[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 35 (Monday, February 23, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9390-9391]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03575]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0589; FRL-9922-82]

Fomesafen; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
fomesafen in or on watermelon. Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR-4) requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). A final rule establishing a tolerance for
residues of fomesafen on watermelon, among other commodities, was
previously published in the Federal Register on November 1, 2013,
however, watermelon was not ultimately included in the table in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) under section 180.433 paragraph (a).
This document corrects that error.

DATES: This regulation is effective February 23, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 24, 2015, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0589, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The 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>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0589 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
April 24, 2015. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0589, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional
instructions on commenting

or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets
generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of September 28, 2012 (77 FR 59578) (FRL-
9364-6), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
2E8061) by IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, 500 College Road East,
Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.433 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
herbicide fomesafen, 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-N-
(methylsulfonyl)-2-nitrobenzamide, in or on cantaloupe; cucumber; pea,
succulent; pumpkin; squash, summer; squash, winter; and watermelon at
0.025 parts per million (ppm); and soybean, vegetable, succulent at
0.05 ppm. The document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by
Syngenta Crop Protections, LLC, the registrant, which is available in
the docket, http://www.regulations.gov.
    A final rule establishing tolerances on these commodities,
including watermelon at 0.025 ppm, was published in the Federal
Register on November 1, 2013 (78 FR 65565) (FRL-9401-8); however,
watermelon was not ultimately included in the CFR under section 180.433
paragraph (a). This document corrects that error and establishes the
tolerance for residues of fomesafen in or on watermelon at 0.025 ppm.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    EPA is relying upon the findings summarized in the November 1,
2013, final rule (78 FR 65565) (FRL-9401-8) that established tolerances
for residues of fomesafen in or on multiple commodities, including
watermelon, to establish this tolerance. Details regarding the final
rule as well as its associated supporting risk assessments are
available at http://www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2012-0589.
    Based on the risk assessments used to support the November 1, 2013,
Federal Register notice, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to fomesafen residues.

IV. Conclusion

    Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of the herbicide
fomesafen, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
watermelon at 0.025 ppm.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VI. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 12, 2015.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In Sec.  180.433, by adding alphabetically the following entry
``Watermelon'' to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  180.433  Fomesafen; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts per
                        Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Watermelon..............................................           0.025
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-03575 Filed 2-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 144 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43878-43879]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18194]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67480; File No. S7-24-11]

Order Extending Temporary Conditional Exemption in Connection
With the Effectiveness of the Definition of Eligible Contract
Participant

July 20, 2012.

I. Background

    Title VII of the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act'') \1\ amended the definition of the
term ``eligible contract participant'' in the Commodity Exchange Act
(``CEA'').\2\ This amended definition was incorporated by reference
into the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'').\3\ Section
6(l) of the Exchange Act,\4\ which was added by the Dodd-Frank Act,\5\
made it unlawful, as of the July 16, 2011 effective date of Title VII
(360 days after enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act), for any person to
effect a transaction in a security-based swap with or for a person that
is not an eligible contract participant, unless such transaction is
effected on a national securities exchange registered pursuant to
section 6(b) of the Exchange Act.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 111-203 (July 21, 2010).
    \2\ Section 721(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act redesignated section
1a(12) of the Commodity Exchange Act, which contained the pre-Dodd-
Frank Act definition of eligible contract participant, as section
1a(18), 7 U.S.C. 1a(18), and amended certain provisions of that
definition.
    \3\ Exchange Act section 3(a)(65), 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(65). Section
761(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act added section 3(a)(65) to the Exchange
Act.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(l).
    \5\ Section 761(e) of the Dodd-Frank Act.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In June 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') granted a temporary conditional exemption from section
6(l) of the Exchange Act to certain persons.\7\ This temporary
conditional exemption allowed those persons that met the definition of
eligible contract participant as set forth in section 1a(12) of the
Commodity Exchange Act (as in effect on July 20, 2010),\8\ but that
could potentially be considered non-eligible contract participants
under the definition of eligible contract participant as amended by
Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act, to continue to be treated as eligible
contract participants until the term eligible contract participant was
further defined in final rulemaking. The Commission specified in the
Effective Date Relief that the temporary exemption would expire on the
effective date for the final rules further defining the term eligible
contract participant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Order Pursuant to Sections 15F(b)(6) and 36 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Granting Temporary Exemptions and
Other Temporary Relief, Together With Information on Compliance
Dates for New Provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Applicable to Security-Based Swaps, and Request for Comment, 76 FR
36287 (June 22, 2011) (``Effective Date Relief'').
    \8\ 7 U.S.C. 1a(12) (as in effect on July 20, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

A. Post-Exemption Developments

    Subsequent to the Commission's publication of the Effective Date
Relief in June 2011, the Commission adopted, jointly with the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC''), rules further defining the term
eligible contract participant, which will be effective July 23,
2012.\9\ In the Entity Definitions Adopting Release, the Commission
reiterated that the temporary conditional exemption from section 6(l)
of the Exchange Act would expire upon the effectiveness of the Entity
Definitions Adopting Release.\10\ The Commission provided further
notice of the July 23, 2012 expiration of section 6(l) relief in its
June 2012 policy statement regarding implementation of the Dodd-Frank
Act (the ``Implementation Policy Statement'').\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Further Definition of ``Swap Dealer,'' ``Security-Based
Swap Dealer,'' ``Major Swap Participant,'' ``Major Security-Based
Swap Participant'' and ``Eligible Contract Participant'', 77 FR
30596 (May 23, 2012) (``Entity Definitions Adopting Release'').
    \10\ See 77 FR at 30700.
    \11\ See Statement of General Policy on the Sequencing of the
Compliance Dates for Final Rules Applicable to Security-Based Swaps
Adopted Pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 77 FR
35625, 35631 (June 14, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 13, 2012, in response to the request for comment in the
Implementation Policy Statement, the Financial Services Roundtable
(``Roundtable'') submitted a comment

letter \12\ requesting an extension of this relief until the effective
date of the final rules defining the terms ``swap'' and ``security-
based swap.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Letter from Richard M. Whiting, Executive Director and
General Counsel, Financial Services Roundtable, to Elizabeth M.
Murphy, Secretary, Commission (July 13, 2012) (``Roundtable
Extension Request''), available at: http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-05-12/s70512-9.pdf.
    \13\ The Commission and the CFTC have approved the final rules
(``Product Definitions Adopting Release''). See http://sec.gov/rules/final/2012/33-9338.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Roundtable Request

    In support of its request for an extension of section 6(l) relief,
the Roundtable stated that the extension is necessary in order to give
the industry more time to ``review the requirements and implement the
systems necessary to conform to the newly finalized definition of
[eligible contract participant].'' \14\ The Roundtable further stated
that linking the expiration of the section 6(l) relief to the effective
date of the Product Definitions Adopting Release will be more efficient
for market participants due to the large number of CFTC Title VII
provisions that are already tied to the effectiveness of that
release.\15\ Finally, the Roundtable stated that the requested
extension would result in harmonization with the CFTC.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Roundtable Extension Request at 2.
    \15\ Id. at 3.
    \16\ Id. The CFTC's existing relief from the CEA analogue to
section 6(l) expires on the effective date of the Product
Definitions Adopting Release. See Second Amendment to July 14, 2011
Order for Swap Regulation, 77 FR 41260, 41263 n.42 (July 13, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the concerns expressed by the commenter, the Commission
finds that it is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and
is consistent with the protection of investors, to extend the section
6(l) relief provided in the Effective Date Relief for the limited time
requested, that is, until the effective date of the Product Definitions
Adopting Release. Specifically, pursuant to the Commission's authority
under Section 36 of the Exchange Act,\17\ the Commission is extending
the temporary conditional exemption provided in the Effective Date
Relief from section 6(l) of the Exchange Act for persons that meet the
definition of eligible contract participant as set forth in section
1a(12) of the CEA (as in effect on July 20, 2010). This temporary
conditional exemption will expire on the effective date of the Product
Definitions Adopting Release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78mm. Subject to certain exceptions, section 36
of the Exchange Act authorizes the Commission, by rule, regulation,
or order, to conditionally or unconditionally exempt any person,
security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons,
securities, or transactions, from any provision or provisions of the
Exchange Act or any rule or regulation thereunder, to the extent
that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, and is consistent with the protection of investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    It is hereby ordered, pursuant to section 36(a) of the Exchange
Act, that the temporary conditional exemption from section 6(l) of the
Exchange Act provided in the Effective Date Release for persons that
meet the definition of eligible contract participant as set forth in
section 1a(12) of the Commodity Exchange Act (as in effect on July 20,
2010) is extended until 60 days after publication of the Product
Definitions Adopting Release (Rel. No. 33-9338, 34-67453; File No. S7-
16-11) in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-18194 Filed 7-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 135 (Friday, July 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 42514]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 95242; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2021-049]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No.
1, To Introduce a New Data Product To Be Known as the Short Volume
Report

July 11, 2022.
    On November 17, 2021, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``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
Exchange Rule 13.8(h) to introduce a new data product to be known as
the Short Volume Report. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on December 7, 2021.\3\ On January 20,
2022, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the Commission
designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule
change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings
to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\ On
March 7, 2022, the Commission instituted proceedings under Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \6\ to determine whether to approve or
disapprove the proposed rule change.\7\ On March 30, 2022, the Exchange
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which superseded the
proposed rule change as originally filed.\8\ The proposed rule change,
as modified by Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the
Federal Register on April 28, 2022.\9\ On June 2, 2022, the Commission
extended the period for consideration of the proposed rule change to
August 4, 2022.\10\ On June 30, 2022, the Exchange withdrew the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1 (CboeEDGX-2021-
049).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93696 (December 1,
2021), 86 FR 69306. The comment letters received on the proposed
rule change are available on the Commission's website at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboeedgx-2021-049/srcboeedgx2021049.htm.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94008, 87 FR 4069
(January 26, 2022). The Commission designated March 7, 2022, as the
date by which it should approve, disapprove, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule
change.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94369, 87 FR 14056
(March 11, 2022).
    \8\ Amendment No. 1 is available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboeedgx-2021-049/srcboeedgx2021049-20121774-273838.pdf.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94783 (April 22,
2022), 87 FR 25313.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95029, 87 FR 34921
(June 8, 2022).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-15115 Filed 7-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 196)]
[Notices]
[Page 59773]
[DOCID:fr11oc06-78]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Application for Transfer of License and Soliciting
Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

October 3, 2006.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Transfer of License.
    b. Project No: 11685-007.
    c. Date Filed: May 5, 2006.
    d. Applicants: Stockport Mill Country Inn, Inc. (Transferor) and
Stockport Mill Inn, LLC (Transferee).
    e. Name and Location of Project: The Stockport Project is located
at the Muskingum Lock and Dam No. 6 on the Muskingum River, in Morgan
County, Ohio.
    f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    g. Applicant Contact: For Transferee: Dottie J. Singer, Stockport
Mill Inn, LLC, 1995 Broadway Avenue, P.O. Box 478, Stockport, OH 45787.
    h. FERC Contact: Etta L. Foster<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to
intervene: October 27, 2006.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and
interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper, see 18 CFR 385.2001 (a) (1) (iii) and the instructions on the
Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission
strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project
number (P-11685-007) on any comments, protests, or motions filed. The
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors
filing a document with the Commission to serve a copy of that document
on each person in the official service list for the project. Further,
if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission
relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities
of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the
documents on that resource agency.
    j. Description of Application: Applicants request approval, under
Section 8 of the Federal Power Act, of a transfer of license for the
Stockport Project No. 11685 from the Stockport Mill Country Inn, Inc.
to the Stockport Mill Inn, LLC.
    k. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the project

number excluding the last three digits (P-11685) in the docket number
field to access the document. For online assistance, contact
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free<PHONE_NUMBER>, for TTY,

call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the addresses in item g.
    l. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    m. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210,
385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTESTS'', OR
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Project Number of the
particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-
named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number
of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be
served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the
particular application.
    o. Agency Comments: Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filling
comments, it will be assumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-16763 Filed 10-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 141 (Friday, July 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43214-43215]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18068]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62517; File No. SR-EDGX-2010-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
EDGX Rule 11.14

July 16, 2010.
    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 July 13, 2010, the EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``self-regulatory organization'' or the ``EDGX'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II below, which items have been
prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Exchange has
designated the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-
controversial'' rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under
the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this
filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend EDGX Rule 11.14 regarding Trading
Halts Due to Extraordinary Market Volatility to make a technical
amendment to the rule text. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Internet website at http://www.directedge.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov, and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange recently amended EDGX Rule 11.14 (Trading Halts Due to
Extraordinary Market Volatility) to allow the Exchange to pause trading
in an individual stock when the primary listing market for such stock
issues a trading pause in any Circuit Breaker Securities, as defined in
Interpretation and Policy .05 to Rule 11.14. The primary listing
markets for U.S. stocks amended their rules so that they may, from time
to time, issue a trading pause for an individual security if the price
of such security moves 10% or more from a sale in a preceding five-
minute period. Amendments to Rule 11.14 were approved by the Commission
on June 10, 2010.\4\ The Exchange subsequently filed to amend Rule
11.14 to add additional Circuit Breaker Securities, including those in
the Russell 1000[supreg] Index (``Russell 1000'') and specified

Exchange Traded Products (``ETP'') to the pilot rule.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62252 (June 10,
2010) (SR-EDGX-2010-01).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62418 (June 30,
2010) (SR-EDGX-2010-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to make a technical amendment to EDGX
Rule 11.14 to clarify that on the occurrence of any trading halt under
Rule 11.14, only outstanding Post Only orders (as defined in Rule
11.5(c)(5)) in the system will be cancelled. Currently, Rule 11.14
states that all outstanding orders in the system will be cancelled.
This amendment is necessary to comport the rule with how the Exchange's
systems operate. In addition, the Exchange believes that a narrower
cancellation policy will facilitate the formation of additional
liquidity for the halted security, thus increasing price stability upon
the reopening following the halt.
2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the proposed rule change is Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act,\6\ which requires the rules of an exchange 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. The
proposed rule change also is designed to support the principles of
Section 11A(a)(1) \7\ of the Act in that it seeks to assure fair
competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange markets. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule meets these requirements in
that it seeks to promote transparency for how order flow will be
handled during a trading pause.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78k 1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change does not 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Because the foregoing 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, it
has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the self-regulatory organization to submit to the
Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule
change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule
change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \10\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\11\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative upon filing. The Exchange believes that this rule
filing should become effective upon filing to ensure transparency in
the U.S. equities markets for how order flow will be handled during a
trading pause under Rule 11.14. Because the filing clarifies how order
flow will be handled during a trading pause, the Commission believes it
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
to waive the 30-day operative delay and hereby grants such waiver.\12\
Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposed rule change
operative upon filing with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission 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-EDGX-2010-07 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 Number SR-EDGX-2010-07. 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 Web site viewing and
printing 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
the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
EDGX-2010-07 and should be submitted on or before August 13, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-18068 Filed 7-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 178 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56693-56694]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22520]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67800; File No. SR-NYSE-2012-40]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Certain NYSE Rules To Replace References to ``NYSE Amex'' With
``NYSE MKT'' Reflecting the Recent Name Change of NYSE Amex LLC to NYSE
MKT LLC

September 7, 2012.
    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 August 28, 2012, New York Stock Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange''
or ``NYSE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend certain NYSE rules to replace
references to ``NYSE Amex'' with ``NYSE MKT'' to reflect the recent
name change of NYSE Amex LLC to NYSE MKT LLC. The text of the proposed
rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend certain NYSE rules to replace
references to ``NYSE Amex'' with ``NYSE MKT'' to reflect the recent
name change of NYSE Amex LLC to NYSE MKT LLC.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67037 (May 21,
2012), 77 FR 31415 (May 25, 2012) (SR-NYSEAmex-2012-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to replace references to NYSE Amex in Rules
2, 17, 18, 36, 70, and 103B with references to NYSE MKT. NYSE MKT does
not propose to rename the NYSE Amex options business; therefore,
references to ``NYSE Amex Options'' and the ``NYSE Amex Options Trading
Floor'' in Rules 6A, 36, and 70 would not be changed. In addition, the
Exchange does not propose to make any changes to temporary rules or
rules that are no longer applicable (e.g., Rules 300.10T and 715 and
Listed Company Manual Sections 902.02, 902.08, and 902.09).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange has certain rules that are temporary or that
are no longer applicable in that these rules relate to temporary
pilots, grace periods, historical transactions, or legacy rules that
are no longer applicable. As such, the Exchange does not believe it
is necessary to amend these rules that contain references to NYSE
Amex and American Stock Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\5\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in
particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. The proposed rule change would add clarity to the
Exchange's rules by correctly reflecting the current name of NYSE MKT,
which is in the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any 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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest, does not
impose any significant burden on competition, and, by its terms, does
not become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed,
or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange'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 date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-NYSE-2012-40 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 Number SR-NYSE-2012-40. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2012-40 and should be
submitted on or before October 4, 2012.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-22520 Filed 9-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 31)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8591-8593]
[DOCID:fr14fe08-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0183; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-146-AD;
Amendment 39-15376; AD 2008-04-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC-8-400 Series
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:

    There has been a reported case of failure of a bracket (P/N
85217732-108) of the over-centering spring assembly inside the
translating door of the forward baggage compartment. * * * Failure
of the bracket caused the eyebolt at the bottom of the spring
assembly to become loose, resulted in damage of the support beam
during normal door handle movement. Damage of the support beam,
which is dormant, in combination with failure of a doorstop attached
to any remaining undamaged support beam will degrade the structural
integrity of the door, resulting in possible depressurization or
loss of the door.

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

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 20, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 20,
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: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; 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 November 13, 2007
(72 FR 63827). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for
the specified products. The MCAI states:

    There has been a reported case of failure of a bracket (P/N
85217732-108) of the over-centering spring assembly inside the
translating door of the forward baggage compartment. This condition
can exist on other translating doors on the aircraft. Investigation
concluded that an insufficient gap between the bottom eyebolt and
the barrel of the spring assembly caused an increase of tension load
on the bracket and resulted in subsequent failure of the bracket.
Failure of the bracket caused the eyebolt at the bottom of the
spring assembly to become loose, resulted in damage of the support
beam during normal door handle movement. Damage of the support beam,
which is dormant, in combination with failure of a doorstop attached
to any remaining undamaged support beam will degrade the structural
integrity of the door, resulting in possible depressurization or
loss of the door.

Corrective actions include a one-time inspection for damage of the
spring support bracket and support beam of the forward baggage door,
aft service door, and aft passenger door; repetitive inspections for
integrity (corrosion, damage, cracking, and looseness or misalignment)
of the doorstops of support beams found to be within damage limits;
repair of support beams, or replacement of damaged brackets, support
beams, or doorstops, as applicable; and removal of certain washers and
nuts. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the
AD docket.

Comments

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

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

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 about 29 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 5 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average
labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $0 per
product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that
are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the
U.S. operators to be $11,600, or $400 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:

2008-04-04 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, Inc.): Amendment
39-15376. Docket No. FAA-2007-0183; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
146-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective March
20, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model DHC-8-400, DHC-8-401,
and DHC-8-402 airplanes; certificated in any category; having serial
numbers 4001 and 4003 through 4102.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52:

Reason

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

    There has been a reported case of failure of a bracket (P/N
85217732-108) of the over-centering spring assembly inside the
translating door of the forward baggage compartment. This condition
can exist on other translating doors on the aircraft. Investigation
concluded that an insufficient gap between the bottom eyebolt and
the barrel of the spring assembly caused an increase of tension load
on the bracket and resulted in subsequent failure of the bracket.
Failure of the bracket caused the eyebolt at the bottom of the
spring assembly to become loose, resulted in damage of the support
beam during normal door handle movement. Damage of the support beam,
which is dormant, in combination with failure of a doorstop attached
to any remaining undamaged support beam will degrade the structural
integrity of the door, resulting in possible depressurization or
loss of the door.

Corrective actions include a one-time inspection for damage of the
spring support bracket and support beam of the forward baggage door,
aft service door, and aft passenger door; repetitive inspections for
integrity (corrosion, damage, cracking, and looseness or
misalignment) of the doorstops of support beams found to be within
damage limits; repair of support beams, or replacement of damaged
brackets, support beams, or doorstops, as applicable; and removal of
certain washers and nuts.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 1,000 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD, perform a one-time inspection for damage of the spring support
bracket and support beams of the forward baggage door, aft service
door, and aft passenger door, as applicable, in accordance with
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-52-51, Revision A, dated September 8,
2006. Replace any damaged bracket, support beam, or doorstop in
accordance with the service bulletin, prior to further flight.
    (i) If any support beam is damaged at only one spring location
and the damage is within the limits defined in Bombardier Repair
Drawing RD 8/4-52-202, Issue 1, dated December 2, 2005, do the
actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i)(A) and (f)(1)(i)(B) of
this AD.
    (A) Inspect each doorstop of the affected door for integrity in
accordance with the service bulletin prior to further flight, and
repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 400
flight hours, until the support beam is repaired as specified in
paragraph (f)(1)(i)(B) of this AD or replaced in accordance with the
service bulletin. If the doorstop does not meet integrity standards
during any inspection required by this paragraph, before further
flight, repair or replace the doorstop with a new or serviceable
doorstop in accordance with the repair drawing.
    (B) Within 5,000 flight hours after accomplishing the inspection
described in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, repair the support beam in
accordance with the repair drawing or replace in accordance with the
service bulletin. Doing the repair or replacement terminates the
inspections required by paragraph (f)(1)(i)(A) of this AD.
    (ii) If any support beam is damaged at one or two spring
locations and any damage exceeds the limits defined in Bombardier
Repair Drawing RD 8/4-52-202, Issue 1, dated December 2, 2005, prior
to further flight, replace the damaged support beam with a new
support beam in accordance with the service bulletin.
    (iii) If any support beam is damaged at two spring locations and
the damage is within the limits defined in Bombardier Repair Drawing
RD 8/4-52-202, Issue 1, dated December 2, 2005, prior to further
flight, repair the support beam in accordance with the repair
drawing.
    (2) Within 1,000 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD, remove the nuts and washers at the bottom of the over-centering
spring assemblies of the forward baggage door, aft service door, and
aft passenger door by incorporating Modsum 4-155296, in accordance
with Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-52-51, Revision A, dated
September 8, 2006.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: 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, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 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: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace
Engineer, New York ACO, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516) 794-
5531. 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 Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2007-05,
effective April 24, 2007; Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-52-51,
Revision A, dated September 8, 2006, including MHI Service Bulletin
8-MHI0084, Revision C, dated September 6, 2006; and Bombardier
Repair Drawing RD 8/4-52-202, Issue 1, dated December 2, 2005, for
related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-52-51, Revision
A, dated September 8, 2006; and Bombardier Repair Drawing RD 8/4-52-
202, Issue 1, dated December 2, 2005; 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
Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional Aircraft Division, 123 Garratt
Boulevard, Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada.
    (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 February 7, 2008.
Kevin Hull,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-2626 Filed 2-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 31, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48675-48676]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18739]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[EL10-65-010]

Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Entergy Corporation;
Entergy Services Inc.; Entergy Louisiana, LLC; Entergy Arkansas, Inc.;
Entergy Mississippi, Inc.; Entergy New Orleans, Inc.; Entergy Gulf
States Louisiana, L.L.C.; Entergy Texas, Inc.; Notice of Filing

    On May 17, 2021, Entergy Services, LLC,\1\ acting as agent for
Entergy Operating Companies \2\ filed a compliance filing consisting of
the bandwidth formula rate recalculations for the June-December 2005
test year; additional interest calculations for the 2010, 2011, and
2012 test years (fifth, sixth and seventh bandwidth calculations); and
supporting workpapers for the identified adjustments, pursuant to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's

(Commission) Order issued dated April 15, 2021.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Effective September 30, 2018, Entergy Services, Inc.,
changed its name to Entergy Services, LLC.
    \2\ The Entergy Operating Companies (Operating Companies) are
currently Entergy Arkansas, LLC, (formerly Entergy Arkansas, Inc.),
Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, LLC (formerly Entergy
Mississippi, Inc.), Entergy New Orleans, LLC (formerly Entergy New
Orleans, Inc.), and Entergy Texas, Inc.
    \3\ La. Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. Entergy Corp., et al., 175 FERC ]
61,042 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, The Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 15, 2021.

    Dated: August 25, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-18739 Filed 8-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


MEMORANDUM

TO:	Mary Johnson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/SPPD

FROM:	Eastern Research Group, Inc.

DATE:	June 30, 2016

SUBJECT:	Review of Emissions and Sulfur Content Information for Liquid Fuel Boilers

1.0	INTRODUCTION

      The EPA received a petition asserting that the public lacked an opportunity to comment on a new provision in the February 2013 final amendments to the Area Source Boilers Rule (40 CFR part 63 subpart JJJJJJ) that specified that new or reconstructed oil-fired boilers with heat input capacity of 10 million Btu per hour (MMBtu/hr) or greater that combust only oil that contains no more than 0.50 weight percent sulfur or a mixture of 0.50 weight percent sulfur oil with other fuels not subject to a PM emission limit under this subpart and that do not use a post-combustion technology (except a wet scrubber) to reduce PM or sulfur dioxide emissions meet generally available control technology (GACT) for particulate matter (PM), providing the type of fuel combusted is monitored and recorded on a monthly basis. In the January 21, 2015 proposed notice of reconsideration, the EPA solicited comment on the February 2013 provision as well as on an alternative provision based on burning ultra-low-sulfur liquid fuel (ULSLF) (i.e., distillate oil that has less than or equal to 15 ppm sulfur).
      The following sources were used to assess the appropriateness of an alternate PM standard: 1) Emissions and fuel analysis data submitted through Information Collection Requests (ICRs) (approved under OMB Control No. 2060-0616) and 2) Performance tests results submitted to EPA's WebFIRE database.

2.0	DATA TABLES

      The following data tables in the appendix to this memo were used to assess PM emissions levels from boilers combusting oil and control of urban metal HAP for which PM serves as a surrogate in area source oil-fired boilers (i.e., Hg, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, lead, chromium, manganese, nickel):
 Liquid-Fired Area Source Boilers Filterable PM Emissions and Sulfur Content; Data Source ICR
 Area Source Boiler Firing ULSLF; Data Source WebFIRE
 All Liquid-Firing Area Source Boilers; Data Source WebFIRE
 Estimated PM Emissions from Fuel Analysis and Commenter Equation
 Adjusted Sales of Distillate Fuel Oil by End Use; Data Source EIA
 Estimated PM Emissions from AP-42 Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors
 Major Source Boiler Firing ULSLF; Data Source WebFIRE
 Major Sources Boilers Fired Low Sulfur Fuel Oil with Metallic HAP Fuel Analysis; Data Source ICR
 ULSLF - Fired Major Sources Boiler (Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.) with Mercury Fuel Analysis; Data Source WebFIRE


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 173 (Friday, September 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42565-42566]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19071]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Rule 17Ad-3(b),
    SEC File No. 270-424, OMB Control No. 3235-0473.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for approval of extension of the
previously approved collection of information provided for in Rule
17Ad-3(b) (17 CFR 240.17Ad-3(b)), under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
    Rule 17Ad-3(b) requires registered transfer agents to send a copy
of the written notice required under Rules 17Ad-2(c), (d), and (h) to
the chief executive officer of each issuer for which the transfer agent
acts when it has failed to turnaround at least 75% of all routine items
in accordance with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-2(a), or to process at
least 75% of all items in accordance with the requirements of Rule
17Ad-2(b), for two consecutive months. The issuer may use the
information contained in the notices: (1) As an early warning of the
transfer agent's non-compliance with the Commission's minimum
performance standards regarding registered transfer agents; and (2) to
become aware of certain problems and poor performances with respect to
the transfer agents that are servicing the issuer's issues. If the
issuer does not receive notice of a registered transfer agent's failure
to comply with the Commission's minimum performance standards then the
issuer will be unable to take remedial action to correct the problem or
to find another registered transfer agent. Pursuant to Rule 17Ad-3(b),
a transfer agent that has already filed a Notice of Non-Compliance with
the Commission pursuant to Rule 17Ad-2 will only be required to send a
copy of that notice to issuers for which it acts when that transfer
agent fails to turnaround 75% of all routine items or to process 75% of
all items.
    The Commission estimates that only one transfer agent will meet the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-3(b) each year. If a transfer agent fails to
meet those turnaround and processing performance requirements under
17Ad-3(b), it would simply send a copy of the notice to its issuer-
clients that had already been produced for the Commission pursuant to
Rule 17Ad-2(c) or (d). The Commission estimates

the requirement will take each respondent approximately four hours to
complete. The Commission staff estimates that compliance staff work at
registered transfer agents to comply with the third party disclosure
requirement will result in an internal cost of compliance, at an
estimated hourly wage of $283, of $1,128 per year per transfer agent (4
hours x $283 per hour = $1,128 per year). Therefore, the aggregate
annual internal cost of compliance for the approximately one registered
transfer agent each year to comply with Rule 17Ad-3(b) is also $1,128.
There are no external labor costs associated with sending the notice to
issuers.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following Web site: www.reginfo.gov. Comments should
be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within
30 days of this notice.

    Dated: September 5, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-19071 Filed 9-7-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 210)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 64284-64286]
[DOCID:fr29oc08-25]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1117; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-106-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Boeing Model 727 airplanes. This proposed AD would require inspections
for cracking of the left- and right-side shear ties and web posts of
the kickload beam and the adjacent structure in the vertical
stabilizer, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD
results from a report of cracking of the left- and right-side web posts
and shear ties of the kickload beam. We are proposing this AD to detect
and correct cracking of the left- and right-side web posts and shear
ties of the kickload beam, which, when coupled with failures in the
adjacent structure, could result in structural failure of the vertical
stabilizer, and loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 15,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6577; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-1117;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-106-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will

consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received a report of cracking of the left- and right-side
web posts and shear ties of the kickload beam. The cracking was
discovered during a scheduled maintenance visit of an airplane with
65,000 total flight hours and 42,000 total flight cycles. The reported
cracking of the left- and right-side web posts, which attach to the
kickload beam and the left- and right-side stringer 11 in the vertical
stabilizer, was due to stress corrosion caused by elevated fit up
stress. Cracking in the left- and right-side shear ties, which attach
to the kickload beam, was a result of fatigue caused by compensation
for cracking in the web posts. Cracking of the shear ties and web posts
can diminish the effectiveness of both left- and right-side stringer
11. When coupled with failures in the rear spar chord or stringer 10,
the critical crack length at which limit load can be sustained is
reduced, rendering the existing inspection intervals for stringer 10
and the rear spar chord insufficient. This condition, if not corrected,
could result in structural failure of the vertical stabilizer, which
could lead to loss of control of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-
0093, dated March 12, 2008. The service bulletin describes procedures
for doing repetitive high frequency eddy current (HFEC) and low
frequency eddy current (LFEC) inspections for cracking of the left- and
right-side shear ties, left- and right-side web posts, left- and right-
side stringers 10 and 11, rear spar chord, associated critical
fasteners, and adjacent surfaces in the vertical stabilizer. For
airplanes on which any cracking is found in the shear ties or web
posts, the service bulletin describes replacing the cracked parts with
new parts and inspecting all open fastener holes in the kickload beam
web and chords for cracking. For airplanes on which cracking is found
in stringer 10 or 11, rear spar chord and skin, associated critical
fasteners, adjacent surfaces of the vertical stabilizer, or areas other
than the shear ties and web posts, the service bulletin specifies
contacting Boeing for repair instructions. The service bulletin
specifies the following compliance times:

                                                Compliance Times
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airplanes/condition                                     Compliance time                  Repetitive interval
                                                   (whichever occurs first)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 52,000 total flight hours    Before 56,000 total      Before 42,000 total      10,000 flight hours or
 or 39,000 total flight cycles.         flight hours.            flight cycles.           7,500 flight cycles,
                                                                                whichever occurs
                                                                                first.
More than 52,000 total flight hours    Within 4,000 flight      Within 3,000 flight      10,000 flight hours or
 or 39,000 total flight cycles.         hours after the date     cycles after the date    7,500 flight cycles,
                                        of the service           of the service           whichever occurs
                                        bulletin.                bulletin.                first.
Any cracking found...................  Before further flight..  .......................  (None).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the(se) same type
design(s). This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously, except as
discussed under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service
Bulletin.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Bulletin

    Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-0093, dated March
12, 2008, specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how
to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require
repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization
Organization, whom we have authorized to make those findings.
    The service bulletin does not specify a compliance time for
airplanes with exactly 52,000 total flight hours or 39,000 total flight
cycles. We have grouped those airplanes with airplanes having ``less
than'' 52,000 total flight hours or 39,000 total flight cycles, as
specified in paragraph (g) of this proposed AD.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD interim action. If final action is
later identified, we might consider further rulemaking then.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 364 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Average                                  Number of
                                   Work      labor                                     U.S.-
            Action                hours    rate  per    Parts    Cost per  product  registered     Fleet cost
                                              hour                                   airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection....................         10        $80         $0  $800, per                 364  $291,200, per
                                                                  inspection cycle.              inspection
                                                                                cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2008-1117; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-
106-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by December 15, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 727, 727C, 727-100, 727
-100C, 727-200, and 727-200F series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report of cracking of the left- and
right-side web posts and shear ties of the kickload beam. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the left- and
right-side web posts and shear ties of the kickload beam, which,
when coupled with failures in the adjacent structure, could result
in structural failure of the vertical stabilizer, and loss of
control of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Inspections and Corrective Actions

    (f) At the times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-0093, dated March
12, 2008 (``the service bulletin''), except as provided by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD: Do the inspections to detect
cracking of the left- and right-side web posts and shear ties of the
kickload beam, by doing all of the actions specified in Part 2 and
the applicable corrective actions specified in Part 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin, except as
provided by paragraph (i) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective
actions before further flight. Repeat the inspections thereafter at
the intervals specified in paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin.

Clarification and Exception to the Specified Compliance Times

    (g) To determine the compliance times for airplanes having
exactly 52,000 total flight hours or 39,000 total flight cycles, for
the purposes of this AD, these airplanes are grouped with airplanes
having ``less than'' 52,000 total flight hours or 39,000 total
flight cycles, as specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-0093, dated March
12, 2008.
    (h) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-0093,
dated March 12, 2008, specifies a compliance time after the date on
the service bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

Exception to the Specified Corrective Actions

    (i) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
this AD, and Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-55-0093,
dated March 12, 2008, specifies contacting Boeing for appropriate
action: Before further flight, repair the cracking or damage using a
method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA. For a repair method to be approved by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's
approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, ATTN: Berhane Alazar,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(425) 917-6590; has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 10, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-25758 Filed 10-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P