[Federal Register: May 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 99)]
[Notices]
[Page 29568-29569]
[DOCID:fr21my08-108]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Association of American Railroads

(Modification To Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-1999-5104)

    As a modification to the Association of American Railroads (AAR)
permanent waiver of compliance with 49 CFR 213.137, AAR is seeking
permission from FRA to modify the terms and conditions of its decision
letter dated June 27, 2000, pertaining to flange bearing frogs.
    AAR, on behalf of its member railroads, received permission from
FRA to install flange bearing frogs in its June 27, 2000, decision
letter. FRA granted this relief conditionally, with a requirement for
Equipment Inspections at all installations. In a decision letter dated
May 3, 2006, AAR received further permission for CSX Transportation to
specifically install a flange bearing frog in Shelby, Ohio.
    With this petition, AAR is notifying FRA that it's Shelby, Ohio,
flange bearing frog installation has been successful, and that the BNSF
Railway Company (BNSF) will install 2 additional flange bearing frogs
in Moorhead, Minnesota. AAR states, ``This inspection requirement is
costly and significantly delays the transportation of rail cars
undergoing the inspections. In fact, it is because of this inspection
requirement that the industry has been slow to install flange bearing
frog crossing diamonds under the waiver.'' Therefore, AAR requests that
FRA relieve BNSF of this condition requiring equipment inspections.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
1999-5104) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
    Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
    Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular

business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above facility. All documents in
the public docket are also available for inspection and copying on the
Internet at the docket facility's Web site at http://
www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 15, 2005.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
 [FR Doc. E8-11362 Filed 5-20-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 179 (Monday, September 18, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43539-43540]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19707]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9967-48-ORD; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0496, ORD-2017-0497,
ORD-2014-0526]

Availability of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
Assessment Plans for Nitrate/Nitrite, Chloroform, and Ethylbenzene

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing a 30-
day public comment period associated with the draft IRIS Assessment
Plans for Nitrate/Nitrite, Chloroform, and Ethylbenzene. These
documents communicate information on the scoping needs identified by
EPA program and regional offices and the IRIS Program's initial problem
formulation activities. Specifically, the assessment plans outline the
objectives for each assessment and the type of evidence considered most
pertinent to address the scoping needs.
    EPA is releasing these draft IRIS Assessment Plans for public
comment. These assessment plans will also be discussed during the
September 27-28 Science Advisory Board (SAB) Chemical Assessment
Advisory Committee (CAAC) peer consultation meeting. These documents
were prepared by the National Center for Environmental Assessment
(NCEA) within EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD).

DATES: The 30-day public comment period begins September 18, 2017, and
ends October 18, 2017. Comments must be received on or before October
18, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The IRIS Assessment Plan for Nitrate/Nitrite, will be
available via the Internet on IRIS' Recent Additions at http://www.epa.gov/iris/iris-recent-additions and in the public docket at
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0496.
    The IRIS Assessment Plan for Chloroform will be available via the
Internet on IRIS' Recent Additions at http://www.epa.gov/iris/iris-recent-additions and in the public docket at

http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0497.
    The IRIS Assessment Plan for Ethylbenzene will be available via the
Internet on IRIS' Recent Additions at http://www.epa.gov/iris/iris-recent-additions and in the public docket at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-HQ-ORD-2014-0526.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the public comment
period, contact the ORD Docket at the EPA Headquarters Docket Center;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For technical information on the IRIS Assessment Plans, contact Dr.
James Avery, NCEA; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Information on IRIS Assessment Plans

    EPA's IRIS Program is a human health assessment program that
evaluates quantitative and qualitative risk information on effects that
may result from exposure to chemicals found in the environment. Through
the IRIS Program, EPA provides the highest quality science-based human
health assessments to support the Agency's regulatory activities and
decisions to protect public health. As part of scoping and initial
problem formulation activities prior to the development of a draft
assessment, the IRIS Program carries out a broad, preliminary
literature survey to assist in identifying health effects that have
been studied in relation to the chemical or substance of interest as
well as science issues that may need to be considered when evaluating
its toxicity. This information, in conjunction with scoping needs
identified by EPA program and regional offices, are used to inform the
development of an IRIS Assessment Plan (IAP).
    The IAP communicates to the public the plan for reviewing each
individual chemical assessment and includes summary information on the
IRIS Program's scoping and initial problem formulation, objectives and
specific aims for the assessment, and a PECO (Population, Exposure,
Comparators, and Outcomes) framework for the systematic review. The
PECO provides the framework for developing literature search strategies
and inclusion/exclusion criteria, particularly with respect to evidence
stream (i.e., human, animal, mechanistic), exposure measures and
outcome measures. The IAP serves to inform the subsequent development
of chemical specific systematic review protocols, which will be made
publicly available. For more information, visit EPA's IRIS Program Web
site at https://www.epa.gov/iris.

II. How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at
www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-
0496 for Nitrate/Nitrite, EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0497 for Chloroform, and EPA-
HQ-ORD-2014-0526 for Ethylbenzene, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center (ORD Docket), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Hand Delivery: The ORD Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC.
    The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. If you provide comments by mail or hand delivery,
please submit three copies of the comments. For attachments, provide an
index, number pages consecutively with the comments, and submit an
unbound original and three copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0496 for
Nitrate/Nitrite, EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0497 for Chloroform, and EPA-HQ-ORD-
2014-0526 for Ethylbenzene. Please ensure that your comments are
submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after
the closing date will be marked ``late,'' and may only be considered if
time permits. It is EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in
the public docket without change and to make the comments available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless a comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information through
www.regulations.gov or email that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials,
such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the ORD Docket in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: August 30, 2017.
Mary Ross,
Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2017-19707 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Comments on Section VI of IAQR SNPR   Page 9: You point out that the difficulty with the opt in is determining baseline emissions in order to determine allocation of permits. One possibility: Allow opt in with no allocation, but offer regulatory relief from another program ( e. g., BART). Is this possible?   Page 9: " Immediately following is a description of how opt in provisions could be incorporated in the IAQR model rules, for which EPA solicits comment." Need to be clear this description is of a recommended set up, not a required one. The next pages use " would" instead of " could."   Page 11: " Non EGU boilers and turbines under the NOx SIP Call that choose to opt in to the IAQR cap and trade program would still be required to meet the SIP call seasonal NOx limitations." Why? This could address the problem with the lack of robustness in the seasonal program. Has this already been discussed and decided against?   Page 15: Can't states reallocate excess Title IV allowances via an auction?   Page 17: " Auctions treat existing and new sources in a similar fashion. However, sources performing costly retrofits to reduce emissions would then also have to pay for allowances for their remaining emissions." I think the " however" is a non sequiter. Should also include some lines on the advantages to States of adopting auctions. These include: 1) auctions eliminate the permanent right to pollute, 2) auctions provide additional flexibility to states in adopting features to the cap and trade program ( e. g., safety valve reductions), 3) auctions eliminate any perverse incentives that might be introduced by an allocation that is updated periodically, and 4) auctions provide distortion free revenues to the state.   Page 18: " Allocating allowances for free could lessen the financial impact of the program on the affected sources which already bear the compliance costs." I would add " , but would not affect the sources' output decisions."   Page 18: " Permanent systems allocate all of the allowances at the beginning of the program. They provide long planning horizons for affected sources that receive an allocation. Additionally, permanent allocations provide an incentive for units to improve their generation efficiency because they can sell excess allowances if they reduce their emissions per unit of power output." I would cut everything after " additionally" because this describes a feature of cap and trade, not of permanent allocations. Also, should add a line that permanent systems establish a permanent right to pollute ( i. e., retired sources still receive valuable allowances).   Page 21, section iv: Should remind readers that this is offered as an example and that states have the discretion on what type of allocation system to adopt.   Page 24, paragraph 3: Since this paragraph starts " Allowances in the new source set aside could be distributed in a number of ways," one of the ways that should be mentioned is auctioning.   Page 26: Renumber " 3" to " 4."


[Federal Register: March 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 54)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 14661-14665]
[DOCID:fr19mr08-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-29030; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-284-AD;
Amendment 39-15432; AD 2008-06-20]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070, 0100,
1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in
flight * * * and on ground, * * * Special Federal Aviation
Regulation 88 (SFAR88) * * * required a safety review of the
aircraft Fuel Tank System * * *.
* * * * *
    Fuel Airworthiness Limitations are items arising from a systems
safety analysis that have been shown to have failure mode(s)
associated with an `unsafe condition' * * *. These are identified in
Failure Conditions for which an unacceptable probability of ignition
risk could exist if specific tasks and/or practices are not
performed in accordance with the manufacturers' requirements.

We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 23, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of April 23,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on August 21, 2007 (72
FR 46572). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in
flight * * * and on ground, the FAA published Special Federal
Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR 88) in June 2001. SFAR 88 required a
safety review of the aircraft Fuel Tank System to determine that the
design meets the requirements of FAR (Federal Aviation Regulation)
Sec.  25.901 and Sec.  25.981(a) and (b).
    A similar regulation has been recommended by the JAA (Joint
Aviation Authorities) to the European National Aviation Authorities
in JAA letter 04/00/02/07/03-L024 of 3 February 2003. The review was
requested to be mandated by NAA's (National Aviation Authorities)
using JAR (Joint Aviation Regulation) Sec.  25.901(c), Sec.
25.1309.
    In August 2005 EASA published a policy statement on the process
for developing instructions for maintenance and inspection of Fuel
Tank System ignition source prevention (EASA D 2005/CPRO, http://
www.easa.eu.int/home/cert_policy_statements_en.html) that also
included the EASA expectations with regard to compliance times of
the corrective actions on the unsafe and the not unsafe part of the
harmonised design review results. On a global scale the TC (type
certificate) holders committed themselves to the EASA published
compliance dates (see EASA policy statement). The EASA policy
statement has been revised in March 2006: the date of 31-12-2005 for
the unsafe related actions has now been set at 01-07-2006.
    Fuel Airworthiness Limitations are items arising from a systems
safety analysis that have been shown to have failure mode(s)
associated with an `unsafe condition' as defined in FAA's memo 2003-
112-15 `SFAR 88--Mandatory Action Decision Criteria'. These are
identified in Failure Conditions for which an unacceptable
probability of ignition risk could exist if specific tasks and/or
practices are not performed in accordance with the manufacturers'
requirements.
    This EASA Airworthiness Directive mandates the Fuel System
Airworthiness Limitations, comprising maintenance/inspection tasks
and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) for
the type of aircraft, that resulted from the design reviews and the
JAA recommendation and EASA policy statement mentioned above.

The corrective action includes revising the Airworthiness Limitations
Section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness for certain
airplanes, and

the FAA-approved maintenance program for certain other airplanes, to
incorporate new limitations for fuel tank systems. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have received Fokker Service Bulletin
SBF28-28-050, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008. (We referred to Fokker
Service Bulletin F28/28-050, dated June 30, 2006, in the NPRM as an
appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the
required actions.) Revision 1 of the service bulletin includes
editorial changes, changes to certain CDCCL control references, and
changes to the compliance paragraph. We have changed paragraphs (f) and
(h) of the AD to refer to Revision 1 of the service bulletin. We have
also added a new paragraph (f)(5) to the AD to specify, in part, that
actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with
Fokker Service Bulletin F28/28-050, dated June 30, 2006, are acceptable
for compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD.
    Operators should note that we have excluded the CDCCL component
titled ``Level Control Pilot Valve Solenoid, jiffy junction,'' from the
requirements of paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this AD. Fokker 70/100 Fuel
Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration
Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-672, Issue 2, specifies that the
appropriate reference for this CDCCL control has not yet been
published. Therefore, we cannot include it in the requirements of this
AD. We may consider additional rulemaking to address this item when the
reference is available.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Refer to Later Revision of Report

    SAM Airlines requests that we revise paragraph (f) of the AD to
refer to Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and
Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-
672, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006. SAM Airlines points out that EASA
AD 2006-0208, dated July 12, 2006 (a parallel EASA Airworthiness
Directive for this AD), includes provisions to use Issue 1 of the
report ``or later approved revisions.'' However, the NPRM does not
allow for use of later approved revisions of this report as an
acceptable means of compliance. SAM Airlines would like to know if the
use of later revisions of the report would require approval through the
provisions of paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM.
    We agree with the commenter's request. In the NPRM, we referred to
Issue 1, dated January 31, 2006, of the report as the appropriate
source of service information for accomplishing the required actions.
Issue 2 of the report includes the CDCCL control references, as
published in the June 1, 2006, revision of the airplane maintenance
manual. Issue 2 also changes task descriptions for the fuel ALIs in
accordance with the Maintenance Review Board document.
    We have revised paragraphs (f) and (h) of this AD to refer to Issue
2 of the report. We have also specified in the new paragraph (f)(5) of
the AD that actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Issue 1 of Report SE-672 are acceptable for compliance
with the corresponding requirements of this AD. We also revised
paragraph (f)(4) of this AD to allow the use of later revisions of the
report, if those revisions are approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, FAA, or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or
its delegated agent.

Request To Remove Reference to Service Information in Certain
Paragraphs

    SAM Airlines also requests that we remove the reference to Fokker
Service Bulletin F28/28-050, dated June 30, 2006, from paragraphs
(f)(1)(i) and (f)(2)(i) of the NPRM. SAM Airlines points out that those
paragraphs apply only to Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100
airplanes, which are not included in Fokker Service Bulletin F28/28-
050.
    We agree with SAM Airlines for the reason stated. We infer that SAM
Airlines also requests we remove the reference to Fokker 70/100 Fuel
Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration
Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-672, Issue 1, dated January 31,
2006, from paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(2)(ii) of the NPRM because
those paragraphs apply only to Fokker Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000,
and 4000 airplanes, which are not included in Report SE-672. We have
revised paragraphs (f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), (f)(2)(i), and (f)(2)(ii) of
the AD to refer only to the applicable documents.

Request To Clarify Changes to Maintenance Program

    SAM Airlines also requests that we clarify paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and
(f)(2)(i) of the NPRM regarding what changes are being made to the
maintenance program. SAM states that the meaning of the word ``limits''
in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of the NPRM is unclear. In SAM Airlines'
interpretation, the intended action in paragraph (f)(1)(i) is to
incorporate into the aircraft maintenance program the intervals of the
fuel ALI tasks. If so, SAM Airlines requests that we revise the wording
to say: ``* * * Instructions for Continued Airworthiness and
incorporate the Fuel ALI tasks and intervals specified in Fokker * *
*.''
    SAM Airlines also explains that accomplishing the CDCCL is
unscheduled and requires distinguishing which inspection is needed in
addition to the normal maintenance task. Therefore, it is not practical
to incorporate the CDCCL into the aircraft maintenance program, as
specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of the NPRM. SAM Airlines suggests the
following wording to clarify paragraph (f)(2)(i) of the NPRM: ``* * *
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness and adhere to the CDCCL
requirements as defined in Fokker * * *.''
    We agree that clarification is necessary. This AD requires affected
operators to revise their copies of their Airworthiness Limitations
document to incorporate the fuel system limitation inspections. This
consists of the inspections, thresholds, and intervals. We have added
these terms to paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD. The AD
also requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) to
incorporate the CDCCLs as defined in the applicable service
information.
    Further, for airplanes that do not have an ALI, this AD requires
that operators revise the maintenance program to include the ALI
inspections, thresholds, and intervals. It also requires incorporation
of the CDCCLs as defined in the applicable service information to
ensure that the specified design configurations are maintained whenever
any work is performed.
    Subsequently, section 91.403(c) of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR 91.403(c)) requires an affected operator to comply with the
revised Airworthiness Limitations document. Ensuring that one's
maintenance program and the actions of its maintenance personnel are in
accordance with the Airworthiness

Limitations is required, but not by the AD. According to 14 CFR
91.403(c), no person may operate an aircraft for which airworthiness
limitations have been issued unless those limitations have been
complied with. Therefore, there is no need to further expand the
requirements of the AD beyond that which was proposed because 14 CFR
91.403(c) already imposes the appropriate required action after the
airworthiness limitations are revised.

Explanation of Additional Changes Made to This AD

    For standardization purposes, we have revised this AD in the
following ways:
     In most ADs, we adopt a compliance time allowing a
specified amount of time after the AD's effective date. In this case,
however, the FAA has already issued regulations that require operators
to revise their maintenance/inspection programs to address fuel tank
safety issues. The compliance date for these regulations is December
16, 2008. To provide for coordinated implementation of these
regulations and this AD, we are including this same compliance date in
paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD.
     We have simplified the language in Note 1 of this AD to
clarify that an operator must request approval for an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) if an operator cannot accomplish the
required inspections because an airplane has been previously modified,
altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by the required
inspections.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 18 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD to the U.S. operators to be $1,440, or $80 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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 the NPRM, the regulatory 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2008-06-20 Fokker Services B.V.: Amendment 39-15432. Docket No. FAA-
2007-29030; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-284-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective April
23, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100
airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category; and
Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 airplanes, serial numbers
11003 through 11241, 11991 and 11992, certificated in any category.

    Note 1: This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with
these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes
that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the
areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance according
to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure
the continued operational safety of the airplane.

Subject

    (d) Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel Tank System explosions in
flight * * * and on ground, the FAA published Special Federal
Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR 88) in June 2001. SFAR 88 required a
safety review of the aircraft Fuel Tank System to determine that the
design meets the requirements of FAR (Federal Aviation Regulation)
Sec.  25.901 and Sec.  25.981(a) and (b).
    A similar regulation has been recommended by the JAA (Joint
Aviation Authorities) to the European National Aviation Authorities
in JAA letter 04/00/02/07/03-L024 of 3 February 2003. The review was
requested to be mandated by NAA's (National Aviation Authorities)
using JAR (Joint Aviation Regulation) Sec.  25.901(c), Sec.
25.1309.
    In August 2005 EASA published a policy statement on the process
for developing instructions for maintenance and inspection of Fuel
Tank System ignition source prevention (EASA D 2005/CPRO, http://
www.easa.eu.int/home/cert_policy_statements_en.html) that also
included the EASA expectations with regard to compliance times of
the corrective actions on the unsafe and the not unsafe part of the
harmonised design review results. On a global scale the TC (type
certificate) holders committed themselves to the EASA published
compliance dates (see EASA policy statement). The EASA policy
statement has been revised in March 2006: The date of 31-12-2005 for
the unsafe related actions has now been set at 01-07-2006.
    Fuel Airworthiness Limitations are items arising from a systems
safety analysis that have been shown to have failure mode(s)
associated with an `unsafe condition' as defined in FAA's memo 2003-
112-15 `SFAR 88--Mandatory Action Decision Criteria'. These are
identified in Failure Conditions for which an unacceptable
probability of ignition risk could exist if specific tasks and/or
practices are not performed in accordance with the manufacturers'
requirements.
    This EASA Airworthiness Directive mandates the Fuel System
Airworthiness Limitations, comprising maintenance/inspection tasks
and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) for
the type of aircraft, that resulted from the design reviews and the
JAA recommendation and EASA policy statement mentioned above.

The corrective action includes revising the Airworthiness
Limitations Section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
for certain airplanes, and the FAA-approved maintenance program for
certain other airplanes, to incorporate new limitations for fuel
tank systems.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD or
before December 16, 2008, whichever occurs first, do the action in
paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this AD, as applicable. For all
identified tasks, the initial compliance time starts from the
effective date of this AD. The repetitive inspections must be
accomplished thereafter at the intervals not to exceed those
specified in Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI)
and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report
SE-672, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; or Fokker Service Bulletin
SBF28-28-050, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; as applicable;
except as provided by paragraphs (f)(3), (f)(4), and (g)(1) of this
AD.
    (i) For Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes: Revise the
Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness to incorporate the inspections, thresholds,
and intervals specified in Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness
Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control
Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-672, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006.
    (ii) For Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 airplanes:
Incorporate into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program the
inspections, thresholds, and intervals specified in Fokker Service
Bulletin SBF28-28-050, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008.
    (2) Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD or
before December 16, 2008, whichever occurs first, do the action in
paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.
    (i) For Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes: Revise the
Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness to incorporate the CDCCLs as defined in
Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical
Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-672,
Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006, except for the CDCCL component
titled ``Level Control Pilot Valve Solenoid, jiffy junction.''
    (ii) For Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 airplanes:
Incorporate into the FAA-approved maintenance inspection program the
CDCCLs as defined in Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-050, Revision
1, dated January 8, 2008.
    (3) Where Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items
(ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL)
Report SE-672, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; and Fokker Service
Bulletin SBF28-28-050, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; allow for
exceptional short-term extensions, an exception is acceptable to the
FAA if it is approved by the appropriate principal inspector in the
FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office.
    (4) After accomplishing the actions specified in paragraphs
(f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD, no alternative inspection, inspection
interval, or CDCCL may be used, unless the inspection, interval, or
CDCCL is part of a later revision of Fokker 70/100 Fuel
Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design
Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-672, Issue 2,
dated December 1, 2006; or Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-050,
Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; as applicable; that is approved
by the Manager, ANM-116, International Branch, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or
its delegated agent, or unless the inspection, interval, or CDCCL is
approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance
with the procedures specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
    (5) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items
(ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL)
Report SE-672, Issue 1, dated January 31, 2006; or Fokker Service
Bulletin F28/28-050, dated June 30, 2006; are acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD.

    Note 2: For Model F.28 Mark 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000
airplanes, after an operator complies with the requirements of
paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, those paragraphs do
not require that operators subsequently record accomplishment of
those requirements each time an applicable action is accomplished
according to that operator's FAA-approved maintenance inspection
program.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 3: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. Send information to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC
on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
Airworthiness Directive 2006-0206, dated June 11, 2006; EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2006-0208, dated July 12, 2006; Fokker 70/
100 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design
Configuration Control

Limitations (CDCCL) Report SE-672, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006;
and Fokker Service Bulletin SBF28-28-050, Revision 1, dated January
8, 2008; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness Limitation
Items (ALI) and Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations
(CDCCL) Report SE-672, Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006; and Fokker
Service Bulletin SBF28-28-050, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008; as
applicable; to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD
specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Fokker Services B.V., P.O. Box 231, 2150 AE Nieuw-Vennep, the
Netherlands.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-
locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 9, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8-5142 Filed 3-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63875-63876]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25057]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10002-33-OW]

Notice of Public Teleconferences

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public teleconferences.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA's Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB) will
hold two public teleconferences of the EFAB Stormwater Infrastructure
Finance Taskforce, a workgroup of the EFAB. The purpose of the
teleconferences is to continue development of a workgroup report on the
availability of public and private sources of funding for the
construction, rehabilitation, and operation and maintenance of
stormwater infrastructure. The EFAB workgroup is developing its report
to the EPA pursuant to Section 4101 of the America's Water
Infrastructure Act of 2018.

DATES: The public teleconferences will be held on Wednesday, December
4, 2019, from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST and Wednesday, December 18,
2019, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. EST.

ADDRESSES: The teleconferences will be held by telephone and webinar
link. All members of the public who wish to attend the meeting must
register in advance, no later than November 27, 2019 for the December
4, 2019 meeting, and no later than December 12, 2019 for the December
18, 2019 meeting, by emailing<EMAIL_ADDRESS>of their
interest in attending and to receive the call-in information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wants
further information concerning the teleconference meetings may contact
Ellen Tarquinio via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The EFAB mailing address is: EPA Environmental
Financial Advisory Board (4204M), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. General information
concerning the EFAB can be found on the EPA website at https://www.epa.gov/waterfinancecenter/efab.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: The EFAB is an EPA advisory
committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5
U.S.C., App. 2, to provide advice and recommendations to EPA on
innovative approaches to funding environmental programs, projects, and
activities. Administrative support for the EFAB is provided by the
Water Infrastructure and Resiliency Finance Center (WIRFC) within EPA's
Office of Water. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby
given that the EFAB Stormwater Infrastructure Taskforce will hold two
public teleconferences to develop advice and recommendations to the EPA
on stormwater funding and financing options throughout the country. The
EFAB report will include a description of current approaches to funding
stormwater infrastructure in each state, challenges to affordability of
the infrastructure based on the type of funding, and gaps for
sustainable operations and maintenance for stormwater infrastructure
projects.
    Availability of Meeting Materials: A meeting agenda and other
materials for the meeting will be available on the EFAB website at
https://www.epa.gov/waterfinancecenter/efab.
    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for
consideration by

EPA's federal advisory committees has a different purpose from public
comment provided to EPA program offices. Therefore, the process for
submitting comments to a federal advisory committee is different from
the process used to submit comments to an EPA program office. Federal
advisory committees provide independent advice to the EPA. Members of
the public can submit comments on matters being considered by the EFAB
for consideration by members as they develop their advice and
recommendations to the EPA.
    Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an
oral presentation at a public teleconference will be limited to three
minutes. Persons interested in providing oral statements at the
December 4, 2019 teleconference should contact Ellen Tarquinio in
writing (preferably via email) at the contact information noted above
by November 27, 2019 to be placed on the list of registered speakers.
Persons interested in providing oral statements at the December 18,
2019, teleconference should contact Ellen Tarquinio in writing
(preferably via email) at the contact information noted above by
December 12, 2019 to be placed on the list of registered speakers.
    Written Statements: Written statements for the December 4, 2019
teleconference should be received by WIRFC by November 27, 2019 so that
the information can be made available to the EFAB workgroup for its
consideration prior to the meeting. Written statements for the December
18, 2019 teleconference should be received by WIRFC by December 12,
2019 so that the information can be made available to the EFAB
workgroup for its consideration prior to the meeting Written statements
should be sent via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(preferred) or
in hard copy with original signature to the EFAB mailing address above.
Members of the public should be aware that their personal contact
information, if included in any written comments, may be posted to the
EFAB website. Copyrighted material will not be posted without explicit
permission of the copyright holder.
    Accessibility: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, or to request accommodations for a
disability, please contact Tara Johnson at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>at least 10 business days prior to the meeting to
allow as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: November 7, 2019.
Andrew Sawyers,
Director, Office of Wastewater Management, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2019-25057 Filed 11-18-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 24, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44422-44424]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17622]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0638; Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-026-AD;
Amendment 39-17519; AD 2013-15-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France (Eurocopter)
Helicopters

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter Model AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350C,
AS350D, and AS350D1 helicopters with a single hydraulic system and a
certain hydraulic pump drive installed. This AD requires inspecting the
hydraulic pump drive pulley bearing (pulley bearing) for leaks, rust,
overheating, and condition. This AD is prompted by six reports of
hydraulic pump drive belt failure caused by seizure of the pulley
bearing. These actions are intended to prevent hydraulic pump drive
belt failure, loss of hydraulic servo assistance, and subsequent loss
of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 8, 2013.
    We must receive comments on this AD by September 23, 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 AD, the foreign authority's AD,
the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact American
Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at
http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. 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: Matt Wilbanks, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments prior to it becoming effective. However, 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 resulted
from adopting this AD. The most helpful comments reference a specific
portion of the AD, 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 them 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 rulemaking during the
comment period. We will consider all the comments we receive and may
conduct additional rulemaking based on those comments.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Emergency AD No. 2013-0044-E, dated February 27,

2013, to correct an unsafe condition for Eurocopter Model AS350B,
AS350BA, AS350BB, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, and AS350D helicopters.
EASA advises that six events were reported of hydraulic pump drive belt
failure caused by seizure of the pulley bearing, and that a preliminary
investigation concluded the installation of a new hydraulic pump drive
(installed in accordance with Eurocopter modification 079566) may have
caused excessive degradation. EASA further states that this condition,
for helicopters with a single hydraulic system, can lead to loss of
hydraulic servo assistance and an increase in pilot work load that
requires landing as soon as possible. For these reasons, the EASA AD
requires repetitive inspections of the hydraulic pump drive belt and
pulley bearing and if required, replacing the hydraulic pump drive
assembly.

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
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same
type designs.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter issued AS350 Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No.
05.00.72, Revision 1, dated June 11, 2013 (EASB 05.00.72), for Model
AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, ASAS350D, and for non-FAA
type-certificated Models AS350L1 and AS350BB helicopters. EASB 05.00.72
describes procedures for inspecting the pulley bearing for leaking
grease, condition of the lip seals, rust on the lip seals, evidence of
overheating revealed by brown discoloring of the bearing, and for the
condition of the sealing flanges. EASB 05.00.72 also describes
procedures for rotating the bearing manually to determine if there are
any friction points, brinelling, or noises from the bearing. EASB
05.00.72 requires these inspections within 10 hours time-in-service
(TIS) for installed bearings with 165 or more hours TIS since
installation. For bearings with less than 165 hours TIS since
installation, EASB 05.00.72 requires inspecting the bearing upon
reaching 165 hours TIS.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires, for hydraulic pump drives with 165 or more hours
TIS since installation, within 10 hours TIS and thereafter at intervals
not exceeding 25 hours TIS, decoupling the pulley and inspecting the
pulley bearing for leaking grease, a crack or tear in the lip seals, a
run of rust on the lip seals, indication of overheating shown by brown
coloring on the inner ring of the bearing, any distortion, impact,
wear, a tear, a crack, or loss of grease on the sealing flanges, or for
a friction point, brinelling, or noise from the bearing. If any of
these conditions exist, this AD requires replacing the hydraulic pump
drive assembly before further flight. If the hydraulic pump drive
assembly is replaced, the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD
still apply.

Interim Action

    We consider this AD to be an interim action. Eurocopter is still
investigating the cause of this condition. If a final action is later
identified, we might consider additional rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 36 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in
order to comply with this AD.
    At an average labor rate of $85 per hour, inspecting the bearing
pulley would require about 1.5 work-hours, for a cost per helicopter of
$128, and a total cost to U.S. operators of $4,608, per inspection
cycle.
    If required, replacing the hydraulic pump drive assembly would
require about 1.5 work-hours, and required parts would cost about
$8,543, for a total cost per helicopter of $8,671.
    According to Eurocopter's service information, some of the costs of
this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact
on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage by
Eurocopter. Accordingly, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    Providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adopting
these AD requirements would delay implementing the safety actions
needed to correct this known unsafe condition. Therefore, we find that
the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment
prior to the adoption of this rule because the required corrective
actions must be accomplished within 10 hours TIS, a very short time
period based on the average flight-hour utilization rate of these
helicopters in the helicopter emergency medical service and air tour
industries.
    Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate
adoption of this AD, we determined that notice and opportunity for
public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good
cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2013-15-03 Eurocopter France (Eurocopter): Amendment 39-17519;
Docket No. FAA-2013-0638; Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-026-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Eurocopter Model AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1,
AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350C, AS350D and AS350D1 helicopters with a
single hydraulic system and with a hydraulic pump drive installed in
accordance with modification 079566 that has 165 or more hours time-
in-service (TIS) since installation, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as seizure of the hydraulic
pump drive pulley bearing. This condition could result in hydraulic
pump drive belt failure, loss of hydraulic servo assistance, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments on this AD by September 23, 2013.

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective August 8, 2013.

(e) Compliance

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

(f) Required Actions

    Within 10 hours TIS, and thereafter at intervals not exceeding
25 hours TIS:
    (1) Uncouple the pulley from the hydraulic pump.
    (2) Using a mirror and a light, inspect the hydraulic pump drive
pulley bearing (pulley bearing) for leaking grease from each lip
seal of the four greasing orifices (lip seal) due to wear, a crack
or tear in a lip seal, a run of rust on a lip seal, indication of
overheating shown by brown coloring on the inner ring of the
bearing, and for any distortion, impact, wear, a tear, a crack, or
loss of grease on each sealing flange.
    (3) Manually rotate the pulley bearing through several full
turns and inspect for a friction point, brinelling, or a noise from
the bearing.
    (4) If there is any leaking grease from a lip seal, a crack or
tear in a lip seal, a run of rust on a lip seal, indication of
overheating shown by brown coloring on the inner ring of the
bearing, or distortion, impact, wear, a tear, a crack, or loss of
grease on a sealing flange, or a friction point, brinelling, or
noise from the bearing, before further flight, replace the hydraulic
pump drive assembly.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(h) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter AS350 Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No.
05.00.72, Revision 1, dated June 11, 2013, 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<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (972) 641-
3775; or at http:[sol][sol]www.eurocopter.com/techpub. You may
review a copy of the service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) Emergency AD No. 2013-0044-E, dated February
27, 2013. You may view the EASA AD in the AD docket on the Internet
at http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2913: Hydraulic
Pump, Main.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 11, 2013.
Kim Smith,
Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-17622 Filed 7-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 10)]
[Notices]
[Page 2055-2056]
[DOCID:fr17ja07-91]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55078; File No. SR-NASD-2006-136]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Make Technical and Grammatical Corrections to Rule 10308

January 10, 2007.
    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 December 28, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has
filed this 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.\5\ 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\ 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \5\ NASD informed the Commission staff that a clerical error was
made in its filing and the word ``individual's'' in paragraph
(a)(5)(B)(iii) of Rule 10308 should be lowercase. Telephone
conversation between Jean Feeney, Vice President, NASD; and Michael
Hershaft, Special Counsel, Commission (Jan. 9, 2006). Because this
is a non-substantive change, this amendment to the proposed rule
change will not toll the 60-day abrogation period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD is proposing to amend paragraph (a)(5)(B) of Rule 10308 of the
NASD Code of Arbitration Procedure to delete unnecessary cross
references in the definition of ``immediate family member,'' and to
correct a grammatical error.\6\ The text of the proposed rule change is
below. Proposed new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in
brackets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Commission recently approved amendments to Rule 10308,
effective Jan. 15, 2007. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54607
(Oct. 16, 2006), 71 FR 62026 (Oct. 20, 2006) (file No. SR-NASD-2005-
094).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

10308. Selection of Arbitrators

    (a) Definitions
    (1) through (4) No change.
    (5) ``public arbitrator''
    (A) No change.
    (B) For [the] purposes of this Rule, the term ``immediate family
member'' means:
    (i) [The] a person's parent, stepparent, child, or stepchild[, of a
person engaged in the conduct or activities described in paragraphs
(a)(4)(A) through (D)];
    (ii) A member of [the] a person's household [of a person engaged in
the conduct or activities described in paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through
(D)];
    (iii) An individual to whom a person [who receives] provides
financial support of more than 50 percent of the individual's annual
income [from a person engaged in the conduct or activities described in
paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D)]; or
    (iv) A person who is claimed as a dependent for federal income tax
purposes [by a person engaged in the conduct or activities described in
paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D)].
    (6) through (7) No change.
    (b) through (f) 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, NASD 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. NASD 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
    NASD believes that the cross-references to ``a person engaged in
the conduct or activities described in paragraph (a)(4)(A) through
(D)'' in the definition of immediate family member in paragraphs
(a)(5)(B)(i)-(iv) of Rule 10308 are redundant when read in conjunction
with other provisions of the rule. For example, Rule
10308(a)(5)(A)(vii) provides that a person may be a public arbitrator
if he or she ``is not the spouse or immediate family member of a person
who is engaged in the conduct or activities described in paragraphs
(a)(4)(A) through (D).'' The definition of ``immediate family member''
in Rule 10308(a)(5)(B) states, in part, ``For the purpose of this Rule,
the term ``immediate family member'' means * * * (i) the parent,
stepparent, child, or stepchild, of a person engaged in the conduct or
activities described in paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D).'' Thus, both
the rule and the definition refer redundantly to ``a person [who is]
engaged in the conduct or activities described in paragraphs (a)(4)(A)
through (D).''
    Moreover, new paragraphs (a)(5)(A)(v) and (vi) of Rule 10308 were
recently added to provide that persons who are otherwise qualified may
not serve as public arbitrators if they have certain family members who
are employed by, or serve as officers or directors of, entities in a
control relationship with a broker-dealer.\7\ In these instances, there
is no need to refer to paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D) as those
paragraphs are not at issue. Rather, what is important is the family
relationship itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For these reasons, NASD proposes to amend the examples of family
relationships in the definition of ``immediate family member'' in
paragraphs (a)(5)(B)(i)-(iv) of Rule 10308 in a non-substantive way to
retain the relationships themselves but omit the references to
paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D) of the rule. As noted above, because
this reference is in Rule 10308(a)(5)(A)(vii), arbitrators who have an
immediate family member engaged in the conduct or activities described
in paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D) of the rule will continue to be
ineligible to serve as public arbitrators. Arbitrators, who do not have
immediate family members engaged in the conduct or activities described
in paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D) of the rule, still may be subject
to new paragraphs (a)(5)(A)(v) and (vi) of Rule 10308, which governs
public arbitrators.
    In deleting the references to paragraphs (a)(4)(A) through (D),
discussed above, NASD has rearranged phrases to provide additional
clarity. In so doing, NASD does not intend to make any change in the
substance of the definitions or in how they are construed.
    Finally, NASD proposes to correct a grammatical error in Rule
10308(a)(5)(B) by replacing the term ``for the purpose of'' with the
more common phrase ``for

purposes of,'' which is used in the remainder of the rule.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See, e.g., Rule 10308(a)(1), (2), (6), and (7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD has filed this proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness so that these proposed non-substantive changes to the
definition of ``immediate family member'' can become operational on
January 15, 2007, the same time as the most recent changes to the
definition of public arbitrator.\9\ NASD believes this proposal will
help clarify Rule 10308, and make it easier to determine the proper
classification of an arbitrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See infra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\10\ which requires, among
other things, that NASD's 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. NASD believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the provision of the Act noted above because it will
assist in the administration of arbitrations by making Rule 10308
easier to understand and apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

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

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective upon filing
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act\11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder\12\ because the proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest. As required under
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\13\ NASD provided the Commission with written
notice of NASD's intent to file the proposed rule change along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the filing date of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposed rule change will become immediately
effective upon filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest,\14\ as such waiver is necessary so that the proposed
rule changes will become effective with other amendments to Rule 10308
on January 15, 2007. For these reasons, the Commission designates that
the proposed rule change has become effective and operative
immediately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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-NASD-2006-136 on the subject line.
    Paper Comments
     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-136. 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 at the principal office of NASD. 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 the File Number SR-NASD-2006-136 and should be
submitted on or before February 7, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-525 Filed 1-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 10835-10837]
[DOCID:fr28fe08-108]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57373; File No. SR-Amex-2008-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, and Amendment No. 1 Thereto,
Relating to Options Linkage Fees

February 22, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on February 8, 2008, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or
``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 substantially
prepared by Amex. On February 19, 2008, Amex submitted Amendment No. 1
to the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, 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

    Amex proposes to clarify the application of options transaction
fees for trades executed through the intermarket options linkage (the
``Options Linkage'') on the Exchange. The text of the proposed rule
change is available at Amex, the Commission's Public Reference Room,
and http://www.amex.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, Amex 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. Amex 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 Amex proposes to clarify the application of options transaction
fees for trades executed through the Options Linkage on the Exchange.
Currently, the Amex Options Fee Schedule (the ``Options Fee Schedule'')
provides that, under the Linkage Fee Pilot Program that is effective
through July 31, 2008, the fees applicable to specialists, registered
options traders, and market maker apply to members of other options
exchanges (``Non-Member Market Makers'') executing Linkage transactions
except for Satisfaction Orders. As a result, the fees for Principal
Orders (``P Orders'') and Principal Acting As Agent Orders (``P/A
Orders'') (collectively, ``Linkage Orders'') submitted through the
Options Linkage are: (i) $0.10 per contract side options transaction
fee for equity options, exchange traded fund share (``ETF'') options,
QQQQ options and trust issued receipt options; (ii) $0.21 per contract
side options transaction fee for index options (including MNX and NDX
options); (iii) $0.05 per contract side options comparison fee; (iv)
$0.05 per contract side options floor brokerage fee; and (v) an options
licensing fee for certain ETF and index option products ranging from
$0.15 per contract side to $0.05 per contract side depending on the
particular ETF or index option.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Options Fee Schedule section of the Amex Price List
available at http://www.amex.com. See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 56102 (July 19, 2007), 72 FR 40908 (July 25, 2007) (SR-
Amex-2007-64).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, the Options Fee Schedule also provides that broker-dealer
orders that are automatically executed on the Exchange are subject to
Broker-Dealer Auto-Ex Fees (``BD Auto-Ex Fee'') that include: (i) $0.50
per contract side options transaction fee for equity options, ETF
options, QQQQ options and trust issued receipt options; (ii) $0.05 per
contract side options comparison fee; and (iii) $0.05 per contract side
options floor brokerage fee.\4\ Broker-dealer orders that are subject
to the BD Auto-Ex Fee include specialist orders, registered options
trader orders, Non-Member Market Maker orders, and orders for the
account of registered broker-dealers. The Exchange charges this fee to
member firms through customary monthly billing. The BD Auto-Ex Fee was
implemented prior to the introduction and roll-out of the Options
Linkage which commenced on January 31, 2003 in two phases. The entire
roll-out of the Options Linkage was completed by July 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47216 (January 17,
2003), 68 FR 5059 (January 31, 2003) (SR-Amex-2002-114).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange in this proposal seeks to clarify the Options Fee
Schedule to make clear that automatically executed Linkage Orders will
be charged the BD Auto-Ex Fee that includes: (i) $0.50 per contract
side options transaction fee; (ii) $0.05 per contract side options
comparison fee; and (iii) $0.05 per contract side options floor
brokerage fee. Accordingly, the total transaction fee would be $0.60
per contract side. In contrast to the initial period of time when the
Options Linkage was introduced, most Linkage Orders on the Exchange are
automatically executed via the ANTE platform. The Exchange acknowledges
that the current Options Fee Schedule does not clearly reflect the fact
that for automatically executed Linkage Orders, the BD Auto-Ex Fee
would apply. However, a specialist or registered options trader on the
Exchange would be subject to the BD Auto-Ex Fee in those circumstances
that such specialist or registered options trader submitted an order
electronically through order-entry lines, such as CMS and/or FIX, for
automatic execution.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act \5\ in general and Section
6(b)(4) \6\ in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange
submits that the proposal clarifies that automatically executed orders
in ANTE, whether Linkage Orders or non-Linkage Orders on the behalf of
broker-dealers, are subject to the BD Auto-Ex Fee set forth in the
Options Fee Schedule. Accordingly, the Exchange asserts that the
proposed clarification relating to Options Linkage Order transaction
charges is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among Exchange
members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change, as amended, 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-Amex-2008-09 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2008-09. 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, 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
Amex. 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-
Amex-2008-09 and should be submitted on or before March 20, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-3735 Filed 2-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P