[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 55 (Friday, March 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15677-15679]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05894]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0915; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-41]
RIN 2120-AA66

Modification, Revocation, and Establishment of Area Navigation
(RNAV) Routes; Charlotte, NC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes two RNAV routes; modifies three RNAV
routes; and removes one RNAV route in the Charlotte, NC, area. These
changes, in combination with existing VOR Federal airways, provide
additional routing options through and around the Charlotte, NC area.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, May 29, 2014. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On December 19, 2013, the FAA published in the Federal Register a

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish 2 RNAV routes; modify
3 RNAV routes; and remove 1 RNAV route in the Charlotte, NC, area (78
FR 76784). Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. One
comment was received. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
expressed support for the proposal.

Differences From the NPRM

    The NPRM stated that this action would support the Charlotte
Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in a Metroplex (OAPM) Project.
That statement resulted in some confusion over the status of the T-
route proposal versus the Metroplex project. To clarify, while these
new routes will enhance airspace efficiency in the Charlotte Metroplex
area, the T-routes in this rule have independent utility from the
Metroplex project and the environmental evaluations were conducted
independently.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 to establish 2 low-altitude RNAV routes (T-206 and T-214);
modify 3 RNAV routes (T-201, T-202 and T-203); and remove 1 RNAV route
(T-200), in the Charlotte, NC, area. The route changes are described
below.
    T-200: T-200, extending between the foothills, GA, VORTAC and the
Florence, SC, VORTAC, is removed in its entirety. T-200 is seldom used
because it traverses very close to the ``final box'' for Charlotte/
Douglas International Airport (CLT) when CLT is landing to the north.
The modified T-202 (see below) provides routing through the south end
of the CLT Class B airspace area in place of T-200.
    T-201: T-201, extending between the Columbia, SC, VORTAC (CAE) and
the JOTTA, NC, fix, is shortened to extend between the MEVAE, SC,
waypoint (WP) (near Bethune, SC) at the south end, and the BORTZ, NC,
WP (south of the JOTTA fix) at the north end. In addition, the track of
the route is shifted approximately 7 nautical miles (NM) to the east of
its current position. The shift moves the route to the east of the CLT
Class B airspace area where it passes through the FEGNO, NC, WP instead
of the LOCAS, NC, fix (on the eastern boundary of the Class B airspace
area). T-201 segregates low altitude overflight traffic from CLT
departure and arrival traffic. Waypoints along the route provide
connectivity with RNAV routes T-202, T-206 and T-214 (described below).
    T-202: T-202 is extended at both ends: northeastward from the GANTS
fix to the ZADEL WP (near Asheboro Municipal Airport [HBI], NC); and
westward from the RICHE fix to the GURSH WP (near Union County Airport
[35A], SC). T-202 utilizes airspace around the south of CLT when CLT is
landing and departing to the south. That segment from the RICHE WP to
the HUSTN WP segregates T-202 traffic from CLT departures. Waypoints
along the route provide connectivity to T-201, T-206 and T-214.
    T-203: T-203, extending between the Columbia, SC, VORTAC and the
Pulaski, VA, VORTAC, is shortened to the ANDYS, SC, fix (near
Winnsboro, SC) at the south end, and the OREAD, NC, WP (10 miles north
of Hickory, NC) at the north end. In addition, the track is shifted
slightly to the west of its current position but still transiting
through the west side of the CLT Class B airspace area. By routing T-
203 via the ROUTH, NC, WP (near Grover, SC), transiting aircraft are
segregated from CLT departure airspace. Waypoints along the route
provide connectivity to T-202, T-206 and T-214.
    T-206: T-206 is a new route extending between the ENADE, NC, WP
(near Cliffside, NC) and the ZADEL, NC, WP (near Asheboro Regional
Airport [HBI], NC). The route is used to transition aircraft through
the north side of the CLT Class B airspace area when CLT is landing and
departing to the north. Waypoints along the route provide connectivity
to T-201, T-202, T-203 and T-214. Additionally, the alignment of T-206
through the GOTHS, NC, WP (northwest of the existing MOPED, NC, fix)
deconflicts transiting traffic from CLT departures.
    T-214: T-214 is a new route extending between the OREAD WP and the
ORPEE, NC, WP (north of Troy, NC), allowing aircraft to transition
north of the CLT Class B airspace when CLT is landing and departing to
the north. T-214 provides a predictable route to points northwest and
west of Charlotte that are deconflicted from the CLT arrival flow.
    The above routes are segregated from the heavily used arrival and
departure corridors serving the Charlotte area, enhancing the
efficiency of the National Airspace System in the Charlotte, NC, area.
    Low altitude RNAV routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA
Order 7400.9X dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15, 2013,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV routes
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so
minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when
promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies the route structure as required to enhance the safe and
efficient flow of air traffic in the Charlotte, NC, area.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9X,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and
effective September 15, 2013, is amended as follows:

T-200 FOOTHILLS, GA to FLORENCE, SC [Removed]

T-201 MEVAE, SC to BORTZ, NC [Amended]

MEVAE, SC               WP                     (lat. 34[deg]25'05'' N., long. 80[deg]22'28'' W.)
TRUEX, SC               WP                     (lat. 34[deg]35'55'' N., long. 80[deg]21'18'' W.)
FEGNO, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]14'49'' N., long. 80[deg]16'39'' W.)
NUROE, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]34'37'' N., long. 80[deg]31'15'' W.)
BORTZ, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]52'56'' N., long. 80[deg]44'56'' W.)

T-202 GURSH, SC to ZADEL, NC [Amended]

GURSH, SC.              WP                     (lat. 34[deg]42'05'' N., long. 81[deg]30'32'' W.)
AWRYT, SC               WP                     (lat. 34[deg]42'00'' N., long. 81[deg]14'52'' W.)
RICHE, SC               FIX                    (lat. 34[deg]41'54'' N., long. 80[deg]59'23'' W.)
HUSTN, NC               FIX                    (lat. 34[deg]53'20'' N., long. 80[deg]34'20'' W.)
FEGNO, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]14'49'' N., long. 80[deg]16'39'' W.)
GANTS, NC               FIX                    (lat. 35[deg]27'11'' N., long. 80[deg]06'16'' W.)
ZADEL, NC.              WP                     (lat. 35[deg]33'47'' N., long. 80[deg]01'47'' W.)

T-203 ANDYS, SC to OREAD, NC [Amended]

ANDYS, SC               FIX                    (lat. 34[deg]22'15'' N., long. 81[deg]08'38'' W.)
AWRYT, SC               WP                     (lat. 34[deg]42'00'' N., long. 81[deg]14'52'' W.)
ROUTH, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]10'38'' N., long. 81[deg]23'59'' W.)
FADOS, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]28'22'' N., long. 81[deg]20'49'' W.)
OREAD, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]52'03'' N., long. 81[deg]16'32'' W.)

T-206 ENADE, NC to ZADEL, NC [New]

ENADE, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]12'08'' N., long. 81[deg]44'41'' W.)
FADOS, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]28'22'' N., long. 81[deg]20'49'' W.)
GOTHS, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]35'17'' N., long. 80[deg]58'25'' W.)
NUROE, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]34'37'' N., long. 80[deg]31'15'' W.)
ZADEL, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]33'47'' N., long. 80[deg]01'47'' W.)

T-214 OREAD, NC to ORPEE, NC [New]

OREAD, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]52'03'' N., long. 81[deg]16'32'' W.)
BORTZ, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]52'56'' N., long. 80[deg]44'56'' W.)
THMSN, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]53'21'' N., long. 80[deg]28'57'' W.)
ZADEL, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]33'47'' N., long. 80[deg]01'47'' W.)
ORPEE, NC               WP                     (lat. 35[deg]27'12'' N., long. 79[deg]52'56'' W.)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 11, 2014.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2014-05894 Filed 3-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 13040]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04855]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0037]

Agency Information Collection Activity: Request for Comments:
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Airport Terminal and Tower Project
Information

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995,
FAA invites public comments on a new information collection form. This
collection involves soliciting project information for the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law (BIL) Airport Terminal and Tower Programs. FAA is
collecting this information to determine projects to be awarded BIL
competitive discretionary grants. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has granted a 180-day emergency approval for this collection. FAA
plans to follow this emergency approval with a submission for a 3-year
approval through OMB's normal PRA clearance process and will
incorporate any comments received as a result of this Notice.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by April 7, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for this information
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice
to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin K. Hunt, Manager, BIL
Implementation Team by email at [email protected] or phone at
(202) 267-3831.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comment Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0806.
    Title: Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Airport Terminal and Tower
Project Information.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 5100-144.
    Type of Review: Emergency approval of an information collection.
    Background: The FAA is developing this collection to solicit the
information necessary to evaluate and select airport terminal and tower
projects for funding under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL),
signed on November 15, 2021. The BIL provides about $1,020,000,000
annually, for five years, to award competitive discretionary grants for
airport terminal and tower development. Of this amount, about
$1,000,000,000 annually, for five years, is for the Airport Terminal
Program, and $20,000,000 annually, for five years, is for an Airport
Tower Program (referred to collectively as ``Airport Terminal and
Towers Programs''). Congress, through the BIL, instructed the FAA to
fund these projects expeditiously in order to address the nation's
aging airport infrastructure. The information collected is based on
grant considerations and priorities outlined in the BIL. Project
consideration areas include increasing terminal capacity and passenger
access, replacing aging infrastructure, achieving compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12101, et seq.) and
expanding accessibility for persons with disabilities, improving
airport access for historically disadvantaged populations, improving
energy efficiency, including upgrading environmental systems, upgrading
plant facilities, and achieving Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) accreditation standards, improving airfield safety
through terminal relocation, encouraging actual and potential
competition, and creating good paying jobs. The information FAA is
collecting will include general airport information, a project
overview, and narratives on project consideration areas as outlined in
the BIL. Airport owners and managers who want to pursue funding and
obtain benefits from the BIL Airport Terminal and Tower Programs will
submit information via FAA Form 5100-144 to compete for grants.
Approximately 3,075 airports are eligible to compete for this funding,
but FAA expects only a small subset of eligible airports to submit
project information through this competitive discretionary grant
process.
    Use: The FAA will use submitted information to evaluate and select
projects for funding that most closely align with grant considerations
and priorities provided in the BIL. These include the areas noted
above.
    Respondents: An estimated 510 airports are expected to apply for
these competitive grants.
    Frequency: Information will be collected once within 180 days of
OMB approval.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 6 hours per respondent.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Robin K. Hunt,
Manager, BIL Implementation Team.
[FR Doc. 2022-04855 Filed 3-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 132 (Monday, July 11, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44795-44797]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16262]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2016-0045; FRL-9948-84-Region 7]

Approval of Iowa's Air Quality Implementation Plans; Polk County
Board of Health Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve a revision submitted by the State of Iowa. The
purpose of these revisions is to update the Polk County Board of Health
Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Air Pollution. This final action will
reflect updates to the Iowa's statewide rules previously approved by
EPA and will ensure consistency between applicable local agency rules
and Federally-approved rules.

DATES: This final rule is effective on August 10, 2016.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R07-OAR-2016-0045. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and at EPA Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Please schedule an appointment during normal
business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. For additional information and general guidance,
please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by
addressing the following:

I. What is being addressed in this document?
II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
III. EPA's Response to Comments
IV. What action is EPA taking?

I. What is being addressed in this document?

    The State of Iowa requested EPA approval of revisions to the local
agency's rules and regulations, Chapter V, Air Pollution, as a revision
to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). In order for the local
program's Air Pollution rules to be incorporated into the Federally-
enforceable SIP, on behalf of the local agency, the state must submit
the formally adopted regulations and control strategies, which are
consistent with the state and Federal requirements, to EPA for
inclusion in the SIP. The regulation adoption process generally
includes public notice, a public comment period and a public hearing,
and formal adoption of the rule by the state authorized rulemaking
body. In this case, that rulemaking body is the local agency. After the
local agency formally adopts the rule, the local agency submits the
rulemaking to the state, and then the state submits the rulemaking to
EPA for consideration for formal action (inclusion of the rulemaking
into the SIP). EPA must provide public notice and seek additional
public comment regarding the proposed Federal action on the state's
submission.
    EPA received the request from the state to adopt revisions to the
local air agency rules into the SIP on December 8, 2015. The revisions
were adopted by the local agency on October 6, 2015, and became
effective on October 12, 2015. EPA is approving the requested revisions
to the Iowa SIP relating to the following:
     Article I. In General, Section 5-1. Purpose and Ambient
Air Quality Standards;
     Article I. In General, Section 5-2. Definitions;
     Article X. Permits, Division 1. Construction Permits,
Section 5-33. Exemptions from Permit Requirements;
     Article X. Permits, Division 2. Operating Permits, Section
5-39. Exemptions from Permit Requirement.
    EPA's action does not cover revisions to:
     Article VI. Emission of Air Contaminants from Industrial
Processes, New Source Performance Standards, Section 5-16(n),
     Article VIII. National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Source Categories, Section 5-16(p), and,
     Article VIII. National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Source Categories, Section 5-20.
    EPA is also approving the definition of Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) that was inadvertently omitted from the January 12,
2015, Federal Register notice that approved the September 2013
revisions to the Polk County Board of Health Rules and Regulations,
Chapter V, Air Pollution. 80 FR 1471. The definition of MACT is not
referenced elsewhere in Polk County's Federally approved rules.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Chapter V, Subchapter 5-20 National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Source Categories is not
Federally approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical
support document which is part of this docket, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.

III. EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period on EPA's proposed regulation opened
February 16, 2016, the date of its publication in the Federal Register,
and closed on March 18, 2016. (81 FR 8030). During this period, EPA
received one comment, with two separate issues, that are addressed as
follows:
    Comment: First, the commenter stated that it was not clear if the
Polk County local air agency issues Prevention of Significant (PSD)
permits for Polk County or if the state agency issues PSD permits.
Second, the commenter stated that the SIP submission contained an
illegal startup, shutdown, malfunction (SSM) exemption and that EPA
could not approve the SIP submission until the SSM exemption was
removed.
    Response to comment: First, Iowa has a delegated PSD program that
is not delegated to local air agencies. 72 FR 27056, May 14, 2007. PSD
permits are only issued by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. No
changes will be made in response to this comment.
    Second, in response to the commenter's concern that the SIP
contains an illegal SSM exemption in Article VI, Section 5-17(a) of the
Polk County Board of Health Rules and Regulations, the revisions to the
Iowa SIP that EPA is approving are definitions and construction
permitting exemptions that do not relate to automatic exemptions from
otherwise applicable SIP emissions limitations during periods of
startup, shutdown or malfunction. In addition, in response to the
commenter's concern, Iowa requested that the EPA not act on a reference
in the Polk County Board of Health Rules and Regulations to 567 Iowa
Administrative Code (IAC) Chapter 24, as a subsection of that provision
is subject to EPA's June 12, 2015 SSM SIP Call. 80 FR 33839.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is taking final action to approve this SIP revision to update
the Polk County board of Health Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Air
Pollution. This final action will reflect updates to the Iowa's
statewide rules previously approved by EPA and will ensure consistency
between applicable local agency rules and Federally-approved rules.

Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Iowa
Regulations described in the direct final amendments to 40 CFR part 52
set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov and at the appropriate EPA office (see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action 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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by September 9, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 22, 2016.
Mark Hague,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart Q--Iowa

0
2. In Sec.  52.820 the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry for ``Chapter V'' under the heading ``Polk County'' to read
as follows:

Sec.  52.820  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                              EPA-Approved Iowa Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Iowa citation                  Title                 State effective date                  EPA approval date                 Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Iowa Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Commission [567]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Polk County
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter V.......................  Polk County Board    10/12/15...........................  7/11/16, [Insert Federal Register    Article I, Section 5-2,
                                   of Health Rules                                           citation].                           definition of
                                   and Regulations                                                                                ``variance,''
                                   Air Pollution                                                                                ``anaerobic lagoon,''
                                   Chapter V.                                                                                and ``greenhouse
                                                                                gases''; Article III,
                                                                                Incineration and Open
                                                                                Burning, Section 5-
                                                                                7(d) Variance
                                                                                Application; Article
                                                                                VI, Sections 5-16(n),
                                                                                (o) and (p); Article
                                                                                VIII; Article IX,
                                                                                Sections 5-27(3) and
                                                                                (4); Article X,
                                                                                Section 5-28,
                                                                                subsections (a)
                                                                                through (c), and
                                                                                Article X, Section 5-
                                                                                35(b)(5); Article
                                                                                XIII; and Article XVI,
                                                                                Section 5-75 are not
                                                                                part of the SIP.
                                                                                Article VI, Section 5-
                                                                                17, adopted by Polk
                                                                                County on 7/26/2011,
                                                                                is not part of the
                                                                                SIP, and the
                                                                                previously approved
                                                                                version of Article VI,
                                                                                Section 5-17 remains
                                                                                part of the SIP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-16262 Filed 7-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 117)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 29118-29121]
[DOCID:fr19jn09-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0218; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-006-AD;
Amendment 39-15944; AD 2009-13-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Piper Aircraft, Inc. PA-23, PA-31, and
PA-42 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) PA-23 series airplanes and all PA-31 and
PA-42 series airplanes. This AD establishes life limits for safety-
critical nose baggage door components. This AD also requires you to
replace those safety-critical nose baggage door components and
repetitively inspect and lubricate the nose baggage door latching
mechanism and lock assembly. This AD results from several incidents and
accidents, including fatal accidents, where the nose baggage door
opening in flight was listed as a causal factor. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct damaged, worn, corroded, or non-conforming nose
baggage door components, which could result in the nose baggage door
opening in flight. The door opening in flight could significantly
affect the handling and performance of the aircraft. It could also
allow baggage to be ejected from the nose baggage compartment and
strike the propeller. This failure could lead to loss of control.

DATES: This AD becomes effective on July 24, 2009.
    On July 24, 2009, the Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD.

ADDRESSES: To get the service information identified in this AD,
contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida
32960; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: http:/
/www.newpiper.com/company/publications.asp.
    To view the AD docket, go to U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, or on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov. The docket number is FAA-2009-0218;
Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-006-AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory K. Noles, Aerospace Engineer,
One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Blvd., Suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia
30349; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On March 3, 2009, we issued a proposal to amend part 39 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that
would apply to certain Piper PA-23 series airplanes and all PA-31 and
PA-42 series airplanes. This proposal was published in the Federal
Register as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on March 10, 2009
(74 FR 10195). The NPRM proposed to establish life limits for safety-
critical nose baggage door components. The NPRM also proposed to
require replacement of those safety-critical nose baggage door
components and repetitively inspect and lubricate the nose baggage door
latching mechanism and lock assembly.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
and FAA's response to each comment:

Comment Issue No. 1: Require the Installation of a Secondary Forward
Baggage Door Latch

    Iliamna Air Taxi, Inc. and others request the AD incorporate a
secondary forward baggage door latch per supplemental type certificate
(STC) number SA02331AK as part of the solution. The recommendations
range from making the STC latch an additional action to this AD to
having the STC latch as a terminating action for this AD. The
commenters suggest the STC latch provides a cost-effective option that
provides additional or improved safety to the AD action. One commenter
questioned the validity of the AD action by referencing incidents/
accidents that occurred after the FAA

addressed National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) safety
recommendation A-78-004 from a related accident. The commenter also
states that Piper has released two previous service bulletins that have
not been effective in preventing incidents/accidents and believes this
AD will also be ineffective.
    The FAA disagrees. A properly inspected, maintained, and latched
nose baggage door latch does not have an unsafe condition. The intent
of this AD is to assure the nose baggage door latches properly and to
alert the pilot to check that the door is properly latched. The STC
latch, and other similar latches, do not directly infringe on the
actions or intent of the AD and could, therefore, be installed at
owner/operator discretion. The STC latch could potentially add another
level of safety to the operation of the nose baggage door. However, no
formal evidence exists that it could be considered a replacement or
fail-safe system to the existing type design. Even if the STC latch
were validated for a backup or fail-safe purpose, it is only approved
for a limited number of the aircraft models affected by this AD and
would not provide a comprehensive solution. For these reasons, the STC
will remain an optional installation.
    The FAA is not aware of any incidents or accidents that have been
attributed to a latch when it is installed per the type design,
maintained per the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, and
operated per required procedures. The NPRM and Piper Aircraft, Inc.
Service Bulletin No. 1194A, dated November 10, 2008, are a valid
solution. They highlight the importance of these measures, provide a
detailed inspection program, and add life-limits to critical latch
components. These steps are beyond any previous actions taken to
provide the required level of safety.
    We will not change the final rule AD action based on this comment.

Comment Issue No. 2: Allow a Smaller Nose Baggage Door Placard

    An anonymous commenter requests that we allow use of a smaller nose
baggage door placard because the placard supplied in the piper part
number 88451-002 kit is unnecessarily large for the application and
``unsightly.''
    The FAA agrees. A smaller placard can be considered for the
application. We will change the AD to allow the use of a smaller
placard provided the size of the letters is a minimum of \1/8\-inch.

Comment Issue No. 3: Revise the Emergency Procedures in the Pilot
Operating Handbook (POH) To Add Procedures for the Nose Baggage Door
Opening In-Flight

    The NTSB commented that they support the AD and encourage
dissemination to flight-related publications likely to be read by
operators. However, they also commented that the AD should add
emergency procedures to the POH for affected airplanes, indicating how
pilots should respond to a nose baggage door inadvertently opening in-
flight.
    The FAA disagrees. Operation with the baggage door open is not
permitted and evaluation of handling qualities with the baggage door
open is not a regulatory requirement. Therefore, data for emergency
procedures is not available because a configuration with the baggage
door open has never been tested. Without test data, specific emergency
procedures can not be recommended.
    We will not change the final rule AD action based on this comment.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data and determined that
air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed
except for the changes previously discussed and minor editorial
corrections. We have determined that these minor corrections:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 8,000 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to do the inspection and parts
replacement:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost per   Total cost on
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        airplane      U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $80 per hour = $320...........................            $190             $510       $4,080,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 AD.

Regulatory Findings

    We have 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 that 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 summary of the costs to comply with this AD (and
other information as included in the Regulatory Evaluation) and placed
it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary by sending a
request to us at the address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket
No. FAA-2009-0218; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-006-AD'' in your
request.

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 Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (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. FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding a new AD to read as follows:

2009-13-06 Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Amendment 39-15944; Docket No. FAA-
2009-0218; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-006-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective on July 24, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Models PA-23, PA-23-160, PA-23-235, PA-
23-250, PA-23-250 (Navy UO-1), PA-E23-250, PA-31, PA-31-300, PA-31-
325, PA-31-350, PA-31P, PA-31P-350, PA-31T, PA-31T1, PA-31T2, PA-
31T3, PA-42, PA-42-720, and PA-42-1000 airplanes, all serial
numbers, that are:
    (1) Certificated in any category; and
    (2) Equipped with a baggage door in the fuselage nose section (a
nose baggage door).

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from several incidents and accidents,
including some fatal accidents, where the nose baggage door opening
in flight was listed as a causal factor. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct damaged, worn, corroded, or non-conforming nose
baggage door components, which could result in the nose baggage door
opening in flight. The door opening in flight could significantly
affect the handling and performance of the aircraft. It could also
allow baggage to be ejected from the nose baggage compartment and
strike the propeller. This failure could lead to loss of control.

Compliance

    (e) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless
already done:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Actions                             Compliance                            Procedures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) For all aircraft:                 (A) Initially: within 1,000 hours     Follow INSTRUCTIONS: PART I of Piper
(i) inspect the nose baggage door      time[dash]in[dash]service (TIS)       Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No.
 assembly for damaged, worn,           since all life[dash]limited           1194A, dated November 10, 2008. As
 corroded, or non[dash]conforming      components were installed new         an alternative to using part number
 components;                           following Piper Aircraft, Inc.        100700[dash]079 placard, you may
(ii) replace life[dash]limited         Service Bulletin No. 1194A, dated     fabricate a placard (using at least
 components specified in the service   November 10, 2008, or within the      \1/8\[dash]inch letters) with the
 information; and                      next 100 hours TIS after July 24,     words in figure 1 of this AD and
(iii) install or inspect, as           2009 (the effective date of this      install the placard directly above
 applicable, the nose baggage          AD), whichever occurs later; and      the nose baggage door handle.
 placard following the service        (B) Repetitively thereafter: at
 information.                          intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours
                                       TIS.
(2) For all aircraft:                 (A) Initially: within 100 hours TIS   Follow INSTRUCTIONS: PART II of
(i) lubricate and inspect all nose     after July 24, 2009 (the effective    Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service
 baggage door latching and locking     date of this AD); and                 Bulletin No. 1194A, dated November
 components for damaged, worn,        (B) Repetitively thereafter: at        10, 2008.
 corroded, or non[dash]conforming      intervals not to exceed 100 hours
 components; and                       TIS.
    (ii) verify the key can only be
     removed from the lock assembly
     in the locked position in
     accordance with the service
     instructions.
(3) For all aircraft with damaged,    Before further flight after any       Follow Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service
 worn, corroded, or                    inspection required in paragraphs     Bulletin No. 1194A, dated November
 non[dash]conforming components:       (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this AD where    10, 2008.
 repair/replace any damaged, worn,     any evidence of damaged, worn, or
 corroded, or non[dash]conforming      corroded components was found.
 components.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19JN09.005

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (f) The Manager, Atlanta 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: Gregory K. Noles, Aerospace Engineer, One Crown Center, 1895
Phoenix Blvd., Suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone: (770)
703-6085; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (g) You must use Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No.
1194A, dated November 10, 2008, 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 Piper
Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: http://
www.newpiper.com/company/publications.asp.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference for this AD at the FAA, Central Region,
Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
Central Region, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference for this AD 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/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 12, 2009.
Scott A. Horn,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-14307 Filed 6-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 179 (Thursday, September 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57090-57092]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23608]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65312; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-126]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Rebates and Fees for Complex Orders

September 9, 2011.
    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 September 1, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, 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 its Complex Order Fees in Section I
of its Fee Schedule titled ``Rebates and Fees for Adding and Removing
Liquidity in Select Symbols.''
    While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be
operative on September 1, 2011.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, 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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Section I, Part
B of the Exchange's Fee Schedule for Complex Orders. A Complex Order is
any order involving the simultaneous purchase and/or sale of two or
more different options series in the same underlying security, priced
at a net debit or credit based on the relative prices of the individual
components, for the same account, for the purpose of executing a
particular investment strategy. Furthermore, a Complex Order can also
be a stock-option order, which is an order to buy or sell a stated
number of units of an underlying stock or ETF coupled with the purchase
or sale of options contract(s).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Rule 1080, Commentary .08(a)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to increase the current Customer Complex
Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity in Designated Options \4\ from $0.26
per contract to $0.27 per contract. The Exchange also proposes to
increase the current Complex Order Fee for Removing Liquidity in
Designated Options for Directed Participants \5\ from

$0.27 per contract to $0.28 per contract. The Exchange believes that
increasing the Customer Complex Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity in
the Designated Options will incentivize members to direct customer
order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange also believes that increasing
the Complex Order Fee for Removing Liquidity for Directed Participants
will still continue to draw order flow to the Exchange as well, as that
fee is within the range of fees assessed by other exchanges. The
Exchange is not proposing any change to fees for Select Symbols.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Designated Options are defined in Section I of the Fee
Schedule and include AAPL, BAC, C, F, GLD, INTC, IWM, JPM, QQQ, SLV,
SPY, and XLF.
    \5\ See Exchange Rule 1080(l), ``* * * The term `Directed
Specialist, RSQT, or SQT' means a specialist, RSQT, or SQT that
receives a Directed Order.'' A Directed Participant has a higher
quoting requirement as compared with a specialist, SQT or RSQT who
is not acting as a Directed Participant. See Exchange Rule 1014.
    \6\ Select Symbols are defined in Section I of the Exchange's
Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be
operative on September 1, 2011.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \7\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \8\ in particular, in that
it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges
among Exchange members. The Exchange also believes that there is an
equitable allocation of reasonable rebates among Exchange members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to only
pay a Complex Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity to Customers, as
compared to other market participants, and increase the Customer
Complex Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity in Designated Options because
this will incentivize members to direct Customer order flow to the
Exchange in these Designated Options.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to increase the Complex Order Fee for Removing
Liquidity in Designated Options for Directed Participants because the
proposed fee for options overlying the Designated Options remains
competitive with fees charged by other exchanges and is reasonable and
equitably allocated to those members that opt to direct orders to the
Exchange rather than to a competing exchange. The proposed fee is
within the range of fees assessed by other exchanges employing similar
pricing schemes. For example, the International Securities Exchange,
LLC (``ISE'') provides its market makers a $0.02 reduction off the
taker fee for removing liquidity in its Select Symbols from the complex
order book by trading with orders that are preferenced to them.\9\ The
Exchange's proposal to increase the Directed Participant's Fee for
Removing Liquidity for Complex Orders from $0.27 per contract to $0.28
per contract is reasonable because the Exchange is continuing to assess
Directed Participants the lowest fee as compared to other market
participants and reflects the fact that these market makers have higher
quoting requirements as compared to Specialists, ROTs, SQTs and RSQTs
who do not receive directed orders.\10\ In addition, the Exchange
believes the proposed fee is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
in that it will apply equally to all market participants that were
previously subject to this fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See ISE's Schedule of Fees.
    \10\ Currently, a Directed Participant is assessed a Complex
Order Fee For Removing Liquidity in Designated Options of $0.27 per
contract, a Specialist, Registered Options Trader (``ROT''),
Streaming Quote Trader (``SQT'') and Remote Streaming Quote Trader
(``RSQT'') is assessed $0.29 per contract, a Firm is assessed $0.30
per contract; a Broker-Dealer is assessed $0.35 per contract and a
Professional is assessed $0.30 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the Customer Complex Order Rebate for Adding
Liquidity the Exchange believes that it is reasonable to pay a
different rebate for transacting equity options in Designated Options,
and with respect to the Directed Participant Complex Order Fee for
Removing Liquidity the Exchange believes that it is reasonable to
assess a different Fee for Removing Liquidity in the Designated
Options. The Exchange currently pays a different Customer Complex Order
Rebate for Adding Liquidity and assesses a different Directed
Participant Complex Order Fee for Removing Liquidity in Designated
Options as compared to other Select Symbols. Trading in Designated
Options is different from trading in other symbols in that they are
more liquid, have higher volume and competition for executions is more
intense. The Exchange believes that paying different rebates and
assessing different fees for Designated Options as compared to Select
Symbols will incentivize trading in Designated Options and increase
liquidity in the Designated Options, which in turn will benefit all
market participants. With respect to the increased Directed Participant
Complex Order Fee for Removing Liquidity in Designated Options, the
Exchange is increasing this fee to cover costs. Notwithstanding the
increase in the fee, the Exchange believes that Directed Participants
will continue to send order flow to the Exchange in Designated Options
because the fee is within the range of fees assessed by other
exchanges.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to pay a different Customer Complex Order
Rebate for Adding Liquidity for transacting equity options in certain
symbols and with respect to the Directed Participant Complex Order Fee
for Removing Liquidity the Exchange believes that it is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory to assess a different Fee for Removing
Liquidity in certain symbols because the Exchange uniformly pays the
same Customer Complex Order Rebate for Adding Liquidity for all
Customer Complex Orders in all Designated Options and the Exchange
uniformly assesses the same Fee for Removing Liquidity to all Directed
Participants Complex Orders in all Designated Options.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market comprised of
nine U.S. options exchanges in which sophisticated and knowledgeable
market participants can readily send order flow to competing exchanges
if they deem fee levels at a particular exchange to be excessive. The
Exchange believes that the Complex Order fees and rebates it pays/
assesses must be competitive with fees and rebates in place on other
exchanges. The Exchange believes that this competitive marketplace
impacts the fees and rebates present on the Exchange today and
influences the proposals set forth above.

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 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 either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\11\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission

summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the
Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-Phlx-2011-126 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-Phlx-2011-126. 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 website (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-Phlx-2011-126 and
should be submitted on or before October 6, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-23608 Filed 9-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 102 (Thursday, May 26, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32041-32042]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11360]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2233]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before August 24, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2233, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Jackson County, Missouri and Incorporated Areas
        Project: 17-07-1363S Preliminary Date: September 30, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Independence...................  City Hall, 111 East Maple
                                          Avenue, Independence, MO
                                          64050.
City of Kansas City....................  City Planning and Development
                                          Department, 414 East 12th
                                          Street, 5th Floor, Kansas
                                          City, MO 64106.
City of Levasy.........................  City Hall, 103 Pacific Street,
                                          Levasy, MO 64066.
City of Sugar Creek....................  City Hall, 103 South Sterling
                                          Avenue, Sugar Creek, MO 64054.
Unincorporated Areas of Jackson County.  Jackson County Department of
                                          Public Works Technology
                                          Center, 303 West Walnut
                                          Street, Independence, MO
                                          64050.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Shelby County, Missouri and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 21-07-0047S Preliminary Date: October 15, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Shelbina.......................  City Hall, 116 East Walnut
                                          Street, Shelbina, MO 63468.
Unincorporated Areas of Shelby County..  Shelby County Courthouse, 100
                                          East Main Street, Shelbyville,
                                          MO 63469.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Wright County, Missouri and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 21-07-0048S Preliminary Date: December 4, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Hartville......................  City Hall, 200 South Main
                                          Avenue, Hartville, MO 65667.
City of Mansfield......................  City Hall, 122 North Business
                                          60, Mansfield, MO 65704.
City of Mountain Grove.................  City Hall, 100 East State
                                          Street, Mountain Grove, MO
                                          65711.
Unincorporated Areas of Wright County..  Wright County Courthouse, 125
                                          Court Square, Hartville, MO
                                          65667.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-11360 Filed 5-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 245 (Friday, December 20, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 77194]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30474]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

 In the Matter of the Enlightened Gourmet, Inc., Eternal Image,
Inc., NMT Medical, Inc., and Wits Basin Precious Minerals, Inc.; Order
of Suspension of Trading

December 18, 2013.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
The Enlightened Gourmet, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended September 30, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Eternal Image, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended September 30, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
NMT Medical, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended September 30, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Wits Basin Precious Minerals, Inc. because it has not filed any
periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 2010.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST
on December 18, 2013, through 11:59 p.m. EST on January 2, 2014.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-30474 Filed 12-18-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P