[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 105 (Thursday, May 31, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 32089]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13186]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9679-4]

Establishment of the Great Lakes Advisory Board (GLAB)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; establishment of a Federal Advisory Committee.

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

SUMMARY: As required by section 9(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, we are giving notice that EPA is establishing the Great
Lakes Advisory Board (GLAB). The purpose of the GLAB is to provide
advice to the Administrator in her capacity as Chair of the Inter-
Agency Task Force established per Executive Order 13340 (May 18, 2004),
on matters related to Great Lakes restoration and protection. The major
objectives will be to provide advice and recommendations on: Great
Lakes protection and restoration policy; long term goals and objectives
for Great Lakes protection and restoration; and annual priorities to
protect and restore the Great Lakes that may be used to help inform
budget decisions.
    EPA has determined that this federal advisory committee is in the
public interest and will assist the EPA in performing its duties and
responsibilities. Copies of the GLAB's charter will be filed with the
appropriate congressional committees and the Library of Congress.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rita Cestaric, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 W. Jackson, Chicago, IL 60604, Email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The GLAB will be composed of approximately
fifteen (15) members who will serve as representative members, Regular
Government Employees (RGEs), or Special Government Employees (SGEs).
The GLAB expects to meet in person or by electronic means (e.g.,
telephone, videoconference, webcast, etc.) approximately two (2) times
a year, or as needed and approved by the Designated Federal Officer
(DFO). Meetings will be held in the Great Lakes region and Washington,
DC. The GLAB will be examined annually and will exist until the EPA
determines that the GLAB is no longer needed. The charter will be in
effect for two years from the date it is filed with Congress. After the
initial two-year period, the charter may be renewed as authorized in
accordance with Section 14 of FACA (5 U.S.C. App. 2 Sec.  14).
    Membership: Nominations for membership will be solicited through
the Federal Register and other sources. In selecting members, EPA will
consider candidates representing a broad range of interests relating to
the Great Lakes, including, but not limited to, environmental groups,
business, agricultural groups, citizen groups, environmental justice
groups, foundations, academia and state, local and tribal governments.
In selecting members, EPA will consider the differing perspectives and
breadth of collective experience needed to address the EPA's charge.

    Dated: May 17, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Great Lakes National Program Manager.
[FR Doc. 2012-13186 Filed 5-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 180 (Thursday, September 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55842-55843]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23323]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14706-000]

Empire State Hydro 303, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On August 26, 2015, Empire State Hydro 303, LLC, filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Rock
Bottom Dam Hydroelectric Project (project) to be located on the
Susquehanna River, near the city of Binghamton, Broome County, New
York. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant
the permit holder priority to file a license application during the
permit term. A

preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) An
existing 9-foot-high, 460-foot-long gravity dam; (2) a proposed
concrete powerhouse approximately 100 feet long by 40 feet wide housing
eight low-head, horizontal bulb turbines having a total installed
capacity of 1,992 kilowatts; (3) a proposed concrete tailrace wall
extending approximately 100 feet downstream; (4) a proposed 500-foot-
long, 12,700-volt transmission line interconnecting with the local
utility; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project would
have an average annual generation of about 10 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Mark Boumansour, Gravity Renewables, Inc.,
1401 Walnut Street, Suite 220, Boulder, CO 80302; phone: (303) 440-
3378.
    FERC Contact: Timothy Looney; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14706-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14706) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: September 10, 2015.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-23323 Filed 9-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                                                        EPA Document #740R22001
                                                                      June 2022
                             Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
                                                        EPA Document #740R22001
                                                                      June 2022
                             Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
United States
Environmental Protection Agency

Nontechnical Summary of the Risk Evaluation for
Cyclic Aliphatic Bromide Cluster
(HBCD)

CASRN: 25637-99-4
CASRN: 3194-55-6
CASRN: 3194-57-8

                                   June 2022
BACKGROUND
 The primary use for cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster chemicals, including hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), has been as a flame retardant in expanded polystyrene and extruded polystyrene in insulation foam used for construction; however, EPA identified other uses including use as a component of solder and use in automobile replacement parts.
 The manufacturing (including import) and use of HBCD has rapidly declined in the United States and globally over the past 10 years due to international regulation and the availability of substitutes. Annual production volumes were consistently 10-50 million lbs from 2007 to 2011. From 2012 to 2015, production fell to 1-10 million lbs/year. Additional communications with industry representatives indicate that, as of 2018, domestic manufacture of HBCD had ceased and there are currently no U.S. manufacturers of the chemical.

ACTION
 EPA is releasing a final revision to the risk determination with an order withdrawing the TSCA section 6(i)(1) order previously included in the September 2020 risk evaluation on HBCD. EPA has determined that HBCD presents an unreasonable risk to health and the environment under its conditions of use. For this chemical, commercial and consumer conditions of use were combined.
 This final risk evaluation, which includes the 2020 risk evaluation and a 2022 revised unreasonable risk determination, is conducted pursuant to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21[st] Century Act, which requires EPA to prioritize and evaluate the safety of existing chemicals to determine whether a chemical presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment under the conditions of use. If a chemical is determined to present an unreasonable risk, then EPA must regulate the substance to address the unreasonable risk.
 The 2020 risk evaluation, supplemental materials, 2022 revised unreasonable risk determination and corresponding response to public comments can be found in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0237 on www.regulations.gov.
 HBCD was selected in 2016 as one of the first 10 chemicals for risk evaluation under section 6 of TSCA.
 Public comments and external scientific peer review informed the development of the HBCD final risk evaluation. EPA published the revised unreasonable risk determination in June 2022, the HBCD risk evaluation in September 2020, the HBCD draft risk evaluation in June 2019, the HBCD problem formulation document in May 2018, and the scope document in June 2017.

KEY POINTS
    Risk conclusions for the environment are based upon both aquatic and terrestrial organisms of numerous species from different families. Adverse effects on aquatic species included reduced growth of aquatic plants (algae), reduced growth and delayed embryo development in fish, reduced growth and survival for pelagic (water flea) and benthic (California blackworm) invertebrates. Adverse effects in terrestrial soil organisms included effects on reproduction and mortality in earthworms chronically exposed to HBCD.
    Risk conclusions from human health effects were based on the most robust and sensitive acute (offspring loss) and chronic thyroid hormone effects) endpoints. Thyroid hormone changes (both acute and chronic) are considered the primary effect resulting from HBCD exposure, as they are associated with all the other observed downstream endpoints.
    In the revised unreasonable risk determination for HBCD, EPA is making an unreasonable risk determination for HBCD as a whole chemical substance, rather than a condition of use-specific approach. The whole chemical approach is appropriate for HBCD because there are benchmark exceedances for multiple conditions of use for both health and the environment, HBCD is a persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substance, and the health effects associated with HBCD exposures are irreversible.
    After evaluating 12 conditions of use of HBCD, EPA determined that HBCD presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health and the environment under its conditions of use.
    In addition, EPA is revising the assumption that workers always or properly use personal protective equipment (PPE). Although EPA does not question public comments received regarding the occupational safety practices often followed by industry. Information on the use of PPE as a means of mitigating risk will be considered during the risk management phase.
    By removing the assumption that all workers always and appropriately wear PPE, four of the six conditions of use driving the unreasonable risk to the environment in the 2020 HBCD risk evaluation now also drive unreasonable risk based on health risks to workers, an identified potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation (PESS). The four conditions of use affected by this change are: import, processing the chemical as a formulation, mixture, or reaction product; processing the chemical into articles; recycling.
    Overall, six conditions of use of the 12 evaluated drive the HBCD whole chemical unreasonable risk determination due to risks identified for both health and the environment: import, processing the chemical as a formulation, mixture, or reaction product; processing the chemical into articles; recycling; commercial installation of building/construction materials; and disposal (demolition).
    The use of consumer articles and products containing HBCD or where these items were distributed in commerce do not drive the unreasonable risk presented by HBCD.
    Exposures from ambient air, surface water, biosolids, or sediments for the general population from all conditions of use do not drive the unreasonable risk presented by HBCD. Similarly, exposures to the general population via drinking water based on an assessment of the physical-chemical properties and fate of HBCD in the environment as well as the absence of any HBCD measured in water samples do not drive the unreasonable risk presented by HBCD.
    The risk evaluation includes uses of HBCD that are no longer manufactured, processed, or distributed for use in products and the disposal of those products, otherwise known as "legacy uses" and "associated disposal," respectively. Because of the court ruling in Safer Chemicals Healthy Families v. U.S. Environmental Protection, as well as public and peer review comments, EPA made additional assessments on these uses: general population exposure to HBCD in dust and indoor air released from HBCD-containing products, and articles that are still in use but for which the manufacture, processing, and distribution for such use has ceased.
 EPA released the draft risk evaluation for HBCD in June 2019 for a 60-day public comment period. Additionally, EPA held a peer review meeting of the Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) on the draft risk evaluation of HBCD on July 29-August 2, 2019. The report of the SACC on HBCD is in the docket (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0237). Along with the final risk evaluation, EPA released a document that provides a response to public and peer review comments.
 EPA is releasing a final revision to the unreasonable risk determination with an order withdrawing the TSCA section 6(i)(1) order previously included in the September 2020 risk evaluation. EPA is also releasing a document with response to public comments received on the draft revised risk determination on HBCD published in December 2021.

NEXT STEPS
EPA has issued the final risk evaluation (2020 risk evaluation and a 2022 revised risk determination) for HBCD, meeting the requirements set forth in TSCA section 6(b) for chemical risk evaluations. EPA is now initiating the process to address the unreasonable risk identified. Following the issuance of the final risk evaluation, EPA will address, by rule, the unreasonable risk identified.

SUMMARY OF UNREASONABLE RISK DETERMINATION
EPA has determined that HBCD present an unreasonable risk of injury to health and the environment under the conditions of use. EPA's unreasonable risk determination for HBCD is driven by risks associated with the following conditions of use, considered singularly or in combination with other exposures:
::	Manufacturing - Import
::	Processing: Incorporated into a Formulation, Mixture, or Reaction Products
::	Processing: Incorporation into Article
::	Processing: Recycling (of XPS and EPS foam, resin, and panels containing HBCD
::	Commercial/Consumer Use:  Building/Construction Materials (Installation)
::	Disposal (Demolition)

EPA will initiate TSCA section 6(a) risk management actions on these conditions of use as required under TSCA section 6(c)(1).


[Federal Register: December 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 238)]
[Notices]
[Page 66178-66179]
[DOCID:fr14de09-101]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61121; File No. SR-CBOE-2009-091]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to the CBSX Market Data Infrastructure Fee

December 7, 2009.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that on
November 30, 2009, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by CBOE. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE'' or
``Exchange'') proposes to amend the CBOE Stock Exchange (``CBSX'')
market data infrastructure fee. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at
the Exchange's Office of the Secretary and at the Commission.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CBOE 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. CBOE 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, Proposed Rule Change

(a) Purpose
    The Exchange charges CBSX market participants a monthly fee to
recoup the

fees CBSX pays a third party market data vendor and other parties to
help establish facilities at CBSX through which the third party market
data vendor can provide CBSX participants with certain market data.\3\
The amount of the fee is equal to $20,400 divided by the number of CBSX
participants receiving the market data. The Exchange proposes to reduce
the fee to $10,800 divided by the number of CBSX participants receiving
the market data, due to the fact that the Exchange's costs to provide
this infrastructure have decreased.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 55882 (June 8, 2007), 72 FR
32931 (June 14, 2007), Exchange Act Release No. 56000 (July 2,
2007), 72 FR 37554 (July 10, 2007), and Exchange Act Release No.
57472 (March 11, 2008), 73 FR 14515 (March 18, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\4\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \5\ of the Act in particular, in that
it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its members. The proposed rule
change will result in reduced fees charged to CBSX market participants
who receive market data through CBSX's market data infrastructure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of purposes of the Act.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \6\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \7\
thereunder. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 No. SR-CBOE-2009-091 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CBOE-2009-091. 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 such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-CBOE-2009-091 and should be
submitted on or before January 4, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-29628 Filed 12-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 1687]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00294]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 74010; File No. SR-NYSE-2014-62]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Amending the Bylaws of New York Stock
Exchange LLC's Wholly-Owned Subsidiary, NYSE Regulation, Inc., To
Provide That Non-Affiliated Directors of NYSE Regulation, Inc. Would
Not Be Removed for Cause If They Are Acting in Good Faith in Exercising
Their Responsibilities as Directors Related to NYSE Regulation's
Functions and Responsibilities Delegated to It Under the Delegation
Agreement Between New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE Regulation and NYSE
Market (DE), Inc.

January 7, 2015.
    On November 7, 2014, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``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 amend the Sixth Amended and Restated Bylaws
(``Bylaws'') of its wholly-owned subsidiary, NYSE Regulation, Inc.
(``NYSE Regulation''), to provide that non-affiliated directors of NYSE
Regulation (``Non-Affiliated Directors'') \3\ would not be removed for
cause if they are acting in good faith in exercising their
responsibilities as directors related to NYSE Regulation's functions
and responsibilities delegated to it under the delegation agreement
between the Exchange, NYSE Regulation, and NYSE Market (DE), Inc.
(``Delegation Agreement'').\4\ The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on November 26, 2014.\5\ The
Commission did not receive any comment letters regarding the proposal.
This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ The Bylaws define ``Non-Affiliated Directors'' as U.S.
Persons who are not members of the Board of Directors of
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (``ICE'') and qualify as independent
under NYSE Regulation's director independence policy. See Bylaws of
NYSE Regulation, Inc., Article III, Section 1(A); see also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67564 (August 1, 2012), 77 FR
47161 (August 7, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-17; SR-NYSEArca-2012-59; SR-
NYSEMKT-2012-07) (approving NYSE Regulation's director independence
policy). The Bylaws require that a majority of NYSE Regulation's
Board of Directors consist of Non-Affiliated Directors. The
remaining directors are NYSE Regulation's Chief Executive Officer
(``CEO'') and members of the ICE Board of Directors that qualify as
independent under NYSE Regulation's director independence policy.
The Exchange represents that the Bylaws do not require any
affiliated directors other than the NYSE Regulation CEO.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53382 (February 27,
2006), 71 FR 11251 (March 6, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2005-77) (approving
NYSE's business combination with Archipelago Holdings, Inc.). The
Exchange has posted a copy of the Delegation Agreement on its public
Web site at www.nyse.com.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73657 (November 20,
2014), 79 FR 70608 (SR-NYSE-2014-62).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend Article III, Section 4 of the Bylaws
to provide that Non-Affiliated Directors would not be removed for cause
if they are acting in good faith in exercising their responsibilities
as directors related to the functions and responsibilities of NYSE
Regulation delegated to it under the Delegation Agreement. The Exchange
also proposes to make a conforming change to the Bylaws so that the
title of the Bylaws would read ``Seventh Amended and Restated Bylaws of
NYSE Regulation, Inc.''
    Currently, Article III, Section 4 of the Bylaws provides that the
Exchange may only remove Non-Affiliated Directors for ``cause.'' The
Exchange proposes to amend Article III, Section 4 so that ``cause''
would not encompass ``decisions or actions taken in good faith by a
Non-Affiliated Director in his or her capacity as a Director of [NYSE
Regulation] and related'' to NYSE Regulation's delegated regulatory
functions and responsibilities under the Delegation Agreement. The
Exchange stated that this proposed amendment to the Bylaws would make
explicit that conduct consistent with a Non-Affiliated Director's
duties and responsibilities related to NYSE Regulation's delegated
functions and responsibilities would not constitute grounds for
removal.
    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\6\
In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,\7\ which requires an
exchange to be so organized and have the capacity to carry out the
purposes of the Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its
members and persons associated with its members, with the Act, the
rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the exchange. The
Commission also finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ which requires that the rules of an
exchange be designed, among other things, to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes
that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the proposed amendment to the Bylaws
would make explicit that conduct consistent with a Non-Affiliated
Director's duties and responsibilities related to NYSE Regulation's
delegated functions and responsibilities would not constitute grounds
for such director's removal from NYSE Regulation's Board of Directors.
The Exchange stated that the proposed amendment to the Bylaws would
provide Non-Affiliated Directors of NYSE Regulation with reasonable
assurances that actions or decisions, which were consistent with their
fiduciary duty and which such Non-Affiliated Directors believed, in
good faith, to be the proper exercise of NYSE Regulation's delegated
functions and responsibilities, could not be used as a basis to remove
those directors from office. The Exchange believes that the proposal
would remove uncertainty surrounding this issue and would contribute to
a more effective, efficient, and orderly decision-making process by
NYSE Regulation's Board of Directors. Based on the foregoing, the
Commission believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Act.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2014-62) be, and it hereby is,
approved.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00294 Filed 1-12-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 112 (Tuesday, June 11, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34960-34962]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13799]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0501; Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-036-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Model Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter France (Eurocopter) Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters.
This proposed AD would require repetitively inspecting the lower and
upper front and rear fittings (fittings) that attach the upper fin to
the fenestron for a crack. If there is a crack, this AD would require
removing all four fittings from service. This proposed AD would also
require, within a specified time, removing all fittings from service,
and the fittings would not be eligible to be installed on any
helicopter. This AD is prompted by the loss of an upper fin in flight.
The proposed actions are intended to detect a crack in the fittings to
prevent loss of the upper fin and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 12, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address 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 Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations

Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed 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. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Grant, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Group, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth,
Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
No. 2011-0108, dated June 7, 2011, to correct an unsafe condition for
Eurocopter Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters. EASA advises of an
in-flight loss of a fin on a Model EC155B1 helicopter. According to
EASA, a crack in the fittings attaching the upper fin to the fenestron
(tail rotor assembly) was discovered during an investigation. As a
result, EASA issued an emergency AD to mandate repetitive inspections
of the upper fin attachment fittings. EASA states that Eurocopter has
now developed modification (MOD) 0754B40 to increase the strength of
the fuselage-fin junction fittings by installing two reinforced single-
piece fittings to replace the affected fittings, which is terminating
action for the repetitive inspection requirements. EASA subsequently
issued AD No. 2011-0108, which superseded its emergency AD, to require
installation of MOD 0754B40 and to retain the repetitive inspection
requirements until the MOD is installed.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
France and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with France, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
its AD. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known
relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition is likely
to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter has issued Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 05A017,
Revision 2, dated December 9, 2010, which specifies repetitively
inspecting the fittings for a crack and replacing each fitting if there
is a crack. Eurocopter has also issued Service Bulletin No. 53-029,
Revision 1, dated March 10, 2011, which specifies replacing the
fittings with reinforced fittings in accordance with MOD 0754B40.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require repetitively inspecting certain
part-numbered fittings for a crack, and if there is a crack, removing
the fittings from service before further flight. Also, within 180 hours
time-in-service (TIS), this AD proposes removing certain part-numbered
fittings from service. Replacing the fittings with airworthy fittings
not listed in the applicability paragraph of this proposed AD would be
terminating action for the requirements of this AD. The affected
fittings would not eligible to be installed on any helicopter.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    This AD would not require replacing the upper fin to fenestron
fittings with reinforced fittings in accordance with MOD 0754B40 within
6 calendar months as stated in the EASA AD but rather would require
removing the affected fittings from service within the equivalent 180
hours TIS.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 9 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators would incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD, based on an average labor rate
of $85 per work hour. It would take 1 work hour to inspect the fittings
and about 3 inspections would occur before replacement. It would take 8
work hours to replace the fittings and required parts would cost
$3,311. Based on these figures, the total cost would be $4,246 per
helicopter and $38,214 for the U.S. fleet.

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, 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);
    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 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

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):

Eurocopter France: Docket No. FAA-2013-0501; Directorate Identifier
2011-SW-036-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters with
lower front fitting part number (P/N) 365A23-4240-01, upper front
fitting P/N 365A23-4242-01, lower rear fitting P/N 365A23-4241-01,
or upper rear fitting P/N 365A23-4243-01 (fittings) installed,
certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in a fitting.
This condition could result in loss of the upper fin during flight
and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time.

(d) Required Actions

    (1) Within 15 hours time-in-service (TIS) and thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 55 hours TIS:
    (i) Using an appropriate light source and a 10x or higher power
magnifying glass, inspect each front (c) and rear (d) upper fitting
and each front (e) and rear (f) lower fitting for a crack as
depicted in Figure 1 of Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin
No. 05A017, Revision 2, dated December 9, 2010 (ASB). Inspect the
hatched area as depicted in Details B, C, and D of Figure 2 of the
ASB. A high-resolution (more than 2 million pixels) digital camera
or dye-penetrant inspection may be used to facilitate the crack
inspection.
    (ii) If there is a crack in any fitting, before further flight,
remove all four fittings from service.
    (2) Within 180 hours TIS, remove the fittings from service.
    (3) Do not install lower front fitting P/N 365A23-4240-01, upper
front fitting P/N 365A23-4242-01, lower rear fitting P/N 365A23-
4241-01, and upper rear fitting P/N 365A23-4243-01 on any
helicopter.

(e) Credit for Actions Previously Completed

    Inspections accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the procedures specified in Eurocopter Emergency
Alert Service Bulletin No. 05A017, Revision 2, dated December 9,
2010; Revision 1, dated January 27, 2010; and Revision 0, dated
September 28, 2007, are considered acceptable for compliance with
the inspection specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this AD.

(f) Special flight permits

    Special flight permits will not be issued.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Robert Grant, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Group, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; 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 Service Bulletin No. 53-029, Revision 1, dated
March 10, 2011, which is not incorporated by reference, contains
additional information about the subject of this AD. For 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 the referenced 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 AD No. 2011-0108, dated June 7, 2011.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 5530 Vertical
Stabilizer Structure.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 3, 2013.
Kim Smith,
Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-13799 Filed 6-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P