGB not equipped with a
handcranking pad oil dynamic assembly. AD 2013-26-01 requires an
independent inspection to verify re-installation of the AGB
handcranking pad cover after any maintenance involving the removal and
reinstallation of the AGB handcranking pad cover. As an optional
terminating action to the inspection requirements, AD 2013-26-01
allowed the installation of an AGB that incorporates a handcranking pad
oil dynamic seal assembly. AD 2013-26-01 resulted from 42 events of
total loss of engine oil from CFM56 model turbofan engines while in
flight. The FAA issued AD 2013-26-01 to prevent loss of engine oil
while in flight, which could result in engine failure, loss of thrust
control, and damage to the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2013-26-01 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2013-26-01, a dual-engine oil loss event
occurred, prompting the FAA to propose the mandatory installation of a
redesigned handcranking pad oil dynamic seal assembly. In addition, CFM
revised its service information to provide procedures for replacing the
starter drive pad assembly and handcranking cover assembly and for
reworking and reidentifying an affected AGB to a part eligible for
installation.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other
products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed CFM International CFM56-7B Service Bulletin (SB)
72-0879, Revision 6, dated March 1, 2018 (CFM SB 72-0879); CFM
International SB CFM56-3 SB 72-1129, Revision 7, dated May 5, 2020 (CFM
SB 72-1129); and CFM International SB CFM56-7B SB 72-0564 Revision 8,
dated May 6, 2020 (CFM SB 72-0564). CFM SB 72-1129 describes procedures
for the introduction of a new starter drive pad, new handcranking cover
assembly, and reworking and reidentifying an AGB installed on CFM56-3
model turbofan engines. CFM SB 72-0879 and CFM SB 72-0564 describe
procedures for the introduction of a new starter drive pad, new
handcranking cover, and reworking and reidentifying an AGB installed on
CFM56-7B model turbofan engines. CFM SB 72-0879 and CFM SB 72-0564 are
differentiated by the part numbers of the AGBs eligible for rework and
the new part numbers by which these AGBs will be reidentified once
rework is complete. This service information is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2013-26-
01. This proposed AD would require the performance of an independent
inspection to verify re-installation of the AGB handcranking pad cover
after maintenance. Alternatively, this proposed AD would require the
insertion of an independent inspection as a required inspection item in
the approved continuous airworthiness maintenance program for the
aircraft not later than the next time the AGB handcranking pad cover is
removed for maintenance. This proposed AD would also remove the
optional terminating action in AD 2013-26-01 and add a mandatory
terminating action for certain model turbofan engines, requiring the
removal and replacement of an affected AGB with an AGB that
incorporates the oil dynamic seal assembly.
    For all CFM56-3B and the majority of CFM56-7B turbofan engine
models, this proposed AD would require replacement of the AGB as a
mandatory terminating action to the inspection requirement of this AD.
This proposed AD does not require this terminating action for CFM56-
7B27A, CFM56-7B27A/3 and CFM56-7B27AE model turbofan engines because
these model engines, which are installed only in military airplanes, do
not have a replacement AGB eligible for installation.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, as proposed, would affect 700
engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates that
the majority of operators will perform the repair and reidentification
of the AGB rather than replace the AGB with a zero hour part. For the
purpose of this cost estimate, the FAA estimates that 95% of AGBs will
be repaired and reidentified while 5% of AGBs will be replaced with a
zero hour AGB.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Independent Inspection................  1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0             $85         $59,500
                                         hour = $85.
Insert inspection item into aircraft    1 work-hour x $85 per                  0              85          59,500
 maintenance program.                    hour = $0.
Rework and reidentify AGB.............  4 work-hours x $85 per            12,000          12,340       8,206,100
                                         hour = $340.
Replace AGB with zero hour AGB........  4 work-hours x $85 per           526,700         527,040      18,446,400
                                         hour = $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA has 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) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing airworthiness directive 2013-26-01, Amendment 39-17710 (78
FR 79295, December 30, 2013); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

CFM International, S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2021-0259; Project
Identifier AD-2020-01128-E.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by June 17, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2013-26-01, Amendment 39-17710 (78 FR 79295,
December 30, 2013).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to CFM International, S.A. CFM56-3 and CFM56-7B
model turbofan engines equipped with an accessory gearbox (AGB)
assembly with the following part numbers (P/Ns):
    (1) For CFM56-3, CFM56-3B, and CFM56-3C model turbofan engines,
AGB P/N: 335-300-103-0, 335-300-105-0, 335-300-106-0, 335-300-107-0,
335-300-108-0, 335-300-109-0, or 335-300-110-0, installed.
    (2) For CFM56-7B20, CFM56-7B20/2, CFM56-7B20/3, CFM56-7B22,
CFM56-7B22/2, CFM56-7B22/3, CFM56-7B22/3B1, CFM56-7B22/B1, CFM56-
7B24, CFM56-7B24/2, CFM56-7B24/3, CFM56-7B24/3B1, CFM56-7B24/B1,
CFM56-7B26, CFM56-7B26/2, CFM56-7B26/3, CFM56-7B26/3B1, CFM56-7B26/
3B2, CFM56-7B26/3B2F, CFM56-7B26/3F, CFM56-7B26/B1, CFM56-7B26/B2,
CFM56-7B27, CFM56-7B27/2, CFM56-7B27/3, CFM56-7B27/3B1, CFM56-7B27/
3B1F, CFM56-7B27/3B3, CFM56-7B27/3F, CFM56-7B27/B1, and CFM56-7B27/
B3 model turbofan engines, AGB P/N: 340-046-503-0, 340-046-504-0, or
340-046-505-0, installed.
    (3) For CFM56-7B27A, CFM56-7B27A/3, or CFM56-7B27AE model
turbofan engines, AGB P/N: 340-188-601-0, 340-188-603-0, or 340-188-
605-0, installed.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7260, Turbine Engine
Accessory Drive.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a dual engine loss of oil event and 42
prior events of total loss of engine oil during flight. The FAA is
issuing this AD to prevent loss of engine oil while in flight. The
unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in engine failure,
loss of thrust control, reduced control of the aircraft, and damage
to the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) After the effective date of this AD, after any maintenance
that involves removal and re-installation of the AGB handcranking
pad cover, perform an independent inspection to verify re-
installation of the AGB handcranking pad cover; or
    (2) Prior to the next removal of the AGB handcranking pad cover
from the engine, insert the independent inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD as a required inspection item in the
existing approved continuous airworthiness maintenance program for
the aircraft.

(h) Mandatory Terminating Action

    As a mandatory terminating action to the requirements of
paragraph (g) of this AD:
    (1) For affected CFM56-3, CFM56-3B, and CFM56-3C model turbofan
engines, at the next engine shop visit, or before December 31, 2026,
whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, replace
the affected AGB with a part eligible for installation.
    (2) For affected CFM56-7B model turbofan engines, except for
CFM56-7B27A, CFM56-7B27A/3 and CFM56-7B27AE model turbofan engines,
at the next engine shop visit, or before December 31, 2024,
whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, replace
the affected AGB with a part eligible for installation.

(i) Definition

    (1) For the purpose of this AD, an ``engine shop visit'' is the
induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the
separation of pairs of major mating engine case flanges, except for
the following situations, which do not constitute an engine shop
visit:
    (i) Separation of engine flanges solely for the purposes of
transportation of the engine without subsequent maintenance.
    (ii) Separation of engine flanges solely for the purpose of
replacing the fan or propulsor without subsequent maintenance.
    (2) For the purpose of this AD, for affected CFM56-3, CFM56-3B,
and CFM56-3C model turbofan engines, a part eligible for
installation is:
    (i) An AGB with a part number other than 335-300-103-0, 335-300-
105-0, 335-300-106-0, 335-300-107-0, 335-300-108-0, 335-300-109-0,
335-300-110-0, or
    (ii) An affected AGB that has been reworked and reidentified to
a part number eligible for installation using CFM International
Service Bulletin (SB) CFM56-3 SB 72-1129, Revision 7, dated May 5,
2020.
    (3) For the purpose of this AD, for affected CFM56-7B model
turbofan engines, except for CFM56-7B27A, CFM56-7B27A/3 and CFM56-
7B27AE model turbofan engines, a part eligible for installation is:
    (i) An AGB with a part number other than 340-046-503-0, 340-046-
504-0, or 340-046-505-0, or
    (ii) An affected AGB that has been reworked and reidentified to
a part number eligible for installation using, as applicable, CFM
International SB CFM56-7B SB 72-0879, Revision 6, dated March 1,
2018, or CFM International SB CFM56-7B SB 72-0564 Revision 8, dated
May 6, 2020.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.1914. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District

Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in Related Information. You may email your request
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Christopher
McGuire, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District
Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (781) 238-
7199; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact CFM
International, S.A., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D
Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(781) 238-7759.

    Issued on March 30, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-08747 Filed 4-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 50 (Thursday, March 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16320-16324]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05885]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69083; File No. SR-C2-2013-013]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Regulation NMS
Plan To Address Extraordinary Market Volatility

March 8, 2013.
    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 March 7, 2013, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (``C2'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
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

    The Exchange proposes to modify its rules to address certain option
order handling procedures and quoting obligations on the Exchange after
the implementation of the market wide equity Plan to Address
Extraordinary Market Volatility (the ``Plan'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site (http://www.c2exchange.com/Legal/), at the Exchange's Office
of the Secretary, 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 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to update Exchange rules to correspond
with the Plan. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to make proposed
changes to Exchange Rules Rule 6.10, ``Order Types Defined,'' 6.11,
``Openings (and sometimes Closings),'' Rule 6.13, ``Complex Order
Execution,'' Rule 6.15, ``Obvious Error and Catastrophic Errors,'' Rule
6.18, ``HAL,'' Rule 6.39, ``Equity Market Plan to Address Extraordinary
Market Volatility,'' Rule 8.5, ``Obligations of Market-Makers, Rule
8.17, ``DPM Obligations,'' and Rule 8.19, ``DPM Participation
Entitlements.'' The Exchange believes these modifications will protect
investors because when an underlying security is in a limit or straddle
state (collectively referred to in this filing as a ``limit up-limit
down state''), there will not be a reliable price for the security to
serve as a benchmark for the price of the option. In addition, the
width of the markets might be compromised and, thus, the quality of
execution for retail customers. The Plan is more fully explained below.
    In an attempt to address extraordinary market volatility in NMS
Stock, and, in particular, events like the severe volatility on May 6,
2010, the Exchange, in conjunction with the other national securities
exchanges and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(collectively, ``Participants'') drafted the Plan pursuant to Rule 608
of Regulation NMS and under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act'').\3\ The Plan is primarily designed to, among other things,
address extraordinary market volatility in NMS stocks, protect
investors, and promote fair and orderly markets. The Plan provides for
market-wide limit up-limit down requirements that prevent trades in
individual NMS Stocks from occurring outside of specified price bands,
as defined in Section I(N) of the Plan. These requirements would be
coupled with trading pauses, as defined in Section I(Y) of the Plan, to
accommodate more fundamental price moves (as opposed to erroneous
trades or monetary gaps of liquidity).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64547 (May 25,
2011), 76 FR 31647 (June 1, 2011) (File No. 4-631).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan was filed on April 5, 2011 by the Participants for
publication and comment.\4\ The Participants requested the Commission
approve the Plan as a one-year pilot. On May 24, 2012, the Participants
filed an amendment to the Plan which clarified, among other things, the
calculation of the reference price, as defined in Section I(T) of the
Plan, potential for order type exemption, and the creation of an
Advisory Committee.\5\ On May 31, 2012, the Commission approved the
Plan, as amended, on a one-year pilot basis.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id.
    \5\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (File No. 4-631).
    \6\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012) 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Plan, Participants are required to adopt certain rules in
order to comply. Specifically, Section VI of the Plan sets forth the
limit up-limit down requirements of the Plan, and in particular, that
all trading centers in NMS Stocks, including both those operated by the
Participants and those operated by member of Participants, shall
establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that
are reasonably designed to prevent trades at prices that are below the
lower price band or above the upper price band for an NMS Stock,
consistent with the Plan. Price Bands will be calculated by Securities
Information Processors (``SIPs'') responsible for consolidation of
information for an NMS Stock pursuant to Rule 603(b) of Regulation NMS
under the Act. As proposed, and approved, the Plan would be
implemented, as a one year pilot program, in two phases.\7\ Phase I
would become effective on April 8 and apply to Tier I NMS Stock per
Appendix A of the Plan, and Phase II would become effective six months
later, or earlier if announced by the SIPs 30 days prior, and would
apply to all NMS Stocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Plan, when one side of the market for an individual
security is outside the applicable price band, the SIPs will be
required to disseminate such National Best Bid or National Best Offer
with an appropriate flag identifying it as non-executable. When the
other side of the market reaches the applicable Price Band, the market
for an individual security will enter a limit state. Trading for that
security will exit the limit state if, within 15 seconds of entering
the limit state, all limit state quotations were executed or cancelled.
If the market does not exit a limit state within 15 seconds, then the
primary listing exchange will declare a five-minute trading pause,
which will be applicable to all markets trading the security.
    Though the Plan is primarily designed for equity markets, the
Exchange believes it will, indirectly, potentially impact the options
markets as well. Thus, as stated above, the Exchange is proposing to
amend its rules to ensure the option markets are not harmed as a result
of the Plan's implementation. As such, the Exchange is proposing to
amend various rules to reflect such changes. The Exchange believes such
changes will protect participants, the Exchange and investors in
general.
    First, the Exchange is proposing to add Rule 6.39 to codify the
changes throughout the Exchange's rules. The Exchange is proposing to
add the title to ``Equity Market Plan to Address Extraordinary Market
Volatility'' and add text. Rule 6.39 will define the Plan as it applies
to the Exchange. In addition, the proposed rule change will describe
the location of the other rule changes associated with the Plan. In
essence, the proposed changes to Rule 6.39 will serve as a roadmap for
the Exchange's universal changes due to the implementation of the Plan.
The proposed rule changes will list changes to Exchange order types,
order handling, obvious error, and market-maker quoting obligations
that the Exchange is proposing to make in connection with the
implementation of the Plan. These rule changes are more thoroughly
described in various sections of the Exchange Rulebook, but having one
place referencing all rules associated with the Plan will serve to
better protect investors by making the other rules easily located. The
Exchange believes the proposed changes to Rule 6.39 will describe to
Trading Permit Holders (``TPHs''), and other participants, where to
find the changes associated with the Plan and will, thus, attempt to
maintain a more orderly market.
    Next, the Exchange is proposing to modify its opening procedures
under Rule 6.11, ``Openings (and sometimes Closings).'' The Exchange is
proposing to add an Interpretation and Policy .03 to clarify that if
the underlying security for a class of options enters into a limit up-
limit down state when the class moves to opening rotation, any market
orders entered that trading day currently opening, prior to the opening
of that class, will be cancelled. The Exchange believes this change is
consistent with cancelling market orders in general during a limit up-
limit down period as described in more detail below. The Exchange
further believes this proposed change will help the Exchange to

protect its TPHs from executing skewed orders during limit up-limit
down periods.
    Next, the Exchange is proposing to modify Exchange Rule 6.18,
``HAL.'' Exchange Rule 6.18 currently governs the operation of HAL, a
feature within the System that provides automated order handling in
designated classes trading on the System for qualifying orders that are
not automatically executed by the System. The Exchange determines the
eligible order size, eligible order types, eligible origin code (i.e.
public customer orders, non-Market-Maker broker-dealer orders and
Market-Maker broker-dealer orders), and classes in which HAL is
activated.\8\ When the Exchange receives a qualifying order that is
marketable against the National Best Bid or Offer (``NBBO'') and/or the
Exchange's best bid or offer (``BBO''),\9\ HAL electronically exposes
the order \10\ at the NBBO price to allow Market-Makers appointed in
that class, as well as all TPHs acting as agent for orders, at the top
of the Exchange's book in the relevant series (or all TPHs if allowed
by the Exchange) \11\ to step-up to the NBBO price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Rule 6.18.
    \9\ HAL will not electronically expose the order if the
Exchange's quotation contains resting orders and does not contain
sufficient Market-Maker quotation interest to satisfy the entire
order.
    \10\ The duration of the exposure period may not exceed one
second. Rule 6.18(c) describes the manner in which an exposed order
is allocated under HAL, and Rule 6.18(d) lists the circumstances in
which an exposure period would terminate early.
    \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the underlying security of the option in HAL affects the
pricing of the eventually executed order, the Exchange is proposing to
make changes to Rule 6.18 to reflect the implementation of the Plan.
More specifically, the Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 6.18 to
modify the behavior of HAL of a market order while the underlying
security of the option is in a limit up-limit down state. If an
underlying security shall enter a limit state while a HAL of a market
order is in process, the auction will end early, upon the entering of
the state, and any unexecuted portion of a market order shall be
cancelled. The Exchange believes the proposed rule changes will best
protect the TPH by ensuring it does not receive an executed order with
an unanticipated price due to the change in the underlying security. In
addition, by ending the auction early, the Exchange is providing a
better chance for the TPH to get its order executed as it is in the
TPH's interest for an earlier execution versus a later one.
    Next, the Exchange is proposing to modify how an electronic complex
order request for responses (``RFR'') auction (``COA'') will operate
while the underlying security of at least one of the options has
entered a limit state. Exchange Rule 6.13(c) currently describes the
general COA process. Generally, on a class-by-class basis, the Exchange
may activate COA, which is a process by which eligible complex orders
\12\ are given an opportunity for price improvement before being booked
in the electronic complex order book (``COB'') or once on a PAR
workstation. On receipt of a COA-eligible order and request from a TPH
representing the order that it be COA'd, the Exchange will send an RFR
message to all TPHs who have elected to receive RFR messages.\13\ Each
Market-Maker with an appointment in the relevant option class and each
TPH acting as agent for orders resting at the top of the COB in the
relevant options series may then submit responses to the RFR message
during the Response Time Interval.\14\ The Exchange is proposing to add
to the COA rule that if, during COA, the underlying security of a
market order enters a limit up-limit down state, the COA will end upon
the entering of that state and the remaining portion of the order will
cancel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ An eligible complex order, referred to in Rule 6.13 as a
``COA-eligible order,'' means a complex order that, as determined by
the Exchange on a class-by-class basis, is eligible for a COA
considering the order's marketability (defined as a number of ticks
away from the current market), size, complex order type and complex
order origin type (i.e. non-broker-dealer public customer, broker-
dealers that are not Market-Makers or specialists on an options
exchange, and/or Market-Makers or specialists on an options
exchange). All determinations by the Exchange on COA-eligible order
parameters are announced to Trading Permit Holders by Regulatory
Circular. See Rule 6.18(c)(1)(B) and Interpretation and Policy .01
to Rule 6.18.
    \13\ See Rule 6.18(c)(3)(B). The RFR message will identify the
component series, the size of the COA-eligible order and any
contingencies, but will not identify the side of the market.
    \14\ See Rule 6.18(c)(3). A ``Response Time Interval'' means the
period of time during which responses to the RFR may be entered, the
length of which is determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class
basis but may not exceed three seconds. See Rule 6.18(c)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange is proposing to amend Exchange Rule 6.15
relating to the nullification and adjustment of options transactions.
Under the current rule, an Obvious Pricing Error occurs when the
execution price of an electronic transaction is above or below the
Theoretical Price for the series by a specified amount. For purpose of
the rule, the ``Theoretical Price'' of an option series is currently
defined, for series traded on at least one other options exchange, as
the last national best bid price with respect to an erroneous sell
transaction and the last national best offer price with respect to an
erroneous buy transaction, just prior to the trade. If there are no
quotes for comparison, designated help desk personnel \15\ will
determine the Theoretical Price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Exchange Rule 6.15(a)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the theoretical price may be unreliable due to the
underlying security entering a limit state, the Exchange is proposing
to amend the Exchange obvious error rules to provide that the Exchange
may not nullify or adjust trades when the underlying security is in a
limit up-limit down state. The Exchange is also proposing to add
language specifying that transactions in options that overlay a
security that is in a limit state may, however, be reviewed on an
Exchange motion. The Exchange is also proposing to add language to
specify that this provision will be on a one year pilot basis to
coincide with the Plan. The Exchange will provide the Commission with
data and analysis during the duration of this pilot as requested.\16\
The Exchange believes this will best protect the market because it
allows limit orders to be executed on the Exchange while the underlying
securities are in limit states regardless of the calculated theoretical
price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Finally, as an administrative change, the Exchange is
proposing to eliminate a sentence referring to an Interpretation and
Policy (.08) that no longer exists. The proposed provision will be
the new Interpretation and Policy (.08) to Rule 6.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change would
protect against TPHs getting a potential second look at transactions
that happened during limit states that could be unfair to other
participants. The proposed rule change would encourage added liquidity
on the Exchange as the proposed changes would help to ensure that limit
orders that are filled during a limit up-limit down state would have
certainty of execution. By allowing the Exchange to continue to review
such transactions on their own motion, the Exchange is further
attempting to protect investors and maintain an orderly market. The
Exchange believes that the combination of encouraging TPHs to
participate on the market and allowing a safeguard to erroneous trades
will provide the best solution during the pilot of the Plan.
    Next, the Exchange is proposing to modify Rule 6.10 and 6.13 and,
more specifically, how certain Exchange order types will be handled
while the underlying security of such orders enters into a limit up-
limit down state. The proposed rule change will, among

other things, address how market orders,\17\ market-on-close,\18\ stop
orders,\19\ and stock option orders \20\ will function on the Exchange
upon the implementation of the Plan. More specifically, the Exchange is
proposing to add language to clarify that: (a) Market orders will be
returned during limit up-limit down states, (b) market-on-close orders
will not be elected if the underlying security is in a limit up-limit
down state, (c) stop orders will be held while the underlying security
is in a limit up-limit down state, and (d) stock-option orders will
only execute if the calculated stock price is within the permissible
Price Bands.\21\ In addition, during a limit up-limit down state, if a
message is sent to replace a limit order with a market order, the
resting limit order will be cancelled and the replaced market order
will also be cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Exchange Rule 6.10 which defines a market order as ``an
order to buy or sell a stated number of options contracts at the
best price available at the time of execution.''
    \18\ See Exchange Rule 6.10(c)(2) which defines a market-on-
close order designation as an order ``to be executed as close as
possible to the closing bell, or during the closing rotation, and
should be near to or at the closing price for the particular series
of option contracts.
    \19\ See Exchange Rule 6.10(c)(3) which defines a stop order
contingency to an order as one that ``to buy or sell when the market
for a particular option contract reaches a specified price on the
Exchange.''
    \20\ See Exchange Rule 6.13(a)(2) which defines a stock-option
order as ``an order to buy or sell a stated number of units of an
underlying stock or a security convertible into the underlying stock
* * * coupled with the purchase or sale of options contract(s) on
the opposite side of the market.''
    \21\ If the calculated price of a stock-option order is not
within the permissible Price Bands, the stock-option order will be
routed for manual handling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When a stock is in a limit or straddle state, while options trading
will continue, there will not be a reliable price for a security to
serve as a benchmark for the price of the option. In addition, without
a reliable underlying stock price, there is an enhanced risk of errors
and improper executions. With these concerns in mind, the Exchange
believes that adding a level of certainty for TPHs will encourage
participation on the Exchange whilst the underlying securities are in
limit up-limit down states. Thus, the Exchange believes handling these
certain orders in this way will best protect the investor after the
implementation of the Plan by not allowing execution at unreasonable
prices due to the shift in the stock prices.
    Finally, the Exchange is proposing to eliminate all market maker
obligations for options in which the underlying security is in a limit
state while the underlying security in is in the limit up-limit down
state. Currently, Exchange Rules 8.5 and 8.17 impose certain
obligations on Market-Makers and DPMs, respectively, including
obligations to provide continuous quotes as follows: \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ For purposes of Rules 8.5(a)(1), and 8.17(a)(1),
``continuous'' means 90% of the time. If a technical failure of
limitation of the System prevents a Market-Maker from maintaining
timely and accurate quotes in a series, the duration of such failure
will not be included in the 90% determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 8.5 requires that Market-Makers provide a continuous
two-sided market in 60% of the non-adjusted option series of the
Market-Maker's appointed class that have a time to expiration of less
than nine months;
     Rule 8.17(a)(1) requires DPMs to provide continuous quotes
in at least the lesser of 99% or 100% minus one call-put pair \23\ of
the non-adjusted option series of each class allocated to it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Rule 8.17(a)(1) which defines a ``call-up pair'' as
``one call and one put that cover the same underlying instrument and
have the same expiration date and exercise price.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rule 8.19 provides that DPMs generally will receive the
participation entitlements in their assigned classes when quoting at
the best price if they satisfy their obligations and other conditions
set forth in the rules. Specifically, Rule 8.19 provides that the DPM
participation entitlement will be 50% when there is one Market-Maker
also quoting at the best price on the Exchange and 40% when there are
two Market-Makers also quoting at the best price on the Exchange.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The participation entitlements of DPMs are based on the
number of contracts remaining after all public customer orders in
the book at the best price on the Exchange have been satisfied.
Additionally, a DPM may not be allocated a total quantity greater
than the quantity for which the DPM is quoting at the best price.
See Rules 8.19(b)(1)(B) and (C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because prices may be skewed due to the underlying security being
in a limit up-limit down state, the Exchange is proposing to eliminate
all Market-Maker quoting obligations in series of options that the
underlying security is currently in a limit up-limit down state.
Because of the direct relationship between an options price and the
price of the associated underlying security, the Exchange believes
eliminating all Market-Maker obligations in connection with the
implementation of the Plan is the most effective way to ensure the
options markets will not be compromised. Because a bid or offer of an
underlying security may not be executable due to a limit or straddle
state, the ability to hedge the purchase or sale of an option may not
be possible or, in the least, is at risk. Because of this reason, the
Exchange is anticipating that Exchange Market-Makers will be forced to
change behaviors. In addition, the Exchange believes other options
markets will be implementing similar changes. In an effort to protect
the investors in the options market while the underlying security is in
a limit up-limit down state, the Exchange believes that eliminating
quoting obligations is the more effective way for this protection.
    The Exchange, however, is proposing that Market-Makers may still
receive participation entitlements pursuant to the proposed rules in
all series in their assigned classes in which they are quoting, even in
series in which they are not required to provide continuous electronic
quotes under the Exchange Rules. Market-Makers already receive
participation entitlements in series they are not required to quote.
For example, a DPM is currently required to provide continuous quotes
in at least 99% of the non-adjusted option series or 100% of the non-
adjusted series minus one call-put pair of each option class allocated
to it for 90% of the trading day.\25\ If the DPM elects to quote in
100% of the non-adjusted series in an option class allocated to it, it
will receive a participation entitlement in all of those series when
quoting at the best price, including the 1% of the series in which it
is not required to quote in. Thus, under the proposed rule change, the
market would continue to function as it does now. The Exchange believes
this benefit is appropriate, as it incentivizes Market-Makers to quote
in as many series as possible in their appointed classes, even those
series in which the Rules do not require them to continuously quote.
Thus, under the proposed rule change, the market would continue to
function as it does now with respect to how entitlements are allocated
to Market-Makers. The Exchange believes this benefit is appropriate, as
it incentivizes Market-Makers to quote in as many series as possible in
their appointed classes, even those series in which the underlying
security has entered into a limit up-limit down state. The Exchange is
attempting to better encourage Market-Makers to quote though they will
not be obligated to. If they do choose to quote, the Exchange believes
they should be entitled to receive the Entitlement for such quoting as
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Rule 8.17(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the combination of these modifications will
protect investors because when an underlying security is in a limit or
straddle state, there will not be a reliable price for the security to
serve as a benchmark for the price of the option.

In addition, the width of the markets might be compromised and, thus,
the quality of execution for retail customers. At the same time, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change will create more certainty
on the options markets encouraging more investors to participate
despite the changes associated with the Plan.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\26\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \27\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitation
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \28\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed changes will be
in accordance with the Act as they are merely intended to ensure the
options markets will continue to remain just and equitable with the
implementation of the Plan which is intended to reduce the negative
impacts of a sudden, unanticipated price movement in NMS stocks. The
proposed rule changes would promote this intention in the options
markets while protecting investors participating there. In addition,
similar rule changes will be adopted by other markets in the national
market system in a coordinated manner promoting the public interest.
Creating a more orderly market will promote just and equitable
principles of trade by allowing investors to feel more secure in their
participation in the national market system after the implementation of
the Plan.

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

    C2 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. Specifically, the Exchange
believes the proposed changes will not impose any burden on intramarket
competition because it applies to all TPHs equally. The Exchange does
not believe the proposed changes will impose any burden on intermarket
competition as the changes are merely being made to protect investors
with the implementation of the Plan. In addition, the propose changes
will provide certainty of treatment and execution of options orders
during periods of extraordinary market volatility.

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

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

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

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 No. SR-C2-2013-013 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 No. SR-C2-2013-013. 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 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 No. SR-C2-2013-013 and should be
submitted on or before March 29, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-05885 Filed 3-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality 2. OMB control number b. G None a_ 2060 0302 __ __ __ __

3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title Retrofit/ Rebuild Requirements for 1993 and Earlier Model Year Urban Buses ( 40 CFR part 85, subpart O) ( Renewal)

8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) 1702.04 9. Keywords Environmental Protection, Engine Pollution, Clean Air Act, retrofit, bus 10. Abstract: Section 219 ( d) of the Clean Air Act ( CAA), as amended in 1990, requires that the EPA promulgate regulations for urban buses that: ( a) operate in Metropolitan Statistical Areas ( MSA) or consolidated MSA's with a 1980 population of 750,000 or more; ( b) are not subject to the 1994 or later urban bus standards; and ( c) have their engines replaced or rebuilt after January 1, 1995. The program requires that the particulate emissions level of the urban bus engines be reduced to a level below the engines' original particulate level through the use of EPA certified retrofit/ rebuild equipment, when necessary technology is available at reasonable cost. The program has been phasing itself out as pre 1994 urban buses are retired from fleets.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. X Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 41 b. Total annual responses 41 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 0 % c. Total hours requested 1,457 d. Current OMB inventory 3,709 e. Difference  2,252 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 0 2. Adjustment  2,252 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars)

a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) $ 111 c. Total annualized cost requested $ 111 d. Current OMB inventory $ 106 e. Difference $ 5 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 0 2. Adjustment $ 5__

15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. _ Application for benefits e. __ Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ General purpose statistics g. P Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. X On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. x Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. a Other ( describe)

17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes x No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Nydia Yanira Reyes Morales Phone: 202 343 9264 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected' ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official Merrylin Zaw Mon, Director Certification and Compliance Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Collection Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95 Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 5 CFR 1320.9 reads " As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency ( through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify ( and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information

"( a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

"( b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

"( c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U. S. C § 601( 6)), the use of such techniques as:

"( 1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond; "( 2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof; "( 3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

"( d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

"( e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

"( f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

"( g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8( b)( 3); [ see below]

"( h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of the information in a manner which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

"( I) uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and "( j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public."

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3) requires that each collection of information:

"( 3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of: "( I) the reasons the information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( ii) the way such information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of the average burden of the collection ( together with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden); "( iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit ( citing authority), or mandatory ( citing authority); "( v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any ( citing authority); and "( vi) the fact that any agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number."

OMB 83 I ( Instructions) 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41948-41949]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18715]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-2322-000]

Nexus Energy Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
Nexus Energy Inc.'s application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR

part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is September 18, 2017.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 29, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-18715 Filed 9-1-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on July 6, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2004-18060

________________________________________________________________________
___________________This serves as notice to the public of the action
described below, taken by the Department official indicated (no
additional confirming order will be issued in this matter).

Application of  US Airways, Inc. filed  6/9/04, for:

XX Exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between (1) Chicago, Illinois, and Cozumel, Mexico; (2) Washington, DC,
and Cancun, Mexico; and (3) Denver, Colorado, and San Jose del Cabo,
Mexcio, and to integrate this authority with its existing exemption and
certificate authority.  US Airways intends to operate this service
pursuant to a code-share arrangement with United Air Lines, Inc.,
whereby US Airways’ code will be placed on United’s flights in the
subject markets.

Applicant rep:  Howard Kass<PHONE_NUMBER>        DOT Analyst: Sylvia
Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The authority granted was effective when taken:    July 6, 2004, through
  July 6, 2006

Action taken by:  Paul L. Gretch, Director

		  Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:	XX Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2.  Consistent with our policy, the dormancy notice
period will begin December 1, 2004, US Airways’ proposed startup date
for these services.  The exemption authority granted is limited to
service provided on a code-share basis only.

The route integration authority granted is subject to the condition that
any service provided under this exemption shall be consistent with all
applicable agreements between the United States and the foreign
countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award of the route
integration authority granted should be construed as conferring upon US
Airways rights (including fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond
rights) to serve markets where U.S. carrier entry is limited unless US
Airways notifies the Department of its intent to serve such a market and
unless and until the Department has completed any necessary carrier
selection procedures to determine which carrier(s) should be authorized
to exercise such rights; and (b) should there be a request by any
carrier to use the limited-entry route rights that are included in US
Airways’ authority by virtue of the route integration exemption
granted here, but that are not then being used by US Airways, the
holding of such authority by route integration will not be considered as
providing any preference for US Airways in a competitive carrier
selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be entitled to
use the authority at issue.

2

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the application was consistent with the public
interest; and

(3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major regulatory
action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.  To the
extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced Docket.  We
may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this Notice at any
time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

											  05/2004


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9585-9586]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02521]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4287-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

Kansas; Amendment No. 3 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 Kansas (FEMA-4287-DR), dated October 20, 2016, and related
determinations.

DATES: Effective January 26, 2017.

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 Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Kathy Fields,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Christian M. Van Alstyne
as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    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.

Robert J. Fenton,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-02521 Filed 2-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 169 (Wednesday, August 31, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59837-59839]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20706]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-5467; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-186-AD;
Amendment 39-18630; AD 2016-17-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Defense and Space S.A. (Formerly
Known as Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.) Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Defense and Space S.A. Model CN-235, CN-235-200, and CN-235-300
airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of main landing gear (MLG)
access doors detaching from the airplane as a result of excessive
vibration and metal fatigue in the attach fittings. This AD requires
modification of the MLG access door by replacing seals in the MLG
fairing and, for certain airplanes, adding an additional bolt. We are
issuing this AD to prevent a fracture in the MLG access door associated
with excessive vibration and metal fatigue in the attach fittings. This
condition could lead to MLG access door detachment and consequent
impact of flight controls, resulting in reduced control of an airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective October 5, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 5,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact EADS-CASA, Military Transport Aircraft Division (MTAD),
Integrated Customer Services (ICS), Technical Services, Avenida de
Arag[oacute]n 404, 28022 Madrid, Spain; telephone +34 91 585 55 84; fax
+34 91 585 55 05; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.eads.net. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
5467.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
5467; 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, International Branch, ANM 116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Defense and
Space S.A. Model CN-235, CN-235-200, and CN-235-300 airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2016 (81 FR 21766)
(``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of MLG access doors
detaching from the airplane as a result of excessive vibration and
metal fatigue in the attach fittings. The NPRM proposed to require
modification of the MLG access door by replacing seals in the MLG
fairing and, for certain airplanes, adding an additional bolt. We are
issuing this AD to prevent a fracture in the MLG access door associated
with excessive vibration and metal fatigue in the attach fittings. This
condition could lead to MLG access door detachment and consequent
impact of flight controls, resulting in reduced control of an airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued
Airworthiness Directive 2015-0225, dated November 18, 2015 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Defense
and Space S.A. Model CN-235, CN-235-200, and CN-235-300 airplanes. The
MCAI states:

    Occurrences of Main Landing Gear (MLG) Access Door detachment
were reported. Subsequent investigation determined that the
detachments of the MLG Door occurred during maneuvers performed at
high speed and with high sideslip angle on airplanes not modified in
accordance with the instructions EADS-CASA Service Bulletins (SBs)
SB-235-52-0061 and SB-235-52-0068. Based on the investigation
results, it was determined that the fracture mechanism was
associated with excessive deformation that could produce scooping in
the forward edge combined with an excessive vibration of the MLG
Access Door.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to MLG Access Door
detachment and consequent impact of flight controls, resulting in
reduced control of an airplane and possible injury of persons on the
ground.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, EADS-CASA issued SB-
235-52-0061 and SB-235-52-0068 to provide modification instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
modification of MLG Access Doors and prohibits installation of a MLG
Access Door sealing part number (P/N) CAN36032R. This [EASA] AD also
prohibits installation of not modified MLG Access Doors.

    Required actions include modification of the MLG access door by
replacing seals in the MLG fairing and, for certain airplanes, adding
an additional bolt. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2016-5467.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We have reviewed the following service information:
     EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-235-52-0061, Revision 1,
dated October 24, 2014. The service information describes procedures
for modifying the MLG access door by installing an additional bolt.
     EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-235-52-0068, Revision 2,
dated January

9, 2015. The service information describes procedures for modifying the
MLG access door by installing an improved fairing seal.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 30 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification........................  60 work-hours x $85 per         $12,684          $17,784         $533,520
                                       hour = $5,100.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the
reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2016-17-17 Airbus Defense and Space S.A. (Formerly Known as
Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.): Amendment 39-18630; Docket No.
FAA-2016-5467; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-186-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 5, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Defense and Space S.A. (formerly known
as Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.) Model CN-235, CN 235-200, and
CN 235-300 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer
serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of main landing gear (MLG)
access doors detaching from the airplane as a result of excessive
vibration and metal fatigue in the attach fittings. We are issuing
this AD to prevent a fracture in the MLG access door associated with
excessive vibration and metal fatigue in the attach fittings. This
condition could lead to MLG access door detachment and consequent
impact of flight controls, resulting in reduced control of an
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modifications

    (1) For all airplanes: Within 12 months after the effective date
of this AD, modify each MLG access door by installing an improved
fairing seal, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-235-52-0068, Revision 2, dated January
9, 2015.
    (2) For all Model CN-235-200 airplanes: Concurrently with the
action required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, modify each affected
MLG access door by installing an additional bolt, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-
235-52-0061, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2014.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD, using EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-
235-52-0068, Revision 1, dated October 24, 2014; or SB-235-52-0068,
dated July 15, 2002.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-
235-52-0061, dated October 31, 1996.

(i) Parts Installation Prohibition and Limitation

    (1) For airplanes modified as specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and
(g)(2) of this AD, as applicable, before the effective date of this
AD: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
seal having part number CAN36032R on any MLG access door.
    (2) For airplanes not modified as specified in paragraphs (g)(1)
and (g)(2) of this AD, as applicable, before the effective date of
this AD: After accomplishing the actions required by paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, as applicable, no person may install a
seal having part number CAN36032R on any MLG access door.
    (3) As of the effective date of this AD, installation of an MLG
access door on an airplane is allowed, provided the MLG access door
is modified as required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD,
as applicable.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
International Branch, send it to ATTN: Shahram Daneshmandi,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus Defense and Space
S.A.'s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2015-0225, dated November 18, 2015, for related
information. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2016-5467.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-235-52-0061, Revision 1, Dated
October 24, 2014.
    (ii) EADS CASA Service Bulletin SB-235-52-0068, Revision 2,
dated January 9, 2015.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact EADS-
CASA, Military Transport Aircraft Division (MTAD), Integrated
Customer Services (ICS), Technical Services, Avenida de
Arag[oacute]n 404, 28022 Madrid, Spain; telephone +34 91 585 55 84;
fax +34 91 585 55 05; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.eads.net. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 18, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-20706 Filed 8-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 251 (Thursday, December 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81816-81817]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32919]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. TX16-2-000]

Arkansas River Power Authority; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on December 23, 2015, Arkansas River Power
Authority submitted its Application for Interconnection and
Transmission Service and Request for Expedited Consideration.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed

docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 14, 2016.

    Dated: December 24, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32919 Filed 12-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P