[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 60584]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25314]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of
Directors

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

TIME AND DATE: October 27, 2011, 12 noon to 3 p.m., Eastern Daylight
Time.

PLACE: This meeting will take place telephonically. Any interested
person may call<PHONE_NUMBER>, passcode, 908048 to participate in this
meeting.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board
of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and
implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to
that end, may consider matters properly before the Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified
Carrier Registration Board of Directors at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on: September 26, 2011.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-25314 Filed 9-27-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: April 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 17474-17475]
[DOCID:fr15ap09-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RD09-6-000]

North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Filing

April 8, 2009.
    Take notice that on March 5, 2009, pursuant to section 215(d)(1) of
the Federal Power Act and part 39.5 of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's Regulations, The North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) filed a petition seeking approval for
interpretations of Requirement R11 in its Commission-approved NERC
Reliability Standard, TOP-002-2--Normal Operations Planning, designated
as TOP-002-2a.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as

appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or
before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not
necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other
than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive 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<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 8, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-8563 Filed 4-14-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 74)]
[Notices]
[Page 20622]
[DOCID:fr16ap08-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL08-53-000]

PowerSouth Energy Cooperative, on Behalf of Itself and Its
Members: Baldwin EMC; Central Alabama EC; CHELCO; Clarke-Washington
EMC; Coosa Valley EC; Covington EC; Dixie EC; Escambia River EC; Gulf
Coast EC; Pea River EC; Pioneer EC; South Alabama EC; Southern Pine EC;
Tallapoosa River EC; West Florida EC; Wiregrass EC; The Utilities Board
of the City of Andalusia, Alabama; The City of Brundidge, Alabama;
Water Works & Electric Board of the City of Elba; The Utilities Board
of the City of OPP, Alabama; Notice of Filing

April 10, 2008.
    Take notice that on April 4, 2008, PowerSouth Energy Cooperative
(PowerSouth), on behalf of itself and its member owners Baldwin EMC,
Central Alabama EC, CHELCO, Clarke-Washington EMC, Coosa Valley EC,
Covington EC, Dixie EC, Escambia River EC, Gulf Coast EC, Pea River EC,
Pioneer EC, South Alabama EC, Southern Pine EC, Tallapoosa River EC,
West Florida EC, Wiregrass EC, The Utilities Board of the City of
Andalusia, Alabama, The City of Brundidge, Alabama, Water Works &
Electric Board of the City of Elba, and The Utilities Board of the City
of OPP, Alabama (Members), filed a request for partial waiver of
certain regulatory obligations relating to section 210 of the Public
Utilities Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 imposed on PowerSouth and its
Members under sections 292.303(a) and 292.303(b), 18 CFR 292.303(a) and
202.303(b), of the Commission's regulations.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 5, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-8147 Filed 4-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 105)]
[Notices]
[Page 30900]
[DOCID:fr02jn10-150]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of
Directors

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
    Time and Date: June 9, 2010, 8 a.m. until 12 Noon, Mountain
Daylight Time.
    Place: This meeting will take place telephonically. Any interested
person may call Place: This meeting will take place at the Hotel Park
City, 2001 Park Avenue, Park City, UT 84060. Any interested person may
call Mr. Avelino Gutierrez at<PHONE_NUMBER> to receive the toll free
number and pass code needed to participate in this meeting by
telephone.
    Status: Open to the public.

Matters to be Considered: The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board
of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and
implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to
that end, may consider matters properly before the Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified
Carrier Registration Board of Directors at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on: May 28, 2010.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-13396 Filed 5-28-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 27226]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11174]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-1660-000]

Tuscola Bay Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Tuscola Bay Wind, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is May 23, 2012.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 3, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-11174 Filed 5-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 147)]
[Notices]
[Page 44305-44307]
[DOCID:fr30jy08-117]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58217; File No. SR-NSX-2008-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Provide for a Post Intermarket Sweep Order

July 24, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 18, 2008, National Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange.
NSX filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is proposing to amend NSX Rule 11.11(c)(8) to allow
ETP Holders the option of designating an intermarket sweep order
(``ISO'') as a ``Post Intermarket Sweep Order'' (``Post ISO''). The
text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is in
italics, and the proposed deletions are enclosed in brackets:

Rules of National Stock Exchange, Inc.

Chapter XI. Trading Rules
* * * * *
Rule 11.11. Orders and Modifiers
    Users may enter into the System the types of orders listed in this
Rule 11.11, subject to the limitations set forth in this Rule or
elsewhere in these Rules.
    (a)-(b) No change.
    (c) Other Types of Orders and Order Modifiers.
    (1)-(7) No change.
    (8) [Incoming] Intermarket Sweep Order (``ISO'').
    (i) Incoming ISO. The System will accept incoming intermarket sweep
orders (as such term is defined in Regulation NMS) from other trading
centers. In order to be eligible for treatment as an intermarket sweep
order, the order must be marked ``ISO,'' and the User entering the
order must simultaneously route one or more additional limit orders
marked ``ISO,'' as necessary, to away markets to execute against the
full displayed size of any protected quotation for the security with a
price that is superior to the limit price of the intermarket sweep
order entered in the System. Such orders, if they meet the requirements
of the foregoing sentence, will be considered immediate-or-cancel (IOC)
and will be executed without regard to protected quotations at away
markets consistent with Regulation NMS.
    (ii) Post ISO. A User may designate an ISO as a ``Post ISO.'' In
order to be eligible for treatment as a Post ISO, the order must be
marked ``Post ISO,'' and in submitting such an order the User entering
the order represents that such User has simultaneously routed one or
more additional limit orders marked ``ISO,'' as necessary, to away
markets to execute against the full displayed size of any protected
quotation for the security with a price that is superior or equal to
the limit price of the Post ISO entered in the System. Such order, if
it meets the requirements of the foregoing sentence and is not a Post
Only Order pursuant to Rule 11.11(c)(5), will be executed without
regard to protected quotations at away markets consistent with
Regulation NMS by sweeping the NSX Book up to and including its limit
price. A Post ISO which is designated by the User as a Post Only Order
pursuant to Rule 11.11(c)(5) will be rejected without execution if,
when entered, it is immediately marketable against displayed orders in
the NSX Book. Any unfilled portion of a Post ISO that meets the
requirements of Rule 11.22(d)(3) will be posted at the entered limit
price.
    (9) No change.
    (d) No change.
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for,

the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend Exchange Rules 11.11(c)(8) to
allow ETP Holders the option of posting an order designated as an ISO.
    Under current Rule 11.11(c)(8), the System will accept incoming
intermarket sweep orders (as such term is defined in Regulation NMS)
from other trading centers. In order to be eligible for treatment as an
intermarket sweep order, the order must be marked ``ISO,'' and the User
entering the order must simultaneously route one or more additional
limit orders marked ``ISO,'' as necessary, to away markets to execute
against the full displayed size of any protected quotation for the
security with a price that is superior to the limit price of the
intermarket sweep order entered in the System. Such orders, if they
meet the requirements of the foregoing sentence, will be considered
immediate-or-cancel (IOC) and will be executed without regard to
protected quotations at away markets consistent with Regulation NMS.
    Under the proposed rule change, by designating an ISO as a ``Post
ISO,'' the ETP Holder represents to the Exchange that the ETP Holder
has simultaneously routed one or more additional limit orders marked
``ISO,'' as necessary, to away markets to execute against the full
displayed size of any protected quotation for the security with a price
that is superior or equal to the limit price of the intermarket sweep
order entered in the System. The incoming Post ISO (unless marked
``post only'') will sweep the NSX Book up to its limit price. Unlike a
standard ISO (which is considered IOC), if residual shares of the Post
ISO are available, they will be posted at the entered limit price
(similar to existing ``Sweep and Post'' orders under Rule
11.11(c)(7)(ii)(A)). Any unfilled portion of a Post ISO order following
the sweep of the NSX Book will be posted in the NSX Book and will be
ineligible for routing.
    If an incoming Post ISO is marked as ``Post Only'' pursuant to Rule
11.11(c)(5) and is marketable (within NSX), it will be rejected.
Otherwise, Post Only Post ISOs will be accepted and posted in the NSX
Book at its limit price providing liquidity.
    Similar to ISOs under the current Rules, Users sending a Post ISO
must simultaneously route one or more additional limit orders marked
``ISO,'' as necessary, to away markets to execute against the full
displayed size of any protected quotation for the security with a price
that is superior or equal to the limit price of the intermarket sweep
order entered in the System in accordance with Regulation NMS' Order
Protection Rule Rules 610 and 611. Post ISOs may therefore lock or
cross protected quotes at away market centers that were sent ISOs equal
to the limit price, consistent with Rule 11.22(d)(3), but may not lock
or cross the NSX Top of Book, and are not routable, subject to their
compliance with this rule and Rule 11.22(d)(3).
    Post ISOs may be entered as odd, round or mixed lots. Only
displayed orders (and displayed orders with reserves) may be designated
as Post ISOs. Post ISO for Order Delivery will be processed in the same
way as other order types supported today.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, which
requires, among other things, that the rules of an exchange be designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any inappropriate burden on competition.

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

    The Exchange states that written comments on the proposed rule
change were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange fulfilled this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Exchange requests that the Commission waive
the 30-day operative delay.
    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.\9\
Previously, the Commission approved an order type similar to the one
proposed,\10\ and this proposal does not raise any novel issues. For
these reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change as
operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54549 (September
29, 2006), 71 FR 59179 (October 6, 2006) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-59)
(approving NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(w)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,

including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSX-2008-12 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2008-12. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 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-NSX-2008-12 and should be
submitted on or before August 20, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-17412 Filed 7-29-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 51 (Friday, March 15, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9573-9575]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04808]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85282; File No. SR-FINRA-2018-040]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to FINRA
Rule 4512 (Customer Account Information)

March 11, 2019.

I. Introduction

    On November 28, 2018, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to revise FINRA Rule 4512
(Customer Account Information) to permit the use of electronic
signatures and to also clarify the scope of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on December 17, 2018.\3\ The Commission received two comment
letters regarding the proposed rule change, both supporting the
proposed rule change.\4\ On January 30, 2019 the Commission extended
the time to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed
rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change to March 17, 2019.\5\ For the
reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84788 (Dec. 11,
2018), 83 FR 64609 (Dec. 17, 2018) (File No. SR-FINRA-2018-040)
(``Notice'').
    \4\ See Letters from Paul J. Tolley, Senior Vice President,
Chief Compliance Officer, Commonwealth Financial Network, dated
December 31, 2018 (``Commonwealth Letter''); and Kevin Zambrowicz,
Associate General Counsel & Managing Director, SIFMA, dated January
7, 2019 (``SIFMA Letter'').
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85003 (Jan. 30,
2019), 84 FR 1809 (Feb. 5, 2019) (File No. SR-FINRA-2018-040)
(``Extension'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The subsequent description of the proposed rule change is
substantially excerpted from FINRA's description in the Notice. See
Notice, 83 FR 64609-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA proposed to amend paragraph (a)(3) of FINRA Rule 4512
(Customer Account Information) to permit the use of electronic
signatures and to clarify the scope of the rule.
    With respect to a discretionary customer account maintained by a
member, FINRA Rule 4512(a)(3) currently requires a member to obtain a
manual dated signature of each named, natural person authorized to
exercise discretion in the account. FINRA stated that because the rule
only applies to discretionary accounts maintained by a member, the
named natural person would inevitably be an associated person of the
firm.\7\ Consequently, to

comply with the rule, members must obtain the associated person's
``wet'' signature or a copy of his or her wet signature, such as a
scanned or faxed copy of the wet signature.\8\ Additionally, the rule
also requires members to maintain and preserve a record of the
signature for at least six years after the date the account is
closed.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ There is a corresponding requirement under NASD Rule 2510
(Discretionary Accounts) prohibiting members and their registered
representatives from exercising any discretionary power in a
customer's account unless the customer has given prior written
authorization to a stated individual or individuals, and the account
has been accepted by the firm as evidenced in writing by the firm or
a designated partner, officer or manager of the firm. These
signatures need not be manual. In addition, SEA Rule 17a-
3(a)(17)(ii) requires that, for discretionary accounts with a
natural person, broker-dealers maintain a record containing the
dated signature of each natural person to whom discretionary
authority was granted. This signature also need not be manual.
    \8\ The terms ``manual'' and ``wet'' are used interchangeably in
this proposed rule change.
    \9\ For retention purposes, members may choose to maintain and
preserve the signature record on any of the acceptable media
specified in SEA Rule 17a-4, including electronic storage media
consistent with SEA Rule 17a-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to FINRA, the purpose of the signature is to validate
that the authorized associated person is who he or she purports to be.
FINRA stated that, in light of the industry's shift towards automated
and electronic processes, member firms have requested that FINRA
reevaluate the need for wet signatures under the rule. FINRA noted that
its members have stated that the requirement to obtain wet signatures
raises operational and cost concerns without providing meaningful
investor protection benefits. In addition, according to FINRA, some
members have noted that the requirement puts them at a competitive
disadvantage over investment advisers because investment advisers are
allowed to obtain electronic signatures. Finally, FINRA noted that
members that have adopted automated and electronic processes have
stated that the current requirement results in significant
administrative inefficiencies, particularly because all other account
documentation, including the customer authorization form, and related
recordkeeping may be completed electronically through a streamlined
process.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ To comply with FINRA Rule 4512(a)(3), most of these firms
currently print a paper copy of the account record and require that
the authorized associated person physically sign it. They then
convert the paper record to an electronic record for retention on
electronic storage media. These firms have stated that this two-step
process creates unnecessary inefficiencies and administrative
burdens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of technological advances relating to electronic
signatures, including with respect to authentication and security,
FINRA stated that it believes that the requirement under Rule
4512(a)(3) that members obtain an associated person's wet signature has
become obsolete. As a result, FINRA proposed to amend the rule to
permit the use of electronic signatures. While FINRA Rule 4512(a)(3)
would continue to require members to obtain the signature of an
associated person, it would provide firms the option of obtaining
either a manual or an electronic signature.
    For purposes of compliance with FINRA Rule 4512(a)(3), a valid
electronic signature would be any electronic mark that clearly
identifies the signatory and is otherwise in compliance with the
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (``E-Sign
Act''), the guidance issued by the Commission relating to the E-Sign
Act,\11\ and the guidance provided by FINRA staff through interpretive
letters.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44238 (May 1,
2001), 66 FR 22916 (May 7, 2001) (Commission Guidance to Broker-
Dealers on the Use of Electronic Storage Media Under the Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act of 2000 with Respect
to Rule 17a-4(f)).
    \12\ See, e.g., Letter from Nancy Libin, NASD, to Jeffrey W.
Kilduff, O'Melveny & Myers, LLP, dated July 5, 2001, http://www.finra.org/industry/interpretive-letters/july-5-2001-1200am.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the proposed changes described above, FINRA is
proposing to amend Rule 4512(a)(3) to clarify that the rule is limited
to discretionary customer accounts maintained by a member for which
associated persons of the member are authorized to exercise discretion.
Specifically, FINRA is proposing to amend the rule to state that for a
discretionary customer account maintained by a member, the member must
obtain the dated signature of each named, associated person of the
member authorized to exercise discretion in the account.
    FINRA has stated that it will announce the effective date of the
rule change in a Regulatory Notice to be published no later than 60
days following a Commission approval, and the effective date will be no
later than 30 days following publication of that Regulatory Notice.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Notice, 83 FR at 64610.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Comment Summary

    As noted above, the Commission received two comment letters on the
proposed rule change,\14\ both supporting the proposal. Both commenters
noted that the requirement to obtain a manual or ``wet'' signature is
outdated or generally inconsistent with the move toward an increase in
the use of technology, including the use of electronic signatures.\15\
One commenter indicated that it already executes essentially all client
account and transactional paperwork with the use of electronic
signatures, and that the requirement to obtain a manual signature slows
down its processes for opening discretionary accounts.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra note 6.
    \15\ See Commonwealth Letter at 1-2; see also SIFMA Letter at 1.
    \16\ See Commonwealth Letter at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Both commenters noted that the administrative and operational
inefficiencies and burdens resulting from the requirement to obtain
manual signatures place member firms at a competitive disadvantage
against investment advisers that are not subject to such a requirement
without providing additional investor protections.\17\ The commenters
support the proposed rule change, and one commenter urged the
Commission and FINRA to consider other opportunities to eliminate
manual signature requirements in favor of electronic methods.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Commonwealth Letter at 1; see also SIFMA Letter at 2.
    \18\ See Commonwealth Letter at 2; see also SIFMA Letter at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful consideration of the proposed rule change and the
comment letters, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities
association.\19\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\20\ which
requires, among other things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors
and the public interest. The Commission believes that the proposal will
simplify the process by which member firms validate the identity of an
authorized associated person, and thereby lower costs to member firms
by reducing operational inefficiencies. Moreover, the Commission
believes the proposed rule change is reasonably designed to prevent
fraudulent practices in connection with the use of electronic
signatures because it provides that a valid electronic signature would
be any electronic mark that clearly identifies the signatory and is
otherwise in compliance with the E-Sign Act. The proposed rule change
is also consistent with Commission guidance relating to the E-Sign Act,
and prior FINRA staff guidance regarding electronic signatures.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ In approving this rule change, the Commission has
considered the rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \21\ See supra notes 11-12 and accompanying text.

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

    For these reasons, the Commission believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Act.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\22\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2018-040) is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S. C. 78s(b)(2).
    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-04808 Filed 3-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13404-13410]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06268]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9555; Airspace Docket No. 16-AGL-2]

Modification and Revocation of Multiple Air Traffic Service (ATS)
Routes; Northcentral United States

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends and removes multiple VHF Omnidirectional
Range (VOR) Federal airways in northcentral United States as part of
the FAA's Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) efforts
to safely improve the overall efficiency of the National Airspace
System (NAS) and due to the decommissioning of the Tiverton, OH, VOR/
Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigation aid. This action also
incorporates NAV CANADA's amendment to one of the airways that crosses
into Canada's airspace.

DATES: Effective date 0901, May 24, 2018. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the NAS route
structure as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air
traffic within the NAS.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register for Docket No. FAA-2016-9555 (82 FR 11859; February
27, 2017). The NPRM proposed to amend and remove multiple VHF
Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airways in northcentral United
States to reflect and accommodate route changes being made as part of
the FAA's Cleveland/Detroit Metroplex Project airspace redesign effort.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. No comments were
received.
    Subsequent to publication of the NPRM, the FAA initiated a project
for decommissioning the Tiverton, OH, VOR/DME due to the land-lease for
the navigation aid expiring and not being renewed. With the planned
decommissioning of the Tiverton VOR/DME, several of the Federal airways
proposed for amendment in the NPRM were impacted and required
additional amendment. Additionally, NAV CANADA amended one of the
Federal airways proposed for amendment in the NPRM that crosses into
Canada's airspace. That NAV CANADA amendment required the FAA to adjust
the proposed amendment to the airway. Lastly, the FAA reviewed the
airway amendments proposed in the NPRM and the Cleveland/Detroit
Metroplex project redesign and determined the two activities were in
fact independent of each other and not connected. The airway amendments
proposed in the NPRM support the FAA's NextGen efforts to safely
improve the overall efficiency of the NAS.
    Since several airway amendments proposed in the NPRM required
further amendment due to the decommissioning of Tiverton VOR/DME and
NAV CANADA's amendment to one of the airways, and the NPRM
characterization required clarification that the airway amendments
proposed in the NPRM in fact supported the FAA's NextGen efforts
independent from the FAA's Cleveland/Detroit Metroplex project
activities, the FAA determined it was necessary to supplement the
proposal and reopen the comment period to provide additional
opportunity for public comment.
    The FAA therefore published a supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking (SNPRM) in the Federal Register for Docket No. FAA-2016-9555
(82 FR 35918; August 2, 2017). The SNPRM proposed to amend three VOR
Federal airways in northcentral United States to reflect additional
amendments required by the planned decommissioning of the Tiverton VOR/
DME navigation aid and amend one VOR Federal airway to reflect NAV
CANADA's additional amendment to the airway within Canada's airspace.
The remaining VOR Federal airway amendments and removals proposed in
the NPRM published in the Federal Register (82 FR 11859, February 27,
2017) were unchanged. The SNPRM also clarified the FAA was undertaking
this action in support of its NextGen efforts to safely improve the
overall efficiency of the NAS. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. One comment was received.

Discussion of Comment

    The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) contended that,
for those VOR NAVAIDs that are to be decommissioned, and for those
airways that are correspondingly removed, the FAA should create an RNAV
waypoint at the previous NAVAID location and retain all fixes and
intersections along that route by amending their definition to that of
an RNAV waypoint. Their concern was that with the removal of much of
the route structure and their defining fixes, there would be a gap in
how pilots could navigate through the area and how they communicate
their planned route of flight to air traffic control unless a waypoint
system remained.
    As addressed in the NPRM, and supported in AOPA's comment, the FAA
is retaining the current fixes contained within the airspace area
affected by this action and converting them into RNAV waypoints that
will remain in place to assist pilots and air traffic controllers
already familiar with them, for navigation purposes. Additionally, the
FAA is establishing a waypoint within the immediate vicinity of the
Tiverton VOR/DME location (60 feet) to further assist pilots navigating
through the airspace affected by the Tiverton VOR/DME being
decommissioned.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

Difference From NPRM and SNPRM

    The amendment to V-14 is revised to remove the airway segment
between the Flag City, OH, VORTAC and the Erie, PA, VORTAC. The airway
segment between the Erie, PA, VORTAC and Dunkirk, NY, VOR/DME that was
proposed to be removed, and the airway segment between the Dunkirk, NY,
VOR/DME and Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME that was proposed to be retained, were
removed in a separate rulemaking action (16-AEA-11) published in the
Federal Register (82 FR 26987, June 13, 2017) Docket No. FAA-2017-0107.
    The amendment to V-464 is revised to remove the airway in its
entirety. The airway segment between the Aylmer, ON, Canada, VOR/DME
and Geneseo, NY, VOR/DME that was proposed to be retained, was removed
in a separate rulemaking action (16-AEA-11) published in the Federal
Register (82 FR 26987, June 13, 2017) Docket No. FAA-2017-0107.
    The amendment to V-522 remains to remove the airway in its
entirety. However, the airway was amended in a separate rulemaking
action (16-AEA-11) published in the Federal Register (82 FR 26987, June
13, 2017) Docket No. FAA-2017-0107. The existing airway to be removed
extends between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME and Erie, PA, VORTAC.
    Lastly, minor editorial corrections have been made to a few of the
airway descriptions for standardization. These corrections include
removing the word ``via'' when used between the first and second airway
points listed and changing punctuation (commas to semi-colons) between
airway points contained in the descriptions. With the exception of the
above noted changes and minor editorial corrections, this rule is the
same as that published in the NPRM and SNPRM.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 to modify VOR Federal airways V-2, V-5, V-6, V-8, V-10, V-11,
V-14, V-26, V-30, V-38, V-43, V-45, V-47, V-59, V-75, V-84, V-92, V-96,
V-103, V-116, V-126, V-133, V-170, V-188, V-210, V-221, V-232, V-233,
V-450, V-493, and V-542. Additionally, this action removes VOR Federal
airways V-40, V-98, V-176, V-297, V-353, V-383, V-396, V-406, V-416, V-
418, V-426, V-435, V-443, V-464, V-467, V-486, V-

522, V-523, V-525, and V-584. These VOR Federal airway amendments and
removals support the FAA's ongoing NextGen efforts and planned
decommissioning of the Tiverton, OH, VOR/DME, and are outlined below.
    V-2: V-2 extends between the Seattle, WA, VORTAC and Gardner, MA,
VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. This rule removes the
airway segment between the Lansing, MI, VORTAC and Buffalo, NY, VOR/
DME, and the exclusion statement for the airspace within Canada. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-5: V-5 extends between the Pecan, GA, VOR/DME and London, ON,
Canada, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. This rule
removes the airway segment between the Appleton, OH, VORTAC and London,
ON, Canada, VOR/DME, and the exclusion statement for the airspace
within Canada. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain
unchanged.
    V-6: V-6 extends between the Oakland, CA, VORTAC and DuPage, IL,
VOR/DME; between the intersection of the Chicago Heights, IL, VORTAC
358[deg] and Gipper, MI, VORTAC 271[deg] radials (NILES fix) and
Waterville, OH, VOR/DME; and between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME and La
Guardia, NY, VOR/DME; excluding the airspace within restricted areas R-
4803, R-4813A, and R-4813B when active. This rule removes the airway
segments between the intersection of the Gipper, MI, VORTAC 092[deg]
and Litchfield, MI, VOR/DME 196[deg] radials (MODEM fix) and
Waterville, OH, VOR/DME; and between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME and
Clarion, PA, VOR/DME. Additionally, this rule removes the exclusion
statement for the airspace within restricted areas R-4803, R-4813A, and
R-4813B. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain
unchanged.
    V-8: V-8 extends between the intersection of the Seal Beach, CA,
VORTAC 266[deg] and Ventura, CA, VOR/DME 144[deg] radials (DOYLE fix)
and the Washington, DC, VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway segment
between the Flag City, OH, VORTAC and Briggs, OH, VOR/DME. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-10: V-10 extends between the Pueblo, CO, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Bradford, IL, VORTAC 058[deg] and Joliet, IL,
VORTAC 287[deg] radials (PLANO fix); and between the intersection of
the Chicago Heights, IL, VORTAC 358[deg] and Gipper, MI, VORTAC
271[deg] radials (NILES fix) and the Lancaster, PA, VOR/DME; excluding
the airspace within Canada. This rule removes the airway segment
between the Litchfield, MI, VOR/DME and Youngstown, OH, VORTAC, and the
exclusion statement for the airspace within Canada. The unaffected
portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-11: V-11 extends between the Brookley, AL, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Fort Wayne, IN, VORTAC 038[deg] and Carleton, MI,
VORTAC 262[deg] radials (CRUXX fix). This rule removes the airway
segment between the intersection of the Fort Wayne, IN, 038[deg] and
Waterville, OH, VOR/DME 273[deg] radials (EDGEE fix) and the
intersection of the Fort Wayne, IN, VORTAC 038[deg] and Carleton, MI,
VORTAC 262[deg] radials (CRUXX fix). The unaffected portions of the
existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-14: V-14 extends between the Chisum, NM, VORTAC and Erie, PA,
VORTAC; and between the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and Norwich, CT, VOR/DME.
This rule removes the airway segment between the Flag City, OH, VORTAC
and Erie, PA, VORTAC. The unaffected portions of the existing airway
remain unchanged.
    V-26: V-26 extends between the Blue Mesa, CO, VOR/DME and Dryer,
OH, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. This rule removes
the airway segment between the Lansing, MI, VORTAC and Dryer, OH, VOR/
DME, and the exclusion statement for the airspace within Canada. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-30: V-30 extends between the Badger, WI, VORTAC and Waterville,
OH, VOR/DME; and between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME and Solberg, NJ, VOR/
DME. This rule removes the airway segments between the Litchfield, MI,
VOR/DME and Waterville, OH, VOR/DME; and between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME
and Clarion, PA, VOR/DME. The unaffected portions of the existing
airway remain unchanged.
    V-38: V-38 extends between the Moline, IL, VORTAC and Cape Charles,
VA, VORTAC. This rule removes the airway segment between the
intersection of the Fort Wayne, IN, VORTAC 091[deg] and Rosewood, OH,
VORTAC 334[deg] radials (WINES fix) and the Appleton, OH, VORTAC. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-40: V-40 extends between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME and the
intersection of the Briggs, OH, VOR/DME 077[deg] and Youngstown, OH,
VORTAC 177[deg] radials (CUTTA fix). V-40 is removed in its entirety.
    V-43: V-43 extends between the Appleton, OH, VORTAC and Buffalo,
NY, VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway segments between the
Appleton, OH, VORTAC and Youngstown, OH, VORTAC; and between the Erie,
PA, VORTAC and Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME. The unaffected portion of the
existing airway remains unchanged.
    V-45: V-45 extends between the New Bern, NC, VOR/DME and Sault Ste
Marie, MI, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within restricted areas R-
5502A and R-5502B. This rule removes the airway segment between the
Appleton, OH, VORTAC and the Saginaw, MI, VOR/DME. Additionally, this
proposal removes the exclusion statement for the airspace within
restricted areas R-5502A and R-5502B. The unaffected portions of the
existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-47: V-47 extends between the Pine Bluff, AR, VOR/DME and Pocket
City, IN, VORTAC; and between the Cincinnati, KY, VORTAC and
Waterville, OH, VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway segment between
the Flag City, OH, VORTAC and Waterville, OH, VOR/DME, and corrects the
state location of the Cincinnati VORTAC to reflect ``Kentucky''. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-59: V-59 extends between the Pulaski, VA, VORTAC and Briggs, OH,
VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway segment between the
Newcomerstown, OH, VOR/DME and Briggs, OH, VOR/DME. The unaffected
portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-75: V-75 extends between the Morgantown, WV, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME 325[deg] and Waterville, OH,
VOR/DME 062[deg] radials (LLEEO fix), excluding the airspace within
Canada. This rule removes the airway segment between the Briggs, OH,
VOR/DME and the intersection of the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME 325[deg] and
Waterville, OH, VOR/DME 062[deg] radials (LLEEO fix), and the exclusion
statement for the airspace within Canada. The unaffected portions of
the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-84: V-84 extends between the Northbrook, IL, VOR/DME and Flint,
MI, VORTAC; and between the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and Syracuse, NY,
VORTAC. This rule removes the airway segment between the Lansing, MI,
VORTAC and Flint, MI, VORTAC. The unaffected portions of the existing
airway remain unchanged.
    V-92: V-92 extends between the intersection of the Chicago Heights,
IL, VORTAC 358[deg] and Chicago O'Hare, IL,

VOR/DME 127[deg] radials (BEBEE fix) and the Armel, VA, VOR/DME. This
rule removes the airway segments between the intersection of the
Chicago Heights, IL, VORTAC 358[deg] and Chicago O'Hare, IL, VOR/DME
127[deg] radials (BEBEE fix) and the Chicago Heights, IL, VORTAC; and
between the Goshen, IN, VORTAC and Newcomerstown, OH, VOR/DME. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-96: V-96 extends between the Brickyard, IN, VORTAC and Detroit,
MI, VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway segment between the
intersection of the Fort Wayne, IN, VORTAC 071[deg] and Flag City, OH,
VORTAC 289[deg] radials (TWERP fix) and the Detroit, MI, VOR/DME. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-98: V-98 extends between the Dayton, OH, VOR/DME and the
intersection of the Carleton, MI, VORTAC 243[deg] and Waterville, OH,
VOR/DME 321[deg] radials (MIZAR fix). V-98 is removed in its entirety.
    V-103: V-103 extends between the Chesterfield, SC, VOR/DME and
Lansing, MI, VORTAC, excluding the airspace within Canada. This rule
removes the airway segment between the Akron, OH, VOR/DME and Lansing,
MI, VORTAC, and the exclusion statement for the airspace within Canada.
The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-116: V-116 extends between the intersection of the Chicago
O'Hare, IL, VOR/DME 092[deg] and Chicago Heights, IL, VORTAC 013[deg]
radials (WILLA fix) and the Sparta, NJ, VORTAC, excluding the airspace
within Canada. This rule removes the airway segment between the
intersection of the Chicago O'Hare, IL, VOR/DME 092[deg] and Chicago
Heights, IL, VORTAC 013[deg] radials (WILLA fix) and the Erie, PA,
VORTAC, and the exclusion statement for the airspace within Canada. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-126: V-126 currently extends between the intersection of the
Peotone, IL, VORTAC 053[deg] and Knox, IN, VOR/DME 297[deg] radials
(BEARZ fix) and the Waterville, OH, VOR/DME; and between the Dryer, OH,
VOR/DME and Stonyfork, PA, VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway
segment between the intersection of the Goshen, IN, VORTAC 092[deg] and
Fort Wayne, IN, VORTAC 016[deg] radials (ILTON fix) and the Waterville,
OH, VOR/DME; and between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME and Erie, PA, VORTAC.
The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-133: V-133 extends between the intersection of the Charlotte, NC,
VOR/DME 305[deg] and Barretts Mountain, NC, VOR/DME 197[deg] radials
(LINCO fix) and the Mansfield, OH, VORTAC; and between the Salem, MI,
VORTAC and Red Lake, ON, Canada, VOR/DME; excluding the airspace within
Canada. This rule removes the airway segment between the Zanesville,
OH, VOR/DME and Mansfield, OH, VORTAC; and between the Salem, MI,
VORTAC and Saginaw, MI, VOR/DME. The unaffected portions of the
existing airway and the exclusion statement for the airspace within
Canada remain unchanged.
    V-170: V-170 extends between the Devils Lake, ND, VOR/DME and
Salem, MI, VORTAC; and between the Erie, PA, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Andrews, MD, VORTAC 060[deg] and Baltimore, MD,
VORTAC 165[deg] radials (POLLA fix); excluding the airspace within
restricted area R-5802 when active. This rule removes the airway
segment between the Erie, PA, VORTAC and Bradford, PA, VOR/DME. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway and the exclusion statement
for restricted area R-5802 remain unchanged.
    V-176: V-176 extends between the Carleton, MI, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Chardon, OH, VOR/DME 294[deg] and Dryer, OH, VOR/
DME 357[deg] radials (HIMEZ fix), excluding the airspace within Canada.
V-176 is removed in its entirety.
    V-188: V-188 extends between the Carleton, MI, VORTAC and Groton,
CT, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. This rule removes
the airway segment between the Carleton, MI, VORTAC and Tidioute, PA,
VORTAC, and the exclusion statement for the airspace within Canada. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-210: V-210 extends between the Los Angeles, CA, VORTAC and
Okmulgee, OK, VOR/DME; and between the Brickyard, IN, VORTAC and
Yardley, PA, VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway segment between the
Rosewood, OH, VORTAC and Revloc, PA, VOR/DME. The unaffected portions
of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-221: V-221 extends between the Bible Grove, IL, VORTAC and Erie,
PA, VORTAC, excluding the airspace within Canada. This rule removes the
airway segment between the intersection of the Fort Wayne, IN, VORTAC
016[deg] and Goshen, IN, VORTAC 092[deg] radials (ILTON fix) and the
Erie, PA, VORTAC, and the exclusion statement for the airspace within
Canada. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain
unchanged.
    V-232: V-232 extends between the Chardon, OH, VOR/DME and Colts
Neck, NJ, VOR/DME. This rule removes the airway segment between the
Chardon, OH, VOR/DME and Keating, PA, VORTAC. The unaffected portions
of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-233: V-233 extends between the Spinner, IL, VORTAC and Pellston,
MI, VORTAC. This rule removes the airway segment between the
Litchfield, MI, VOR/DME and Mount Pleasant, MI, VOR/DME. The unaffected
portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-297: V-297 extends between the Johnstown, PA, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Akron, OH, VOR/DME 305[deg] and Waterville, OH,
VOR/DME 062[deg] radials (LLEEO fix), excluding the airspace within
Canada. V-297 is removed in its entirety.
    V-353: V-353 extends between the Jackson, MI, VOR/DME and Flint,
MI, VORTAC. V-353 is removed in its entirety.
    V-383: V-383 extends between the Rosewood, OH, VORTAC and Detroit,
MI, VOR/DME. V-383 is removed in its entirety.
    V-396: V-396 extends between the Windsor, ON, Canada, VOR/DME and
Chardon, OH, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. V-396 is
removed in its entirety.
    V-406: V-406 extends between the Salem, MI, VORTAC and London, ON,
Canada, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. V-406 is removed
in its entirety.
    V-416: V-416 extends between the Rosewood, OH, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Mansfield, OH, VORTAC 045[deg] and Dryer, OH, VOR/
DME 123[deg] radials (JAKEE fix). V-416 is removed in its entirety.
    V-418: V-418 extends between the Salem, MI, VORTAC and Jamestown,
NY, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. V-418 is removed in
its entirety.
    V-426: V-426 extends between the Carleton, MI, VORTAC and Dryer,
OH, VOR/DME. V-426 is removed in its entirety.
    V-435: V-435 extends between the Rosewood, OH, VORTAC and Dryer,
OH, VOR/DME. V-435 is removed in its entirety.
    V-443: V-443 extends between the intersection of the Newcomerstown,
OH, VOR/DME 099[deg] and Bellaire, OH, VOR/DME 044[deg] radials (WISKE
fix) and the Aylmer, ON, Canada, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within
Canada. V-443 is removed in its entirety.

    V-450: V-450 extends between the Escanaba, MI, VOR/DME and London,
ON, Canada, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. This rule
removes the airway segment between the Flint, MI, VORTAC and London,
ON, Canada, VOR/DME, and the exclusion statement for the airspace
within Canada. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain
unchanged.
    V-464: V-464 extends between the Salem, MI, VORTAC and Aylmer, ON,
Canada, VOR/DME, excluding the airspace within Canada. V-464 is removed
in its entirety.
    V-467: V-467 extends between the Richmond, IN, VORTAC and Detroit,
MI, VOR/DME. V-467 is removed in its entirety.
    V-486: V-486 extends between the intersection of the Akron, OH,
VOR/DME 316[deg] and Chardon, OH, VOR/DME 260[deg] radials (LEBRN fix)
and the Jamestown, NY, VOR/DME. V-486 is removed in its entirety.
    V-493: V-493 extends between the Livingston, TN, VORTAC and
Carleton, MI, VORTAC; and between the Menominee, MI, VOR/DME and
Rhinelander, WI, VORTAC. This rule removes the airway segment between
the Appleton, OH, VORTAC and Carleton, MI, VORTAC. The unaffected
portions of the existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-522: V-522 extends between the Dryer, OH, VOR/DME and Erie, PA,
VORTAC. V-522 is removed in its entirety.
    V-523: V-523 extends between the Appleton, OH, VORTAC and Erie, PA,
VORTAC. V-523 is removed in its entirety.
    V-525: V-525 extends between the Appleton, OH, VORTAC and Dryer,
OH, VOR/DME. V-525 is removed in its entirety.
    V-542: V-542 extends between the Rosewood, OH, VORTAC and Lebanon,
NH, VORTAC. This rule removes the airway segment between the Rosewood,
OH, VORTAC and Tidioute, PA, VORTAC. The unaffected portions of the
existing airway remain unchanged.
    V-584: V-584 extends between the Waterville, OH, VOR/DME and Dryer,
OH, VOR/DME. V-584 is removed in its entirety.
    All radials in the route descriptions are stated in True degrees.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order
7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways
listed in this document will be subsequently published in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action amending and removing
multiple VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airways in
northcentral United States qualifies for categorical exclusion under
the National Environmental Policy Act and its agency-specific
implementing regulations in FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures'' regarding categorical exclusions for
procedural actions at paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes
from full environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate
or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting
points. Therefore, this airspace action is not expected to result in
any significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, this
action has been reviewed for factors and circumstances in which a
normally categorically excluded action may have a significant
environmental impact requiring further analysis, and it is determined
that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of
an environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017 and
effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows:
    Paragraph 6010(a). Domestic VOR Federal airways.
* * * * *

V-2 [Amended]

    From Seattle, WA; Ellensburg, WA; Moses Lake, WA; Spokane, WA;
Mullan Pass, ID; Missoula, MT; Helena, MT; INT Helena 119[deg] and
Livingston, MT, 322[deg] radials; Livingston; Billings, MT; Miles
City, MT; 24 miles, 90 miles, 55 MSL, Dickinson, ND; 10 miles, 60
miles, 38 MSL, Bismarck, ND; 14 miles, 62 miles, 34 MSL, Jamestown,
ND; Fargo, ND; Alexandria, MN; Gopher, MN; Nodine, MN; Lone Rock,
WI; Madison, WI; Badger, WI; Muskegon, MI; to Lansing, MI. From
Buffalo, NY; Rochester, NY; Syracuse, NY; Utica, NY; Albany, NY; INT
Albany 084[deg] and Gardner, MA, 284[deg] radials; to Gardner.
* * * * *

V-5 [Amended]

    From Pecan, GA; Vienna, GA; Dublin, GA; Athens, GA; INT Athens
340[deg] and Electric City, SC, 274[deg] radials; INT Electric City
274[deg] and Choo Choo, GA, 127[deg] radials; Choo Choo; Bowling
Green, KY; New Hope, KY; Louisville, KY; Cincinnati, OH; to
Appleton, OH.

V-6 [Amended]

    From Oakland, CA; INT Oakland 039[deg] and Sacramento, CA,
212[deg] radials; Sacramento; Squaw Valley, CA; Mustang, NV;
Lovelock, NV; Battle Mountain, NV; INT Battle Mountain 062[deg] and
Wells, NV, 256[deg] radials; Wells; 5 miles, 40 miles, 98 MSL, 85
MSL, Lucin, UT; 43 miles, 85 MSL, Ogden, UT; 11 miles, 50 miles, 105
MSL, Fort Bridger, WY; Rock Springs, WY; 20 miles, 39 miles 95 MSL,
Cherokee, WY; 39 miles, 27 miles 95 MSL, Medicine Bow, WY; INT
Medicine Bow 106[deg] and Sidney, NE, 291[deg] radials; Sidney;
North Platte, NE; Grand Island, NE; Omaha, NE; Des Moines, IA; Iowa
City, IA; Davenport, IA; INT Davenport 087[deg] and DuPage, IL,
255[deg] radials; to DuPage. From INT Chicago Heights, IL, 358[deg]
and Gipper, MI, 271[deg] radials; Gipper; to INT Gipper 092[deg] and
Litchfield, MI, 196[deg] radials. From Clarion, PA; Philipsburg, PA;
Selinsgrove, PA; Allentown, PA; Solberg, NJ; INT Solberg 107[deg]
and Yardley, PA, 068[deg] radials; INT Yardley 068[deg] and La
Guardia, NY, 213[deg] radials; to La Guardia.
* * * * *

V-8 [Amended]

    From INT Seal Beach, CA, 266[deg] and Ventura, CA, 144[deg]
radials; Seal Beach; Paradise, CA; 35 miles, 7 miles wide (3 miles
SE and 4 miles NW of centerline) Hector, CA; Goffs, CA; INT Goffs
033[deg] and Morman Mesa, NV, 196[deg] radials; Morman Mesa; Bryce
Canyon, UT; Hanksville, UT; Grand Junction, CO; Rifle, CO;
Kremmling, CO; Mile High, CO; Akron, CO; Hayes Center, NE; Grand
Island, NE; Omaha, NE; Des Moines, IA; Iowa City, IA; Moline, IL;
Joliet, IL; Chicago Heights, IL; Goshen, IN; to Flag City, OH. From
Briggs, OH; Bellaire, OH; INT Bellaire 107[deg] and Grantsville, MD,
285[deg] radials; Grantsville; Martinsburg, WV; to Washington, DC.
The portion outside the United States has no upper limit.
* * * * *

V-10 [Amended]

    From Pueblo, CO; 18 miles, 48 miles, 60 MSL, Lamar, CO; Garden
City, KS; Dodge City, KS; Hutchinson, KS; Emporia, KS; INT Emporia
063[deg]and Napoleon, MO, 243[deg] radials; Napoleon; Kirksville,
MO; Burlington, IA; Bradford, IL; to INT Bradford 058[deg] and
Joliet, IL, 287[deg] radials. From INT Chicago Heights, IL, 358[deg]
and Gipper, MI, 271[deg] radials; Gipper; to Litchfield, MI. From
Youngstown, OH; INT Youngstown 116[deg] and Revloc, PA, 300[deg]
radials; Revloc; INT Revloc 107[deg] and Lancaster, PA, 280[deg]
radials; to Lancaster.

V-11 [Amended]

    From Brookley, AL; Greene County, MS; INT Greene County 315[deg]
and Magnolia, MS, 133[deg] radials; Magnolia; Sidon, MS; Holly
Springs, MS; Dyersburg, TN; Cunningham, KY; Pocket City, IN;
Brickyard, IN; Marion, IN; Fort Wayne, IN; to INT Fort Wayne
038[deg] and Waterville, OH, 273[deg] radials.
* * * * *

V-14 [Amended]

    From Chisum, NM; Lubbock, TX; Childress, TX; Hobart, OK; Will
Rogers, OK; INT Will Rogers 052[deg] and Tulsa, OK, 246[deg]
radials; Tulsa; Neosho, MO; Springfield, MO; Vichy, MO; INT Vichy
067[deg] and St. Louis, MO, 225[deg] radials; St. Louis; Vandalia,
IL; Terre Haute, IN; Brickyard, IN; Muncie, IN; to Flag City, OH.
From Buffalo, NY; Geneseo, NY; Georgetown, NY; INT Georgetown
093[deg] and Albany, NY, 270[deg] radials; Albany; INT Albany
084[deg] and Gardner, MA, 284[deg] radials; Gardner; to Norwich, CT.
* * * * *

V-26 [Amended]

    From Blue Mesa, CO; Montrose, CO; 13 miles, 112 MSL, 131 MSL;
Grand Junction, CO; Meeker, CO; Cherokee, WY; Muddy Mountain, WY; 14
miles 12 AGL, 37 miles 75 MSL, 84 miles 90 MSL, 17 miles 12 AGL;
Rapid City, SD; Philip, SD; Pierre, SD; Huron, SD; Redwood Falls,
MN; Farmington, MN; Eau Claire, WI; Waussau, WI; Green Bay, WI; INT
Green Bay 116[deg] and White Cloud, MI, 302[deg] radials; White
Cloud; to Lansing, MI.
* * * * *

V-30 [Amended]

    From Badger, WI; INT Badger 102[deg] and Pullman, MI, 303[deg]
radials; Pullman; to Litchfield, MI. From Clarion, PA; Philipsburg,
PA; Selinsgrove, PA; East Texas, PA; INT East Texas 095[deg] and
Solberg, NJ, 264[deg] radials; to Solberg.
* * * * *

V-38 [Amended]

    From Moline, IL; INT Moline 082[deg] and Peotone, IL, 281[deg]
radials; Peotone; Fort Wayne, IN; to INT Fort Wayne 091[deg] and
Rosewood, OH, 334[deg] radials. From Appleton, OH; Zanesville, OH;
Parkersburg, WV; Elkins, WV; Gordonsville, VA; Richmond, VA; Harcum,
VA; to Cape Charles, VA.
* * * * *

V-40 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-43 [Amended]

    From Youngstown, OH; to Erie, PA.
* * * * *

V-45 [Amended]

    From New Bern, NC; Kinston, NC; Raleigh-Durham, NC; INT Raleigh-
Durham 275[deg] and Greensboro, NC, 105[deg] radials; Greensboro;
INT Greensboro 334[deg] and Pulaski, VA, 147[deg] radials; Pulaski;
Bluefield, WV; Charleston, WV; Henderson, WV; to Appleton, OH. From
Saginaw, MI; Alpena, MI; to Sault Ste Marie, MI.
* * * * *

V-47 [Amended]

    From Pine Bluff, AR; Gilmore, AR; Dyersburg, TN; Cunningham, KY;
to Pocket City, IN. From Cincinnati, KY; Rosewood, OH; to Flag City,
OH.
* * * * *

V-59 [Amended]

    From Pulaski, VA; Beckley, WV; Parkersburg, WV; to
Newcomerstown, OH.
* * * * *

V-75 [Amended]

    From Morgantown, WV; Bellaire, OH; to Briggs, OH.
* * * * *

V-84 [Amended]

    From Northbrook, IL; Pullman, MI; to Lansing, MI. From Buffalo,
NY; Geneseo, NY; INT Geneseo 091[deg] and Syracuse, NY, 240[deg]
radials; to Syracuse.
* * * * *

V-92 [Amended]

    From Chicago Heights, IL; to Goshen, IN. From Newcomerstown, OH;
Bellaire, OH; INT Bellaire 107[deg] and Grantsville, MD, 285[deg]
radials; Grantsville; INT Grantsville 124[deg] and Armel, VA,
292[deg] radials; to Armel.
* * * * *

V-96 [Amended]

    From Brickyard, IN; Kokomo, IN; Fort Wayne, IN; to INT Fort
Wayne 071[deg] and Flag City, OH, 289[deg] radials.
* * * * *

V-98 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-103 [Amended]

    From Chesterfield, SC; Greensboro, NC; Roanoke, VA; Elkins, WV;
Clarksburg, WV; Bellaire, OH; INT Bellaire 327[deg] and Akron, OH,
181[deg] radials; to Akron.
* * * * *

V-116 [Amended]

    From Erie, PA; Bradford, PA; Stonyfork, PA; INT Stonyfork
098[deg] and Wilkes-Barre, PA, 310[deg] radials; Wilkes-Barre; INT
Wilkes-Barre 084[deg] and Sparta, NJ, 300[deg] radials; to Sparta.
* * * * *

V-126 [Amended]

    From INT Peotone, IL, 053[deg] and Knox, IN, 297[deg] radials;
INT Knox 297[deg] and Goshen, IN, 270[deg] radials; Goshen; to INT
Goshen 092[deg] and Fort Wayne, IN, 016[deg] radials. From Erie, PA;
Bradford, PA; to Stonyfork, PA.
* * * * *

V-133 [Amended]

    From INT Charlotte, NC, 305[deg] and Barretts Mountain, NC,
197[deg] radials; Barretts Mountain; Charleston, WV; to Zanesville,
OH. From Saginaw, MI; Traverse City, MI; Escanaba, MI; Sawyer, MI;
Houghton, MI; Thunder Bay, ON, Canada; International Falls, MN; to
Red Lake, ON, Canada. The airspace within Canada is excluded.
* * * * *

V-170 [Amended]

    From Devils Lake, ND; INT Devils Lake 187[deg] and Jamestown,
ND, 337[deg] radials; Jamestown; Aberdeen, SD; Sioux Falls, SD;
Worthington, MN; Fairmont, MN; Rochester, MN; Nodine, MN; Dells, WI;
INT Dells 097[deg] and Badger, WI, 304[deg] radials; Badger; INT
Badger 121[deg] and Pullman, MI, 282[deg] radials; Pullman; to
Salem, MI. From Bradford, PA; Slate Run, PA; Selinsgrove, PA;
Ravine, PA; INT Ravine 125[deg] and Modena, PA, 318[deg] radials;
Modena; Dupont, DE; INT Dupont 223[deg] and Andrews, MD, 060[deg]
radials; to INT Andrews 060[deg] and Baltimore, MD, 165[deg]
radials. The airspace within R-5802 is excluded when active.
* * * * *

V-176 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-188 [Amended]

    From Tidioute, PA; Slate Run, PA; Williamsport, PA; Wilkes-
Barre, PA; INT Wilkes-Barre 084[deg] and Sparta, NJ, 300[deg]
radials; Sparta; INT Sparta 082[deg] and Carmel, NY, 243[deg]
radials; Carmel; INT Carmel 078[deg] and Groton, CT, 276[deg]
radials; to Groton.
* * * * *

V-210 [Amended]

    From Los Angeles, CA; INT Los Angeles 083[deg] and Pomona, CA,
240[deg] radials; Pomona; INT Daggett, CA, 229[deg] and Hector, CA,
263[deg] radials; Hector; Goffs, CA; 13 miles, 23 miles 71 MSL, 85
MSL, Peach Springs, AZ; Grand Canyon, AZ; Tuba City, AZ; 10 miles 90
MSL, 91 miles 105 MSL, Rattlesnake, NM; Alamosa, CO; INT Alamosa
074[deg] and Lamar, CO, 250[deg] radials; 40 miles, 51 miles, 65
MSL, Lamar; 13 miles, 79 miles, 55 MSL, Liberal,

KS; INT Liberal 137[deg] and Will Rogers, OK, 284[deg] radials; Will
Rogers; INT Will Rogers 113[deg] and Okmulgee, OK, 238[deg] radials;
to Okmulgee. From Brickyard, IN; Muncie, IN; to Rosewood, OH. From
Revloc, PA; INT Revloc 096[deg] and Harrisburg, PA, 285[deg]
radials; Harrisburg; Lancaster, PA; INT Lancaster 095[deg] and
Yardley, PA, 255[deg] radials; to Yardley.
* * * * *

V-221 [Amended]

    From Bible Grove, IL; Hoosier, IN; Shelbyville, IN; Muncie, IN;
Fort Wayne, IN; to INT Fort Wayne 016[deg] and Goshen, IN, 092[deg]
radials.
* * * * *

V-232 [Amended]

    From Keating, PA; Milton, PA; INT Milton 099[deg] and Solberg,
NJ, 299[deg] radials; Solberg; INT Solberg 137[deg] and Colts Neck,
NJ, 263[deg] radials; to Colts Neck.

V-233 [Amended]

    From Spinner, IL; INT Spinner 061[deg] and Roberts, IL, 233[deg]
radials; Roberts; Knox, IN; Goshen, IN; to Litchfield, MI. From
Mount Pleasant, MI; INT Mount Pleasant 351[deg] and Gaylord, MI,
207[deg] radials; Gaylord; to Pellston, MI.
* * * * *

V-297 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-353 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-383 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-396 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-406 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-416 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-418 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-426 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-435 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-443 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-450 [Amended]

    From Escanaba, MI; Menominee, MI; Green Bay, WI; Muskegon, MI;
INT Muskegon 094[deg] and Flint, MI, 280[deg] radials; to Flint.
* * * * *

V-464 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-467 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-486 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-493 [Amended]

    From Livingston, TN; Lexington, KY; York, KY; INT York 030[deg]
and Appleton, OH, 183[deg] radials; to Appleton. From Menominee, MI;
to Rhinelander, WI.
* * * * *

V-522 [Removed]

V-523 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-525 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-542 [Amended]

    From Tidioute, PA; Bradford, PA; INT Bradford 078[deg] and
Elmira, NY, 252[deg] radials; Elmira; Binghampton, NY; Rockdale, NY;
Albany, NY; Cambridge, NY; INT Cambridge 063[deg] and Lebanon, NH,
214[deg] radials; to Lebanon.
* * * * *

V-584 [Removed]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 22, 2018.
Rodger A. Dean Jr.,
Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
[FR Doc. 2018-06268 Filed 3-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Proposed Agenda

CMTF Meeting with EPA

August 27, 2008

Introductions

Buffer Zones

Impact of Chloropicrin RED Shank Buffer Zones on Agriculture

EPA Application Rate Assumptions

Failure of RED Buffer Zones to Acknowledge Impacts of GAPs

Impact of Incident Rate

Buffer Zone Credit Issues

Chain2_D Modeling Use

Near Field Activity Zone Analysis

Notice Provisions

Proposed Field Monitoring Plan

First Responders

Worker Monitoring

Timeline

 PAGE   1

	-   PAGE  1  -