12
                                       6
                                   5,020.33
                                   30,121.98
                                    3,012.2
                                    1,506.1
                                                                  $3,332,078.60
         7) Records of Biennial Tune-Up
                                      0.5
                                      0.5
                                     0.25
                                   5,020.33
                                   1,255.08
                                    125.51
                                     62.75
                                                                    $138,835.91
    E.  Personnel Training
                                      N/A

                                       .

    F.  Time for Audits
                                      N/A

Subtotal for Recordkeeping Requirements

                                    284,339
                                                                    $27,350,810
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (ROUNDED)

                                    364,643
                                                                    $35,075,324

Notes:
N/A  -  Not Applicable
[a] On average, over the 3-year period of this ICR, we estimate 9,878 existing large liquid boilers (i.e., units >10 MMBtu/hr) at 4,939 facilities will be subject to the rule.  We also estimate 162 new boilers at 81 facilities per year, for a total of 10,040 boilers at 5,020 facilities.
[b] This ICR uses the following labor rates: $99.16 for technical, $127.43 for managerial, and $50.88 for clerical labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, December 2013, "Table 2. Civilian workers, by occupational and industry group."  The rates are from column 1, "Total compensation."  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.
[c] This burden applies to new sources only. The burden on existing sources to read and understand rule requirements and submit an initial notifications was incurred during a previous ICR period.
[d] This burden applies to existing large liquid fuel boilers only. All existing sources were required to complete the energy audit by the conclusion of the previous ICR period; therefore, no new or existing sources will incur this burden over the next three years.
[e] Cost per occurrence for certified energy audit professionals includes a phone screening to discuss the facility prior to a visit, a 2- to 4-hour site visit, and an additional 2 to 4 hours to prepare a follow-up report on recommendations and findings.  Cost depends on whether the source is industrial or commercial.  It is assumed that 10% of sources will be industrial and 90% will be commercial.
[f] All projected large liquid fuel boilers are expected to comply through stack testing instead of the fuel testing compliance option. Only units <30 MMBtu/hr that are not subject to PM limits under the NSPS (40 CFR Part 60 Subparts Db, Dc) will incur additional testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting costs under this rule.
[g] Sources demonstrating compliance with any applicable emission limits through stack testing must develop a site-specific monitoring plan.  All new large liquid fuel units are expected to develop this plan.
[h] It is assumed that no affirmative defense claims will be filed over the three-year ICR period.
[i] It is assumed that facilities must already maintain records on boiler insurance and/or maintenance scheduling; therefore, no new record system would be required.

Table 1C: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost  -  Existing and New Small Solid Fuel Boilers, NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart JJJJJJ) (Renewal)

Burden Item
                                       A
                                       B
                                       C
                                       D
                                       E
                                       F
                                       G
                                       H

                     Technical Person-Hours per Occurrence
                      Occurrences per Respondent per Year
                                  Technical
                                 Person-Hours
                        per Respondent per Year (C=AxB)
                           Respondents per Year [a]
                       Technical Hours per Year (E=CxD)
                                Clerical Hours
                              per Year (F=Ex0.10)
                               Management Hours
                             per Year  (G=Ex0.05)
                                  Total Cost
                                   per Year
                                    ($) [b]
1. Applications
                                      N/A

2. Surveys and Studies
                                      N/A

3. Reporting Requirements

    A.  Read and Understand Rule Requirements[c]
                                      40
                                       1
                                      40
                                     49.17
                                    1,966.8
                                    196.68
                                     98.34
                                                                    $217,566.43
    B.  Required Activities

           Biennial Tune-Up
                                      12
                                      0.5
                                       6
                                   5,560.33
                                   33,361.98
                                   3,336.20
                                    1,668.1
                                                                  $3,690,485.78
    C.  Create Information
                                      N/A

    D.  Gather Information
                                      N/A

    E.  Report Preparation

         1) Initial Notification that Source is Subject
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                     49.17
                                     98.34
                                     9.83
                                     4.92
                                                                     $10,878.50
         2) Notification of Compliance Status
                                       8
                                       1
                                       8
                                     49.17
                                    393.36
                                     39.34
                                     19.67
                                                                     $43,513.74
         3) Biennial Compliance Report
                                       5
                                      0.5
                                      2.5
                                   5,560.33
                                   13,900.83
                                   1,390.08
                                    695.04
                                                                  $1,537,702.52
Subtotal for Reporting Requirements

                                    57,180
                                                                     $5,500,147
4.  Recordkeeping Requirements

    A.  Read Instructions
                                    See 3A

    B.  Implement Activities
                                      N/A

    C.  Develop Record System[d]
                                      N/A

    D.  Record Information

         1) Records of All Compliance Reports Submitted
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                   5,560.33
                                   11,120.66
                                   1,112.07
                                    556.03
                                                                  $1,230,161.67
         2) Records of Biennial Tune-Up
                                      0.5
                                      0.5
                                     0.25
                                   5,560.33
                                   1,390.08
                                    139.01
                                     69.5
                                                                    $153,769.55
    E.  Personnel Training
                                      N/A

    F.  Time for Audits
                                      N/A

Subtotal for Recordkeeping Requirements

                                    14,387
                                                                     $1,383,931
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (ROUNDED)

                                    71,567
                                                                     $6,884,078

Notes:
N/A  -  Not Applicable
[a] On average, over the 3-year period of this ICR, we estimate 11,022 existing small solid boilers (i.e., units <10 MMBtu/hr) at 5,511 facilities will be subject to the rule.  We also estimate 98 new boilers at 49 facilities per year, for a total of 11,120 boilers at 5,560 facilities.
[b] This ICR uses the following labor rates: $99.16 for technical, $127.43 for managerial, and $50.88 for clerical labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, December 2013, "Table 2. Civilian workers, by occupational and industry group."  The rates are from column 1, "Total compensation."  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.
[c] This burden applies to new sources only. The burden on existing sources to read and understand rule requirements and submit initial notifications was incurred during a previous ICR period.
[d] It is assumed that facilities must already maintain records on boiler insurance and/or maintenance scheduling; therefore, no new record system would be required.

Table 1D: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost  -  Existing and New Small Liquid Fuel Boilers, NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart JJJJJJ) (Renewal)

Burden Item
                                       A
                                       B
                                       C
                                       D
                                       E
                                       F
                                       G
                                       H

                     Technical Person-Hours per Occurrence
                      Occurrences per Respondent per Year
            Technical Person-Hours per Respondent per Year (C=AxB)
                           Respondents per Year [a]
                               Technical Hours
                               per Year (E=CxD)
                                Clerical Hours
                              per Year (F=Ex0.10)
                               Management Hours
                             per Year  (G=Ex0.05)
                                  Total Cost
                                   per Year
                                    ($) [b]
1. Applications
                                      N/A

2. Surveys and Studies
                                      N/A

3. Reporting Requirements

    A.  Read and Understand Rule Requirements[c]
                                      40
                                       1
                                      40
                                     989.5
                                    39,580
                                     3,958
                                     1,979
                                                                     $4,378,320
    B.  Required Activities

           Biennial Tune-Up
                                      12
                                      0.5
                                       6
                                   84,334.5
                                    506,007
                                   50,600.7
                                   25,300.35
                                                                    $55,974,241
    C.  Create Information
                                      N/A

    D.  Gather Information
                                      N/A

    E.  Report Preparation

         1) Initial Notification that Source is Subject
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                     989.5
                                     1,979
                                     197.9
                                     98.95
                                                                       $218,916
         2) Notification of Compliance Status
                                       8
                                       1
                                       8
                                     989.5
                                     7,916
                                     791.6
                                     395.8
                                                                       $875,664
         3) Biennial Compliance Report
                                       5
                                      0.5
                                      2.5
                                   84,334.5
                                  210,836.25
                                   21,083.63
                                   10,541.81
                                                                    $23,322,600
Subtotal for Reporting Requirements

                                    881,266
                                                                    $84,769,742
4.  Recordkeeping Requirements

     A.  Read Instructions
                                    See 3A

     B.  Implement Activities
                                      N/A

     C.  Develop Record System[d]
                                      N/A

     D.  Record Information

          1) Records of All Compliance Reports Submitted
                                       2
                                       1
                                       2
                                    84,335
                                    168,669
                                   16,866.9
                                   8,433.45
                                                                    $18,658,080
          2) Records of Biennial Tune-Up
                                      0.5
                                      0.5
                                     0.25
                                    84,335
                                   21,083.63
                                   2,108.36
                                   1,054.18
                                                                     $2,332,260
     E.  Personnel Training
                                      N/A

     F.  Time for Audits
                                      N/A

Subtotal for Recordkeeping Requirements

                                    218,216
                                                                    $20,990,341
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (ROUNDED)

                                   1,099,482
                                                                   $105,760,083

Notes:
N/A  -  Not Applicable
[a] On average, over the 3-year period of this ICR, we estimate 166,690 existing small liquid boilers (i.e., units <10 MMBtu/hr) at 83,345 facilities will be subject to the rule.  We also estimate 1,979 new boilers at 989.5 facilities per year, for a total of 168,669 boilers at 84,334.5 facilities.
[b] This ICR uses the following labor rates: $99.16 for technical, $127.43 for managerial, and $50.88 for clerical labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, December 2013, "Table 2. Civilian workers, by occupational and industry group."  The rates are from column 1, "Total compensation."  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.
[c] This burden applies to new sources only. The burden on existing sources to read and understand rule requirements and submit initial notifications was incurred during a previous ICR period.
[d] It is assumed that facilities must already maintain records on boiler insurance and/or maintenance scheduling; therefore, no new record system would be required.
Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost  -  NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart JJJJJJ) (Renewal).

Burden Item
                                       A
                                       B
                                       C
                                       D
                                       E
                                       F
                                       G

                     Technical Person-Hours per Occurrence
                             Occurrences per Year
                            Technical Person-Hours
                                per Respondent
                               per Year (C=AxB)
                        Technical Hours per Year (D=C)
                               Management Hours
                              per Year (E=Dx0.05)
                                Clerical Hours
                              per Year (F=Dx0.10)
                                  Total Cost
                                   per Year
                                    ($) [a]
1.  Read and Understand Rule Requirements[b]
                                      40
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                                                             $0
2.  Enter and Update Information into Agency Recordkeeping System[c]
                                       2
                                   1,129.84
                                   2,259.68
                                   2,259.68
                                    112.98
                                    225.97
                                                                    $117,106.59
3.  Required Activities

     a) Observe Initial Stack/Performance Test[d]
                                      40
                                      83
                                     3,320
                                     3,320
                                      166
                                      332
                                                                    $172,057.34
     b) Observe Repeat Performance Test[e]
                                      40
                                      8.3
                                      332
                                      332
                                     16.6
                                     33.2
                                                                     $17,205.73
     c) Review Operating Parameters[f]
                                       2
                                      83
                                      166
                                      166
                                      8.3
                                     16.6
                                                                      $8,602.87
     d) Review Continuous Parameter Monitoring[g]
                                       2
                                     5,316
                                    10,632
                                    10,632
                                     531.6
                                    1,063.2
                                                                    $550,998.08
4.  Excess Emissions Enforcement Activities and Inspections[h]
                                      24
                                     8.30
                                     199.2
                                     199.2
                                     9.96
                                     19.92
                                                                     $10,323.44
5.  Notification Requirements

     a) Review Initial Notification that Sources are Subject to the Standard[c]
                                       2
                                   1,129.84
                                   2,259.68
                                   2,259.68
                                    112.98
                                    225.97
                                                                    $117,106.59
     b) Review Notification of Initial Performance Tests and Review Test Plan[f]
                                      20
                                      83
                                     1,660
                                     1,660
                                      83
                                      166
                                                                     $86,028.67
     c) Review Notification of Compliance Status[c]
                                       2
                                   1,129.84
                                   2,259.68
                                   2,259.68
                                    112.98
                                    225.97
                                                                    $117,106.59
6.  Reporting Requirements

                                       0

     a) Review Annual Compliance Report
                                       4
                                   2,475.34
                                   9,901.36
                                   9,901.36
                                    495.07
                                    990.14
                                                                    $513,133.26
     b) Review Biennial Compliance Report
                                       2
                                   48,349.08
                                   96,698.16
                                   96,698.16
                                   4,834.91
                                   9,669.82
                                                                  $5,011,334.02
     c) Review Initial Report on Energy Audit Results[i]
                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                                                                             $0
7.  Travel Expenses for Performance Tests Observed[j]

                                                                     $100,795.2
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (ROUNDED)

                                    149,141
                                                                     $6,821,798

Notes:
N/A  -  Not Applicable
[a] This ICR uses the following labor rates: $46.21 for technical, $62.27 for managerial, and $25.01 for clerical labor.  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 2013 General Schedule, which excludes locality rates of pay.  The rates have been increased by 60 percent to account for the benefit packages available to government employees.
[b] No burden will be incurred over the three-year ICR period, as this was a one-time requirement during the previous ICR period.
[c] All new sources must submit initial notifications and notifications of compliance status, regardless of subcategory.
[d] It is assumed that EPA will observe 20% of  initial performance tests.
[e] It is assumed that 10% of initial performance tests will be repeated, which will be observed by EPA.
[f] The number of occurrences is based on the number of new facilities that will test and set/submit operating limits.  All new sources must submit operating limits, regardless of subcategory.
[g] The number of occurrences is based on the number of facilities maintaining records of control device parameters.
[h] It is assumed that 10% of new facilities will have exceedances, requiring EPA enforcement.
[i] All existing sources at the time of promulgation of the standard were required to complete the energy audit by the conclusion of the previous ICR period; therefore, no new or existing sources will incur this burden over the next three years.
[j] The total cost is based on the number of performance tests observed by EPA multiplied by the cost of each trip.  Based on EPA experience with other rulemakings, each trip is estimated to be 3 days x ($110 hotel + $58 meals/incidentals) + ($600 round trip) = $1,104 per trip.


[Federal Register: May 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 88)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 21561-21563]
[DOCID:fr08my09-11]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0437; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-018-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. Models PC-12, PC-
12/45, PC-12/47 and PC-12/47E Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI (two different MCAI) describe the unsafe conditions as:

    FOCA AD HB 2002-271 was issued because the Nose Landing Gear
(NLG) Right Hand (RH) upper drag link, Part Number (P/N)
5<IP_ADDRESS> was found broken on some aircraft due to fatigue
cracking, and therefore a life limit of 4,000 landings was
introduced.
    Recent investigation of a new occurrence revealed that the
replacement part NLG RH upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>9 also
suffered fatigue cracking, however on a different location.
    Complete failure of the NLG RH upper drag link could result in
NLG collapse during landing.

and

This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is prompted by reports of several
in-service cracked torque tubes. A reduced wall thickness produced
during the manufacturing process has been determined to be the
initial cause. Additionally, all the involved torque tubes have been
found to show fatigue cracking problems.
    Such a condition, if left uncorrected, could lead to failure of
the torque tube and result in loss of the steering control on ground
and consequent unsafe condition.

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

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 8, 2009.

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

Examining the AD Docket

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

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0437;
Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-018-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On July 7, 2003, we issued AD 2003-14-07, Amendment 39-13226 (68 FR
41903; July 16, 2003). That AD required actions intended to address an
unsafe condition on the products listed above.
    Since we issued AD 2003-14-07, an investigation of a new occurrence
of an upper drag link failure revealed that the replacement part NLG RH
upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>9 also suffered fatigue cracking,
however at a different location.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No.: 2009-0086 dated April 14, 2009, and AD No.: 2009-0060 dated March
11, 2009 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct the
unsafe conditions for the specified products. The MCAI (two different
MCAI) states:

    FOCA AD HB 2002-271 was issued because the Nose Landing Gear
(NLG) Right Hand (RH) upper drag link, Part Number (P/N)
5<IP_ADDRESS> was found broken on some aircraft due to fatigue
cracking, and therefore a life limit of 4,000 landings was
introduced.
    Recent investigation of a new occurrence revealed that the
replacement part NLG RH upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>9 also
suffered fatigue cracking, however on a different location.
    Complete failure of the NLG RH upper drag link could result in
NLG collapse during landing. To address that condition, this AD is
issued to mandate the implementation of the latest revision of the
PC-12 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) chapter 4--airworthiness
limitations section--by establishing repetitive inspections for the
NLG RH upper drag links P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS> and P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>9.

and

This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is prompted by reports of several
in-service cracked torque tubes. A reduced wall thickness produced
during the manufacturing process has been determined to be the
initial cause. Additionally, all the

involved torque tubes have been found to show fatigue cracking
problems.
    Such a condition, if left uncorrected, could lead to failure of
the torque tube and result in loss of the steering control on ground
and consequent unsafe condition.
    For the reason described above, this new AD mandates the
replacement of certain torque tubes by new ones of an improved
design and the latest revision of chapter 4 `limitations' of the PC-
12 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) which introduces the new life
limit for torque tubes with Part Number (P/N) 5<IP_ADDRESS>.

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

Relevant Service Information

    PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. has issued Service Bulletin No: 32-021, dated
November 21, 2008. The actions described in this service information
are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
will affect 540 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
would take about 3.5 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $300 per product.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $313,200, or $580 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 6 work-hours and require parts costing $4,000, for a cost of
$4,480 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
products that may need these actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-13226 (68 FR
41903; July 16, 2003), and adding the following new AD:

Pilatus Aircraft LTD.: Docket No. FAA-2009-0437; Directorate
Identifier 2009-CE-018-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by June 8, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2003-14-07, Amendment 39-13226.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the following model and serial number
airplanes, certificated in any category:
    (1) Models PC-12, PC-12/45, PC-12/47, manufacturer serial
numbers (MSNs) 101 through 544, and MSNs 546 through 888; and
    (2) Model PC-12/47E, MSN 545 and MSNs 1001 through 1150.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 32: Landing
Gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
(two different MCAI) states:
    FOCA AD HB 2002-271 was issued because the Nose Landing Gear
(NLG) Right Hand (RH) upper drag link, Part Number (P/N)
5<IP_ADDRESS> was found broken on some aircraft due to fatigue
cracking, and therefore a life limit of 4,000 landings was
introduced.
    Recent investigation of a new occurrence revealed that the
replacement part NLG RH upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>9 also
suffered fatigue cracking, however on a different location.
    Complete failure of the NLG RH upper drag link could result in
NLG collapse during landing. To address that condition, this AD is
issued to mandate the implementation of the latest revision of the
PC-12 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) chapter 4--airworthiness
limitations section--by establishing repetitive inspections for the
NLG RH upper drag links P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS> and P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>9.

and

    This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is prompted by reports of
several in-service cracked torque tubes. A reduced wall thickness
produced during the manufacturing process has been determined to be
the initial cause. Additionally, all the involved torque tubes have
been found to show fatigue cracking problems.
    Such a condition, if left uncorrected, could lead to failure of
the torque tube and result in loss of the steering control on ground
and consequent unsafe condition.
    For the reason described above, this new AD mandates the
replacement of certain torque tubes by new ones of an improved
design and the latest revision of chapter 4 `limitations' of the PC-
12 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) which introduces the new life
limit for torque tubes with Part Number (P/N) 5<IP_ADDRESS>.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Limitations Section Actions: For all airplanes, before
further flight after the effective date of this AD, insert
Structural and Component Limitations--Airworthiness Limitations,
document 12-A-04-00-00-00A-000T-A, dated January 28, 2009 (for PC-
12, PC-12/45, PC-12/47), and Structural and Component Limitations--
Airworthiness Limitations, document 12-B-04-00-00-00A-000A-A, dated
January 27, 2009 (for PC-12/47E), into the Limitations section of
the FAA-approved maintenance program (e.g., maintenance manual). The
owner/operator holding at least a private pilot certificate as
authorized by 14 CFR 43.7 may do this action. Make an entry in the
aircraft records showing compliance with this portion of the AD
following 14 CFR 43.9. The limitations section revision does the
following:
    (i) Establishes a life limit for torque tube P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>
and does not impose a life limit on torque tube P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>;
    (ii) Requires doing initial and repetitive inspections of nose
landing gear right hand upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS> (for PC-12
and PC-12/45 airplanes) or P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>9 (for all airplanes) in
accordance with the time limits specified in the revision. The
previous limitations did not allow installation of the upper drag
link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS> on PC-12/47 and PC-12/47E. The 4,000 landing
limit for the upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS> installed on the PC-
12 and PC-12/45 is retained from AD 2003-14-07 through this
limitation requirement; and
    (iii) Does not require doing initial and repetitive inspections
of nose landing gear right hand upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>6;
therefore, installation of upper drag link P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>6
terminates the inspection requirement referenced in paragraph
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (2) Additional Torque Tube Actions:
    (i) For PC-12 and PC-12/45, S/N 101 through 299, airplanes:
Within the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective
date of this AD or 1 year after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, replace the torque tube P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>
with torque tube P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS> following PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD.
Service Bulletin No: 32-021, dated November 21, 2008.
    (ii) For all airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, do
not install torque tube P/N 5<IP_ADDRESS>.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to Attn: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using
any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight
Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et.seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Special Flight Permit

    (i) We are limiting the special flight permits for this AD by
requiring you to fly with the landing gear extended in order to
reach the nearest maintenance facility where the inspection or
replacement is done.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI (two different MCAI) AD No.: 2009-0086 dated
April 14, 2009, and AD No.: 2009-0060 dated March 11, 2009; PILATUS
AIRCRAFT LTD. Service Bulletin No: 32-021, dated November 21, 2008;
Structural and Component Limitations--Airworthiness Limitations,
document 12-A-04-00-00-00A-000T-A, dated January 28, 2009; and
Structural and Component Limitations--Airworthiness Limitations,
document 12-B-04-00-00-00A-000A-A, dated January 27, 2009, for
related information.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May 1, 2009.
Scott A. Horn,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-10728 Filed 5-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 26, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 4009]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01514]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG22-44-000.
    Applicants: Swoose II LLC.
    Description: Self-Certification of EWG Status of Swoose II LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/18/22.
    Accession Number: 20220118-5322.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/8/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER21-2562-002.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing--Definitive
Interconnection System Impact Study Process to be effective 10/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-846-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amended GIA DSA Deer Creek Solar 1
SA No. 1058 1059 WDT1384 to be effective 1/21/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-847-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, SA No. 6312;
Queue No. AE2-297 and Cancellation of SA No. 6014 to be effective 12/
21/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-848-000.
    Applicants: Urbana Solar LLC.
    Description: Urbana Solar LLC submits Request for Limited One-Time
Prospective Waiver with Expedited Consideration.
    Filed Date: 1/18/22.
    Accession Number: 20220118-5328.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/8/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-849-000.
    Applicants: Sustaining Power Solutions LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Change in Category
Seller Status in the NW and SW Regions to be effective 1/21/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5098.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-850-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original WMPA, Service
Agreement No. 6321; Queue No. AC2-050 to be effective 12/21/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5100.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-851-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original WMPA SA No. 6318;
Queue No. AG2-395 to be effective 12/21/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5102.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-852-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original WMPA, Service
Agreement No. 6324; Queue No. AG2-389 to be effective 12/21/2021.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5105.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-853-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company,
Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Alabama Power Company
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Blackwater Solar Amended and
Restated LGIA Filing to be effective 1/5/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-854-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company,
Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Alabama Power Company
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Bird Dog Solar Amended and
Restated LGIA Filing to be effective 1/5/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-855-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 355,
Simultaneous Exchange with Dynasty or Alternative to be effective 3/22/
2022.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-856-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company,
Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Alabama Power Company
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: Wolfskin Solar Amended and
Restated LIGA Filing to be effective 1/5/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/20/22.
    Accession Number: 20220120-5115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/10/22

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 20, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-01514 Filed 1-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 249 (Friday, December 27, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78710-78713]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30466]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0340; Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-081-AD;
Amendment 39-17630; AD 2013-21-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter) Model EC135 P1, EC135 P2,
EC135 P2+, EC135 T1, EC135 T2, EC135 T2+, and MBB-BK 117 C-2
helicopters with a certain external mounted hoist system (hoist) with
boom support assembly (boom) installed. This AD requires inspecting the
boom for a crack and, if a crack exists, replacing the boom with an
airworthy boom. Until the boom is inspected, this AD requires, before
further flight, and thereafter before the first flight of each day,
checking the hoist for a crack. This AD was prompted by cracks found on
the boom during a pre-flight check of a hoist on an MBB-BK 117 C-2
helicopter. The actions of this AD are intended to detect a crack and
prevent failure of the boom, loss of the boom and attached loads, and
subsequent loss of helicopter control.

DATES: This AD is effective January 31, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of January 31,
2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub, and contact UTC Aerospace
Systems (formerly the Goodrich Corporation), 2727 East Imperial
Highway, Brea, CA 92821; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
at www.goodrich.com. You may review the referenced service information
at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the foreign authority's ADs,
any incorporated-by-reference service information, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations Office, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Wilbanks, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On April 15, 2013, at 78 FR 22209, the Federal Register published
our notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Eurocopter Model EC135
P1, EC135 P2, EC135 P2+, EC135 T1, EC135 T2 and EC135 T2+ helicopters
with a Goodrich Corporation (Goodrich) hoist with a boom, Part Number
(P/N) 44301-500, 44307-500, or 44307-500-1 installed, and Model MBB-BK
117 C-2 helicopters with a Goodrich hoist with boom P/N 44307-500
installed. The NPRM proposed to require dye penetrant inspecting the
boom for a crack and, if a crack exists, replacing the boom with an
airworthy boom. Until the inspection is completed, the NPRM proposed to
require, before the first flight of each day, a visual check of the
hoist for a crack. The NPRM proposed to allow an owner/operator (pilot)
holding at least a private pilot certificate to conduct that check. The
performance of the check would be required to be entered into the
aircraft's maintenance records showing compliance with this AD in
accordance with applicable regulations. This authorization marks an
exception to our standard maintenance regulations. The proposed
requirements were intended to detect a crack and prevent failure of the
boom, loss of the boom and attached loads, and subsequent loss of
helicopter control.
    The NPRM was prompted by AD No. 2010-0154, dated August 13, 2010,
issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union. EASA
issued AD No. 2010-0154 to correct an unsafe condition for Eurocopter
Model MBB-BK 117 C-2, EC135, and EC635 series helicopters. EASA AD No.
2010-0154 supersedes EASA AD No. 2009-0093-E, dated April 17, 2009.
EASA advises that cracks were detected on the boom, P/N 44307-500,
during a pre-flight check of the hoist on a Model MBB-BK 117 C-2
helicopter. EASA advises that this condition, if not detected and
corrected, would impair the structural strength of the boom and could
lead to failure of the boom. EASA advises that this could result in the
loss of the boom and attached loads. According to EASA, boom P/Ns
44301-500 and 44307-500-1 are of similar design to P/N 44307-500, and
therefore are also subject to this unsafe condition. As a result, EASA
issued Emergency AD No. 2009-0093-E to require repetitive visual checks
of the affected boom and removal or replacement of the boom when cracks
are found.
    EASA advises that since AD No. 2009-0093-E was issued, further
technical investigation determined that torque values that were too
high have been applied. EASA advises that Goodrich Corporation, the
manufacturer of the affected booms, had developed an inspection that
would determine the need for further action. As a result, EASA
superseded its AD to include a new inspection to detect damage, by
issuing EASA AD No. 2010-0154. EASA AD states that if no damage is
found during this new inspection, that constitutes terminating action.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we received no comments on the NPRM (78 FR 22209, April
15, 2013).

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Germany and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with Germany, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same
type designs and that air

safety and the public interest require adopting the AD requirements as
proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD requires you to notify and return parts to the
manufacturer, and this AD does not. The EASA AD also applies to the
Eurocopter EC635 series military helicopters, while this AD does not
because these models are not type certificated in the United States.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter has issued Emergency Alert Service Bulletin (EASB) No.
EC135-85A-036, Revision 2, dated June 23, 2010, and EASB No. MBB BK117
C-2-85A-024, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2010, which specify a visual
check of the boom for cracks, and removing or replacing the boom before
the next flight if there is a crack. The EASBs also require compliance
with the visual and dye penetrant inspection procedures specified in
Goodrich Corporation Service Bulletin 44307-500-03, Revision 2, dated
April 30, 2010. EASA classified these EASBs as mandatory, and issued
EASA AD No. 2010-0154, dated August 13, 2010, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these helicopters.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 350 helicopters of U.S. Registry
and a labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Based on these estimates, we
expect the following costs:
     We estimate that the cost of the daily visual check is
minimal.
     We estimate that removing the hoist and boom assembly,
performing the dye penetrant inspection, and reinstalling the equipment
requires 1.5 work hours. No parts are needed, for a total cost of about
$128 per helicopter and $44,800 for the U.S. fleet.
     Replacing the hoist and boom assembly, if needed, requires
about a 0.33 work-hour for a labor cost of about $28. Parts cost
$10,833 for a total cost of $10,861 per helicopter.

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 helicopters identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    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 DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; 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.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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):

2013-21-06 Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Helicopters: Amendment 39-
17630; Docket No. FAA-2013-0340; Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-081-
AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter)
Model EC135 P1, EC135 P2, EC135 P2+, EC135 T1, EC135 T2, and EC135
T2+ helicopters with a Goodrich Corporation (Goodrich) external
mounted hoist system (hoist) with boom support assembly (boom) Part
Number (P/N) 44301-500, 44307-500, or 44307-500-1 installed, and
Model MBB-BK 117 C-2 helicopters with a Goodrich hoist with boom P/N
44307-500 installed, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in the boom.
This condition could result in loss of the boom and attached loads,
and subsequent loss of helicopter control.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective January 31, 2014.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight, and thereafter before the first
flight of each day until you have performed the inspection required
by paragraph (e)(2) of this AD, clean the hoist and visually check
for a crack, paying particular attention to the areas that are
circled as depicted in Figure 1 to paragraph (e) of this AD. The
actions required by this paragraph may be performed by the owner/
operator (pilot) holding at least a private pilot certificate, and
must be entered into the aircraft records showing compliance with
this AD in accordance with 14 CFR 43.9(a)(1)-(4) and 14 CFR
91.417(a)(2)(v). The record must be maintained as required by 14 CFR
91.417, 121.380, or 135.439.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27DE13.000

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    (2) Within 30 days, perform a dye penetrant inspection of the
boom in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions, Section
2.D, of the Goodrich Service Bulletin 44307-500-03, Revision 2,
dated April 30, 2010 (SB).

    Note 1 to paragraph (e)(2) of this AD: A copy of the SB is
attached to Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin (EASB)
EC135-85A-036, Revision 2, and Eurocopter EASB MBB BK117 C-2-85A-
024, Revision 1, both dated June 23, 2010.

    (3) If a crack exists in the boom, replace the cracked boom with
an airworthy boom before further flight.

(f) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits would be allowed provided the hoist is
disabled during the ferry flight.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Wilbanks, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate,
FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone (817)
222-5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter EASB EC135-85A-036, Revision 2, and Eurocopter
EASB MBB BK117 C-2-85A-024, Revision 1, both dated June 23, 2010,
which are not incorporated by reference, contain additional
information about the subject of this AD. For Eurocopter service
information identified in this AD, contact American Eurocopter
Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone
(972) 641-0000 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. You may review a copy of the service
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2010-0154, dated August 13, 2010, which
supersedes EASA AD No. 2009-0093-E, dated April 17, 2009. You may
view the EASA ADs on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov in
Docket No. FAA-2013-0340.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 5345, Fuselage,
Equipment Attach Fittings.

(j) 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 the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Goodrich Service Bulletin 44307-500-03, Revision 2, dated
April 30, 2010.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Goodrich service information identified in this AD,
contact American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(972) 641-3775; or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub, and contact
the UTC Aerospace Systems (formerly the Goodrich Corporation), 2727
East Imperial Highway, Brea, CA 92821; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
714-984-1675, or at www.goodrich.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 27, 2013.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-30466 Filed 12-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70226-70227]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24419]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79034; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-134]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 7.16P

October 4, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on September 26, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.16P. The proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.16P (Short Sales).
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(G)
regarding the treatment of an Intermarket Sweep Order (``ISO'') \4\
designated Immediate-or-Cancel (``IOC'') during a Short Sale Period.\5\
Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(F) currently provides that during a Short Sale Period,
IOC orders will be traded to the extent possible at a Permitted Price
\6\ and higher and then cancelled, and the working price will not be
adjusted.\7\ An IOC ISO with a limit price at or below the NBB, on the
other hand, is treated unlike an IOC order during a Short Sale Period
and similar to a Day ISO. Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(G) currently provides that a
Day ISO will be rejected if the limit price is at or below the NBB. The
Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(G) to specify that an IOC
ISO and a Day ISO are both handled in a similar manner by the Exchange.
The Exchange proposes to make this change by deleting the word `Day'
from Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(G).\8\ Given that during a Short Sale Period, an
IOC ISO and a Day ISO are both treated in a similar manner, the
Exchange believes the proposed change will provide specificity to the
Exchange's rules that during a Short Sale Period, all ISOs will be
rejected if the limit price is at or below the NBB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An ISO is a Limit Order that does not route and meets the
requirements of Rule 600(b)(30) of Regulation NMS. See Rule
7.31P(e)(3).
    \5\ Short Sale Period is the period of time that the Short Sale
Price Test remains in effect if the Short Sale Price Test is
triggered by the listing market with respect to a covered security.
See Rule 7.16P(f)(4).
    \6\ Permitted Price is the working price and/or display price
adjusted one minimum price increment above the current NBB for short
sale orders during a Short Sale Period that have a working price
and/or display price equal to or lower than the NBB. See Rule
7.16P(f)(5)(A).
    \7\ See Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(F).
    \8\ The Exchange proposes a non-substantive amendment to delete
the term ``Order'' in Rule 7.16P(f)(5)(G) as such term is redundant
of the term ISO, which includes the term ``Order.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\10\
in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
would promote just and equitable principles of

trade, and remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system by ensuring consistency in
the treatment of ISOs during a Short Sale Period. The Exchange believes
the proposal to amend Rule 7.16P will also promote transparency and
provide specificity to the rule, which serves 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.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not
designed to address any competitive issue but rather to make amendments
to the manner in which ISOs are handled during a Short Sale Period.

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

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

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \13\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \14\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. According to
the Exchange, during a Short Sale Period, IOC ISOs and Day ISOs are
treated in a similar manner, and the proposed rule change would specify
that during a Short Sale Period, all ISOs will be rejected if the limit
price is at or below the NBB. The Commission believes the waiver of the
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative
delay and designates the proposal operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
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 Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-134 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-134. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-134 and should
be submitted on or before November 1, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-24419 Filed 10-7-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 234)]
[Notices]
[Page 70816-70817]
[DOCID:fr06de06-111]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54821; File No. SR-FICC-2006-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Federal Reserve's National Settlement System

November 28, 2006.

I. Introduction

    On July 11, 2006, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') and
on August 6, 2006 amended proposed rule change SR-FICC-2006-13 pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal was published in the Federal
Register on October 26, 2006.\2\ No comment letters were received. For
the reasons discussed below, the Commission is granting approval of the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54622, (October 18,
2006), 71 FR 62632.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The proposed rule change amends the rules of FICC's Mortgage-Backed
Securities Division (``MBSD'') to require clearing participants to
satisfy their cash settlement amounts ultimately through the Federal
Reserve's National Settlement Service (``NSS'').\3\ The MBSD cash
settlement process is set forth in Rule 8 of Article II of the MBSD's
rules. On a daily basis, FICC computes a cash balance, which is either
a debit amount or a credit amount, per participant account and nets the
cash balances across aggregated accounts. Unlike at GSD where cash
settlement occurs on a daily basis, at MBSD there are specific dates on
which debits and credits are required to be made. Settlement dates at
MBSD are based upon the settlement dates of the different classes of
MBSD-eligible securities. There is a time deadline for the payment of
debits to FICC as announced by the MBSD from time to time. All payments
of cash settlement amounts by a MBSD clearing participant to FICC and
all collections of cash settlement amounts by a MBSD clearing
participant from FICC are done through depository institutions that are
designated by MBSD participants and by FICC to act on their behalf with
regard to such payments and collections. All payments are made by fund
wires from one depository institution to the other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For a description of NSS, refer to http://www.frbservices.org/Wholesale/natsettle.html
.

    The Commission previously approved a proposed rule change filed
by FICC to make a similar amendment to the rules of its Government
Securities Division (``GSD''). Securities Exchange Act Release No.
52853 (November 29, 2005), 70 FR 72682 (December 6, 2005) [File No.
SR-FICC-2005-14]. FICC's affiliates, The Depository Trust Company
(``DTC'') and the National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') also use NSS in their funds settlement processes.
However, DTC and NSCC do not currently use NSS for the payment of
credit. MBSD will process both the debits and credits of its cash
settlement process through the NSS, as is the case for the GSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule change, the required payment mechanism for
the satisfaction of cash settlement amounts will be the NSS. FICC will
appoint DTC as its settlement agent for purposes of interfacing with
the NSS.\4\ In order to satisfy its cash settlement obligations through
the NSS process, each MBSD clearing participant will appoint a ``cash
settling bank.'' An MBSD clearing participant that qualifies may act as
its own cash settling bank.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ DTC currently performs this service for the GSD and NSCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MBSD will establish a limited membership category for cash
settling banks. Banks or trust companies that are DTC settling banks
(as defined in DTC's rules and procedures), GSD funds-only settling
bank members (as defined in the GSD's rules), or clearing participants
with direct access to a Federal Reserve Bank and NSS will be eligible
to become MBSD cash settling bank participants by executing the
requisite membership agreements for this purpose. Banks or trust
companies that do not fall into these categories and that desire to
become MBSD cash settling bank participants will need to apply to FICC.
Such banks or trust companies will also need to have direct access to a
Federal Reserve Bank and the NSS as well as satisfy the financial
responsibility standards and operational capability imposed by FICC
from time to time. Initially, these applicants will be required to meet
and to maintain a Tier 1 capital ratio of 6 percent.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ This is the same financial requirement for GSD funds-only
settling banks that fall into a similar category. As with the GSD,
FICC would retain the authority and discretion to change this
financial criterion by providing advanced notice to the settling
banks and the netting members through an important notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the membership agreement, each MBSD clearing
participant and the cash settling bank it has selected will be required
to execute an agreement whereby the participant will appoint the bank
to act on its behalf for cash settlement purposes. The bank will also
be required to execute any agreements that may be required by the
Federal Reserve Bank for participation in the NSS for FICC's cash
settlement process. The cash settling banks will be required to follow
the procedures for cash settlement payment processing set forth in the
proposed rule change. This includes, for example, providing FICC or its
settlement agent with the requisite acknowledgement of the bank's
intention to settle the cash settlement amounts of the MBSD clearing
participants it represents on a timely basis and to participate in the
NSS process. Cash settling banks will have the right to refuse to
settle for a particular MBSD clearing participant and will also be able
to opt out of NSS for one business day if they are experiencing
extenuating circumstances.\6\ In such a situation, the clearing
participant would be responsible for ensuring that its cash settlement
debit was wired to the depository institution designated by FICC to
receive such payments by the payment deadline. The proposed rule change
makes clear that the obligation of a MBSD clearing participant to
fulfill its cash settlement would remain at all times with the MBSD
clearing participant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ These procedures are consistent with the GSD, NSCC, and DTC
procedures in this respect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As FICC's settlement agent, DTC will submit instructions to have
the Federal Reserve Bank accounts of the cash settlement banks charged
for the debit amounts and credited for the credit amounts. Utilization
of NSS will eliminate the need for the initiation of wire transfers in
satisfaction of MBSD settlement amounts, and FICC believes that it will
therefore reduce the risk that the MBSD clearing participant that
designated the bank would incur a late payment fine due to delay in
wiring funds. The proposed rule change should also reduce operational
burden for the operations staff of FICC and of the MBSD clearing
participants.

    The NSS is governed by the Federal Reserve's Operating Circular No.
12 (``Circular''). Under the Circular, DTC, as FICC's settlement agent,
has certain responsibilities with respect to an indemnity claim made by
a relevant Federal Reserve Bank as a result of the NSS process. FICC
will apportion the entirety of any such liability to the MBSD clearing
participant or clearing participants for whom the cash settling bank to
which the indemnity claim relates is acting. This allocation will be
done in proportion to the amount of each MBSD clearing participant's
cash settlement amount on the business day in question. If for any
reason such allocation is not sufficient to fully satisfy the Federal
Reserve Bank's indemnity claim, then the remaining loss will be
allocated among all MBSD clearing participants in proportion to their
relative usage of the facilities of the MBSD based on fees for services
during the period in which loss is incurred.
    The proposed rule change also amends the GSD's rules regarding the
use of the NSS. An additional category for eligible funds-only settling
banks is added to include MBSD cash settling banks. This means that an
MBSD cash settling bank would be able to become a GSD funds-only
settling bank by signing the requisite agreements.

III. Discussion

    The Commission previously approved a proposed rule change to FICC's
GSD's rules to require funds-only settlement at GSD to be made through
the NSS.\7\ In the order granting approval of the GSD proposal, the
Commission found that the rule change was designed to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
and to assure the safeguarding of securities in FICC's possession or
control or for which FICC is responsible under Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Act because the rule was designed to improve the efficiency of
GSD's funds-only settlement process without affecting the
responsibility of GSD's members to make their funds-only settlement
payments on time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52853 (November 29,
2005), 70 FR 72682 (December 6, 2005) [File No. SR-FICC-2005-14].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change to Article II, Rule 8 of FICC's MBSD's
Rules is essentially the same as the previously approved proposed rule
change to GSD Rule 13. The new provisions to MBSD Rule 8 regarding the
NSS, the new limited membership category for ``cash settling banks,''
and the procedures for processing payments through NSS are virtually
identical to the provisions that are currently in GSD Rule 13.
Accordingly, for the same reason we approved GSD Rule 13 we are
approving MBSD Rule 8. Namely, that the NSS offered by the Federal
Reserve System is a reliable and proven service that should promote the
efficiency of cash settlement at MBSD and that the changes to MBSD Rule
8 with respect to membership financial requirements, transaction
processing, and loss allocation are designed to prevent any risk of
loss to MBSD or to its members. As a result, we find that the proposed
rule change is designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance
and settlement of securities transactions under Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Act and should not affect FICC's obligation under Section
17A(b)(3)(F) to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds in its
possession or under its control or for which it is responsible.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-FICC-2006-13) be and hereby
is approved.

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-20626 Filed 12-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 113 (Thursday, June 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 35652]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12636]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R08-OPPT-2020-0013; FRL-10010-17-Region 8]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pollution Prevention (P2) Awards
Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Pollution
Prevention (P2) Awards Program is planning to submit an information
collection request (ICR), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Pollution Prevention (P2) Awards Program (EPA ICR No.: 2614.01, OMB
Control No. 2008--NEW) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). Before doing so, the EPA is soliciting public comments on
specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described
below. This is a request for approval of a new collection. An 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.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 10, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OPPT-2020-0013, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EPA's policy is that all
comments received will be included in the public docket without change
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Payan, EPA R8 Land, Chemical
and Redevelopment Division Pollution Prevention Program, (8LCR-CES),
Environmental Protection Agency R8, 1595 Wynkoop St. Denver, CO 80202;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register
document to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: EPA's Pollution Prevention (P2) Program is a voluntary
program that encourages businesses/facilities to adopt P2 projects that
reduces both financial costs (waste management and cleanup) and
environmental costs (health problems and environmental damage). In
passing the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) in 1990, Congress found that
there are significant opportunities for industry to reduce or prevent
pollution at the source through cost-effective changes in production,
operation, and raw materials use. Such changes offer industry
substantial savings in reduced raw material, pollution control, and
liability costs as well as help protect the environment and reduce
risks to worker health and safety. 42 U.S.C. 13101(a)(2). Furthermore,
the PPA states the Administrator shall ``establish an annual award
program to recognize a company or companies which operate outstanding
or innovative source reduction programs'' (PPA section 6604) 42 U.S.C.
13103(b)(13). The EPA P2 Awards Program is an annual, voluntary, and
non-monetary awards program that will recognize companies that
demonstrate leadership in innovative P2 practices and encourage other
entities to consider P2 approaches. This ICR may be applicable to HQ,
as well as any of the 10 Regional Offices that choose to participate
and implement a P2 Awards Program.
    Form numbers: EPA P2 Award Program Application--5800-005.
    Respondents/affected entities: Intended Respondents include various
types of businesses from all North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes. However, businesses need to be from a state in an
EPA Region implementing this awards program.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Respondents are not obligated
to respond. This is done on a voluntary basis.
    Estimated number of respondents: Approximately 5-10 per region
(total).
    Frequency of response: Annually on a voluntary basis.
    Total estimated burden: 19.5 hours per respondent (per year).
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $1,804.83 per respondent (per year), includes
$0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in estimates: Not applicable at this time.

    Dated: May 29, 2020.
Gregory Sopkin,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2020-12636 Filed 6-10-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 200)]
[Notices]
[Page 61037-61038]
[DOCID:fr17oc06-79]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP05-74-001]

Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.; Notice of Compliance
Filing

October 12, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 29, 2006, Maritimes & Northeast
Pipeline, L.L.C., (Maritimes) tendered for filing as part of its FERC
Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Eighth Revised Sheet No. 14,
with an effective date of November 1, 2006.
    Maritimes states that the filing is being made in compliance with
the Commission's order issued on July 27, 2005 in the above-captioned
proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing 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. Such protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest 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 e-mail
notification when a

document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any
FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Protest Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on October 17, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-17198 Filed 10-16-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P