                      Primisulfuron-methyl Name (128973)
                     Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)
                             Date: July 25, 2011

What is a Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)?
      * Available estimates of pesticide usage data for a particular active ingredient that is used on agricultural crops in the United States.
      * Pesticide usage data obtained from various sources.  The data are then merged, averaged, and rounded so that the presented information is not proprietary, business confidential, or trade secret.
What does it contain?
      * Pesticide usage data for a single active ingredient only.
      * Agricultural use sites (crops) that the pesticide is reported to be used on.
      * Available pesticide usage information from U.S. states that produce 80% or more of a crop, in most cases, or less than 80%, in rare cases, depending on the scope of the survey and available resources.
      * Annual percent of crop treated (average & maximum) for each agricultural crop.
      * Average annual pounds of the pesticide applied for each agricultural crop (i.e., for the states surveyed, not for the entire United States).
What assumptions can I make about the reported data?
      * Average pounds of active ingredient applied - Values are calculated by merging pesticide usage data sources together; averaging across all observations, then rounding.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 500, then that value is labeled <500.  Estimated values between 500 & <1,000,000 are rounded to 1 significant digit.  Estimated values of 1,000,000 or greater are rounded to 2 significant digits.)
      * Average percent of crop treated - Values are calculated by merging data sources together; averaging by year, averaging across all years, & rounding to the nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 2.5, then the value is labeled <2.5.  If the estimated value is less than 1, then the value is labeled <1.
      * Maximum percent of crop treated - Value is the single maximum value reported across all data sources, across all years, & rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 2.5, then the value is labeled <2.5.
What are the data sources used?
      * USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service)  -  pesticide usage data from 2003 to 2010.
      * Private pesticide market research  -  pesticide usage data from 2003 to 2010.
      * California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) Pesticide Use Reporting (PUR) data for 2003 to 2009.
What are the limitations to the data?
      * Additional registered uses may exist but are not included because the available surveys do not report usage (e.g., small acreage crops).
      * Lack of reported usage data for the pesticide on a crop does not imply zero usage.
      * Usage data on a particular site may be noted in data sources, but not quantified.  In these instances, the site would not be reported in the SLUA.
      * Non-agricultural use sites (e.g., turf, post-harvest, mosquito control, etc.) are not reported in the SLUA.  A separate request must be made to receive these estimates.
      * Some sites show some use, even though they are not on the label.  This usage could be due to various factors, including, but not limited to Section 18 requests, existing stocks of the chemical, data collection errors, and experimental use permits (EUPs).

                                July 25, 2011

Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses of Primisulfuron-methyl (128973)
                             Sorted Alphabetically

                                                              Percent Crop Ttd.

			Crop
                                                                      Lbs. A.I.
                                                                           Avg.
                                                                           Max.
                                                                              1
Corn
                                                                         30,000
                                                                        <2.5
                                                                              5

SLUA data sources include:
  USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service)
Private Pesticide Market Research

These results reflect amalgamated data developed by the Agency and are releasable to the public.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 168 (Thursday, September 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 49330]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18933]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8875-01-R6]

Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petitions for Objection
to State Operating Permit for Blanchard Refining Company, Galveston Bay
Refinery, Galveston County, Texas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final order on petition for objection to Clean Air
Act Title V operating permit.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator signed
an Order dated August 9, 2021, granting in part and denying in part a
Petition dated April 11, 2017 from the Environmental Integrity Project
and Sierra Club. The Petition requested that the EPA object to a Clean
Air Act (CAA) title V operating permit issued by the Texas Commission
on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to Blanchard Refining Company
(Blanchard) for its Galveston Bay Refinery located in Galveston County,
Texas.

ADDRESSES: The EPA requests that you contact the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view copies of the final
Order, the Petition, and other supporting information. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Region 6 office is currently closed to the public to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Please call or email the contact listed below if
you need alternative access to the final Order and Petition, which are
available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/title-v-petition-database.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aimee Wilson, EPA Region 6 Office, Air
Permits Section,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA affords EPA a 45-day period to
review and object to, as appropriate, operating permits proposed by
state permitting authorities under title V of the CAA. Section
505(b)(2) of the CAA authorizes any person to petition the EPA
Administrator to object to a title V operating permit within 60 days
after the expiration of the EPA's 45-day review period if the EPA has
not objected on its own initiative. Petitions must be based only on
objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity
during the public comment period provided by the state, unless the
petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues
during the comment period or unless the grounds for the issue arose
after this period.
    The EPA received the Petition from the Environmental Integrity
Project and Sierra Club dated April 11, 2017, requesting that the EPA
object to the issuance of operating permit no. O1541, issued by TCEQ to
the Galveston Bay Refinery in Galveston County, Texas. The Petition
claims the proposed permit improperly incorporated a State-only major
source flexible permit, failed to establish a compliance schedule for
Blanchard to obtain a federally approved major source permit, failed to
identify, incorporate, and assure compliance with permits by rule (PBR)
claimed by Blanchard, and failed to assure compliance with emission
limits and operating requirements established by Blanchard's New Source
Review (NSR) permits, including permits by rule.
    On August 9, 2021, the EPA Administrator issued an Order granting
in part and denying in part the Petition. The Order explains the basis
for EPA's decision.

    Dated: August 23, 2021.
David Garcia,
Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2021-18933 Filed 9-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 237 (Wednesday, December 9, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79179-79180]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26996]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10017-41-OA]

Notification of a Closed Meeting of the Science Advisory Board
2020 Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards Committee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory
Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a meeting of the Scientific and
Technological Achievement Awards (STAA) Committee. The purpose of the
meeting is to review the 2020 STAA nominations and to make
recommendations for awards. The meeting is closed to the public.

DATES: The meeting of the SAB STAA Committee will be held on Monday,
January 11, 2021 and Tuesday, January 12, 2021, from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m.
(Eastern Time) each day.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Members of the public who wish to
obtain further information concerning this notice may contact Dr. Zaida
Figueroa, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), via email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>General information about the SAB as well as
any updates concerning the meetings announced in this notice can be
found on the SAB website at http://www.epa.gov/sab.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental
Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA),
codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and
technical advice to the EPA Administrator on the scientific and
technical basis for agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a
Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. The SAB will comply with the
provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural
policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that
the Science Advisory Board Scientific and Technological Achievement
Awards (STAA) Committee, will hold a closed meeting to review the 2020
STAA nominations and to make recommendations for awards and
recommendations for improvement of the Agency's STAA program.
    The STAA awards are established to honor and recognize EPA
employees who have made outstanding contributions in the advancement of
science and technology through their research and development
activities, as exhibited in publication of their results in peer
reviewed journals. In conducting its review, the SAB considers each
nomination in relation to the following four award levels:
     Level I awards are for those who have accomplished an
exceptionally high-quality research or technological effort. The awards
recognize the creation or general revision of a scientific or
technological principle or procedure, or a highly significant
improvement in the value of a device, activity, program, or service to
the public. Awarded research is of national significance or has high
impact on a broad area of science/technology. The research has far
reaching consequences and is recognizable as a major scientific/
technological achievement within its discipline or field of study.
     Level II awards are for those who have accomplished a
notably excellent research or technological effort that has qualities
and values similar to, but to a lesser degree, than those described
under Level I. Awarded research has timely consequences and contributes
as an important scientific/technological achievement within its
discipline or field of study.
     Level III awards are for those who have accomplished an
unusually notable research or technological effort. The awards are for
a substantial revision or modification of a scientific/technological
principle or procedure, or an important improvement to the value of a
device, activity, program, or service to the public. Awarded research
relates to a mission or organizational component of the EPA, or
significantly affects a relevant area of science/technology.
     Honorable Mention awards acknowledge research efforts that
are noteworthy but do not warrant a Level I, II or III award. Honorable
Mention applies to research that: (1) May not quite reach the level
described for a Level III award; (2) show a promising area of research
that the Subcommittee wants to encourage; or (3) show an area of
research that the Subcommittees feels is too preliminary to warrant an
award recommendation at this time.
    The SAB reviews the STAA nomination packages according to the
following five evaluation factors:
     The extent to which the work reported in the nominated
publication(s) resulted in either new or significantly revised
knowledge. The accomplishment is expected to represent an important
advancement of scientific knowledge or technology relevant to
environmental issues and EPA's mission.
     The extent to which environmental protection has been
strengthened or improved, whether of local, national, or international
importance.
     The degree to which the research is a product of the
originality, creativeness, initiative, and problem-solving ability of
the researchers, as well as the level of effort required to produce the
results.
     The extent of the beneficial impact of the research and
the degree to which the research has been favorably recognized from
outside EPA.
     The nature and extent of peer review, including stature
and quality of the peer-reviewed journal or the publisher of a book for
a review chapter published therein.
    I have determined that the meetings of the STAA Committee and
Chartered SAB will be closed to the public because they are concerned
with selecting employees deserving of awards. In making these
recommendations, the Agency requires full and frank advice from the
SAB. This advice will involve professional judgments on the relative
merits of various employees and their respective work. Such personnel
matters involve the discussion of information that is of a personal
nature and the disclosure of which would be a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy and, therefore, are protected from
disclosure by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and sections (c)(2) and (c)(6) of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6). Minutes of
the meetings of the STAA Committee and

the Chartered SAB will be kept and certified by the chair of those
meetings.

Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-26996 Filed 12-8-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76218-76219]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31197]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0130]

Reports, Forms and Record Keeping Requirements; Agency
Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collections and their expected
burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment

period was published on September 8, 2011 [FR Doc. 2010-0130-0001].

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 5, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Joyce, Marketing Specialist,
Office of Communications and Consumer Information (NPO-520), National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., W52-
238, Washington, DC 20590. Mike Joyce's phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>
and his email address is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, NHTSA published a 60-day notice for public comment on
September 8, 2011 announcing the intent to conduct consumer research.
All comments received were reviewed and taken into consideration when
preparing the final ICR for OMB review. This notice announces that the
ICR, abstracted below, has been forwarded to OMB requesting review and
comment. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and
its expected burden. This is a request for new collection.
    Title: Monroney Label Consumer Research.
    OMB Number: Not Assigned.
    Type of Request: New collection.
    Abstract: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) was established by the Highway Safety Act of 1970 (23 U.S.C.
101) to carry out a Congressional mandate to reduce the mounting number
of deaths, injuries, and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle
crashes on the Nation's highways. In support of this mission, NHTSA
proposes to conduct a limited number of focus group sessions with
members of the general public to help inform future revisions to the
Monroney label and guide the development of a consumer education
program. In this collection of information, NHTSA is requesting to
explore how consumers evaluate the Monroney label, and comprehension of
the 5-Star Safety Ratings and understand the potential tradeoffs
consumers make among the items included on the Monroney label. The
research will also consider the location and size of the safety rating
label and compare with other areas of the Monroney label and explore
adding the advanced crash avoidance safety information to the safety
rating label. Additional areas of exploration will be evaluated,
including:
    (i) Vehicle purchase decision-making criteria;
    (ii) Sources of vehicle safety information;
    (iii) Monroney label content, comprehension and potential
tradeoffs; and,
    (iv) New changes to the safety rating section of the Monroney label
to help inform future revisions.

    Description of the Need for the Information and the Proposed Use of
the Information: NHTSA must explore how safety information impacts
vehicle purchase decisions, where consumers look for safety information
and how consumers use safety and other information located on the
Monroney label in their purchase decisions, which will help inform
future revisions to the Monroney label. Additionally, NHTSA will use
this research to discuss potential communication channels in order to
guide the development of a consumer education program.
    Affected Public: Passenger vehicle consumers.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 180 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 80.
    NHTSA will conduct two research phases. For the first phase, which
this notice addresses, NHTSA will conduct one type of qualitative
research. This research project will consist of two (2) focus groups in
five (5) cities for a maximum of ten (10) focus group sessions, lasting
120 minutes and will be held with eight (8) participants in each
session. Participation by all respondents would be voluntary, and
respondents will receive $75 for their participation. For recruiting of
these participants, however, a total of 120 potential participants (12
per group) will be recruited via telephone screening calls, which are
estimated to take 10 minutes per call. Based on experience, it is
prudent to recruit up to 12 people per group in order to ensure at
least 8 will actually appear at the focus group facility at the
appointed time. Thus, the total burden per person actually
participating in the group discussions is estimated to be 130 minutes
(10 minutes for the screening/recruiting telephone call plus 120
minutes in the focus group discussion session). Additionally, the total
burden per person recruited (but not participating in the discussions)
is 10 minutes.
    Comments Are Invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. A Comment to OMB is most effective if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication.
    ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
725-17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk
Officer.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on: November 29, 2011.
Gregory A. Walter,
Senior Associate Administrator, Policy and Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-31197 Filed 12-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 43 (Monday, March 5, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13043-13046]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5180]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0480; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-035-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 747-400 and 747-400D series
airplanes. That NPRM proposed installing aluminum gutter reinforcing
brackets to the forward and aft drip shield gutters of the main
equipment center (MEC); and adding a reinforcing fiberglass overcoat to
the top surface of the MEC drip shield, including an inspection for
cracking and holes in the MEC drip shield, and corrective actions if
necessary. That NPRM also provided for an option to install an MEC drip
shield drain system, which, if accomplished, would extend the
compliance time for adding the reinforcing fiberglass overcoat to the
top surface of the MEC drip shield. That NPRM was prompted by a report
of a multi-power system loss in flight of 1, 2, and
3 alternating current electrical power systems located in the
MEC. This action revises that NPRM by revising the locating dimensions
of the brackets and changing the routing of the forward drain tubes. We
are proposing this supplemental NPRM to prevent water penetration into
the MEC, which could result in the loss of flight critical systems.
Since these actions impose an additional burden over that proposed in
the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the
chance to comment on these proposed changes.

DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by April 19,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francis Smith, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2010-0480;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-035-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 issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that
would apply to Model 747-400 and 747-400D series airplanes. That NPRM
was published in the Federal Register on May 19, 2010 (75 FR 27966).
That NPRM proposed to require installing aluminum gutter reinforcing
brackets to

the forward and aft drip shield gutters of the MEC; and adding a
reinforcing fiberglass overcoat to the top surface of the MEC drip
shield, including an inspection for cracking and holes in the MEC drip
shield, and corrective actions if necessary. That NPRM also provided
for an option to install an MEC drip shield drain system, which, if
accomplished, would extend the compliance time for adding the
reinforcing fiberglass overcoat to the top surface of the MEC drip
shield.

Actions Since Previous NPRM (75 FR 27966, May 19, 2010) Was Issued

    Since we issued the previous NPRM (75 FR 27966, May 19, 2010),
difficulties were found in accessing areas for repair due to a service
bulletin error. We have determined that changing the locating
dimensions of support brackets and re-routing the forward drain tubes
are necessary due to interference with an existing pitot/static shroud.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the previous NPRM
(75 FR 27966, May 19, 2010). The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Reference Revised Service Information

    Boeing requested that we refer to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July 27, 2011, which includes steps to
take into account an interference issue found during part installation.
    We agree to update the references in this supplemental NPRM to
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July 27,
2011. (The previous NPRM (75 FR 27966, May 19, 2010) refers to Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, dated November 4, 2009.) Paragraphs
(c) and (g) of this supplemental NPRM have been updated to refer to
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July 27,
2011. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July
27, 2011, revises the locating dimensions of the brackets and changes
the routing of the forward drain tubes due to difficulties in accessing
areas for repair. It also revises the airplane groups.

Request To Remove Parts Installed During Interim Action

    Delta Air Lines requested provisions in the previous NPRM (75 FR
27966, May 19, 2010) to electively remove the stanchions, fittings, and
tubing installed when doing the interim action, after completing the
terminating inspection, repair, and fiberglass overlay reinforcement on
the top surface of the drip shields. Delta Air Lines stated that these
items add 26 pounds to the weight of the aircraft, and if the interim
action is optional, it may be removed once the terminating action is
implemented.
    We disagree with the request. We have determined that removal of
the hardware installed to the MEC area during the interim action poses
concerns on the effect on the protection offered by the terminating
action (overcoat layer). Removing the hardware could compromise the
seals by creating disbonded seams and reopening cracks in the MEC
polycarbonate casing, and could result in other damage. Although the
interim action is optional, it should be considered a permanent
installation once performed. It should be noted that doing both the
interim and terminating actions provides two layers of water protection
to the MEC, which greatly minimizes the issue of future water
contamination. We have discussed this issue with Boeing. No change has
been made to the supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request To Clarify Material Composition of MEC Drip Shield Gutter

    Boeing requested that we change the wording of paragraphs (g)(1)
and (g)(2)(i) of the previous NPRM (75 FR 27966, May 19, 2010) from
``MEC drip shield aluminum gutter'' to ``aluminum reinforcing brackets
on the MEC drip shield gutter'' to clarify that the original drip
shield gutter is composite material and the reinforcement material is
aluminum.
    We agree with the request and have changed paragraphs (g)(1) and
(g)(2)(i) of this supplemental NPRM accordingly.

Request To Change Parts Costs

    Boeing requested that we revise the previous NPRM (75 FR 27966, May
19, 2010) to change the parts costs associated with installing the
brackets and adding the overcoat. Boeing stated that the parts costs
for the aluminum reinforcing bracket kit is $2,408 instead of ``none''
as specified in the previous NPRM. Boeing also stated that the parts
costs for the fiberglass reinforcement is $1,731 (3 panels x $577/
panel) plus the cost of fiberglass, resin, and repair materials for
cracks and holes in the drip shield instead of ``none'' as mentioned in
the previous NPRM.
    We agree with the request and have changed the ``Estimated costs''
table of this AD accordingly. However, because the costs for parts
required for bracket installation depends on the work package, we have
stated the cost as ``Up to $2,408'' in the ``Estimated costs'' table of
this supplemental NPRM.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this supplemental NPRM because we evaluated all
the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the
original NPRM (75 FR 27966, May 19, 2010). As a result, we have
determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide
additional opportunity for the public to comment on this supplemental
NPRM.

Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM

    This supplemental NPRM would require accomplishing the actions
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1,
dated July 27, 2011, as described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 71 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
            Action                Labor cost         Parts cost         Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Install Brackets.............  19 work-hours x  Up to $2,408 \1\....  Up to $4,023 \1\....  Up to $285,633.\1\
                                $85 per hour =
                                $1,615.
Add Overcoat.................  63 work hours x  $1,731..............  $7,086..............  $503,106.
                                $85 per hour =
                                $5,355 ($577 x
                                3).

Install Optional MEC Drip      22 work hours x  Up to $8,982 \1\....  Up to $10,852 \1\...  Up to $770,492.\1\
 Shield Drain System.           $85 per hour =
                                $1,870.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Depending on work package.

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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

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
airworthiness directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2010-0480; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-035-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 19, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-400 and 747-400D
series airplanes; certificated in any category; as identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July
27, 2011.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/Furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a multi-power system loss in
flight of 1, 2, and 3 alternating current
electrical power systems located in the main equipment center (MEC).
We are issuing this AD to prevent water penetration into the MEC,
which could result in loss of flight critical systems.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modification

    Do the actions specified in either paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of
this AD.
    (1) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD,
install aluminum reinforcing brackets on the MEC drip shield gutter,
in accordance with Work Package 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July
27, 2011; and add a reinforcing fiberglass overcoat to the top
surface of the MEC drip shield, including doing a general visual
inspection for cracking and holes in the top surface of the MEC drip
shield, and doing all applicable corrective actions, in accordance
with Work Package 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July 27, 2011.
Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight after
doing the general visual inspection.
    (2) Do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and
(g)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD,
install aluminum reinforcing brackets on the MEC drip shield gutter,
in accordance with Work Package 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July
27, 2011; and install a MEC drip shield drain system, in accordance
with Work Package 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July 27, 2011.
    (ii) Within 96 months after the effective date of this AD, add a
reinforcing fiberglass overcoat to the top surface of the MEC drip
shield, including doing a general visual inspection for cracking and
holes in the top surface of the MEC drip shield, and doing all
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with Work Package 3 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-25A3555, Revision 1, dated July 27, 2011. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight after doing the general
visual inspection.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle 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. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Francis Smith,
Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems

Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 24, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-5180 Filed 3-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: May 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 98)]
[Notices]
[Page 29371-29373]
[DOCID:fr22my06-104]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53808; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-33]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to Accommodation Liquidations (Cabinet Trades)

May 16, 2006.
    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 May 4, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') 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.
CBOE has designated this proposal as non-controversial under section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the provisions of CBOE Rule 6.54
that pertain to accommodation liquidations (also referred to as
``cabinet trades'') \5\ to authorize PAR Officials and Floor Brokers to
represent cabinet orders on the Exchange. The Exchange is also
proposing various other non-substantive changes to reorganize and
update the existing text in CBOE Rule 6.54 and to update references in
the heading of Chapter VII of the CBOE rulebook and CBOE Rule 7.4. The
text of the proposed rule change is set forth below. Additions are in
italics and deletions are in [brackets].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Accommodation liquidations are transactions to close out
positions in worthless or nearly worthless out-of-the-money option
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated Rules
* * * * *
Chapter VI
Doing Business on the Exchange Floor (Rules 6.1-6.85)
* * * * *
Section C: Trading Practices and Procedures
* * * * *
Rule 6.54. Accommodation Liquidations (Cabinet Trades)
    Cabinet t[T]rading under the following terms and conditions shall
be available in each series of option contracts open for trading on the
Exchange.
    (a) For classes not trading on the CBOE Hybrid System:
    (i) Trading shall be conducted in accordance with other CBOE Rules
except as otherwise provided herein.
    (ii) Limit orders labeled at a price of $1 per option contract must
be placed with the Order Book Official or with a Floor Broker.
    (iii) Orders may be placed for customer, firm, and Market-Maker
accounts and, to the extent such orders are placed with the Order Book
Official, priority in the cabinet book will be based upon the sequence
in which such orders are placed with the Order Book Official.
    [(iii)](iv) Bids or offers for opening transactions at a price of
$1 per option contract may be placed with the Order Book Official only
to the extent that the [public order book] cabinet book contains
unexecuted contra closing orders with which the opening orders
immediately may be matched. Bids and offers at a price of $1 per option
contract may also be provided in response to a request for quote by an
Order Book Official or a Floor Broker, but must yield priority to all
orders in the cabinet book.
    [(iv) Orders may be placed for customer, firm, and Market-Maker
accounts, with priority based upon the sequence in which such orders
are placed with the Order Book Official.]
    (v) Market-Makers shall not be subject to the requirements of Rule
8.7 for orders placed pursuant to this Rule.
    (vi) The Order Book Official appointed to each class of option
contracts shall be responsible for $1 orders that are placed with him
for that class. All bids and offers that are submitted to the Order
Book Official must be submitted to the Order Book Official in writing
and displayed as such in accordance with Rule 7.7, and the Order Book
Official shall effect [all such] transactions during the day by
matching such orders placed with him or by executing such orders placed
with him with a Floor Broker representing a contra order.
    (vii) All cabinet transactions at a price of $1 per option contract
shall be reported to the Exchange following the close of each business
day.
    (b) For classes trading on the CBOE Hybrid System:
    (i) Trading shall be conducted in accordance with other CBOE Rules
except as otherwise provided herein.
    (ii) Limit orders labeled at a price of $1 per option contract must
be traded on the Exchange in a form and manner prescribed by the
Exchange. Currently, accommodation liquidations are only eligible for
Exchange trading via open outcry and hence are not eligible for
placement into the Electronic Book.
. . . Interpretations and Policies
    .01 Order Book Official: An Order Book Official who receives a
closing buy (sell) order for $1 per option contract shall attempt to
execute the order against any $1 closing sell (buy) orders in his
possession. If any part of the buy (sell) order cannot be immediately

executed, the Order Book Official shall display the $1 bid (offer).
    [Upon receiving a closing sell order for $1 per option contract,
the Order Book Official shall attempt to execute the order against any
$1 closing buy orders in his possession. If any part of the sell order
cannot be immediately executed, the Order Book Official shall display
the $1 offer.] The Order Book Official may accept bids or offers for
opening transactions at a price of $1 per contract only to the extent
that the [public order book] cabinet book already contains closing
orders for the contra side.
    Upon execution of any $1 per contract orders, the Order Book
Official shall promptly supply reports of the transaction back to the
member firms involved. In accordance with (a)(vii) above, he will not
report the transactions to the Exchange until after the close of each
business day.
    .02 PAR Officials: For purposes of this Rule, a PAR Official may
also perform the functions of an Order Book Official.
* * * * *
Chapter VII
Order Book Officials [and Board Brokers] (Rules 7.1--7.50)
* * * * *
Rule 7.4. Obligations for Orders
    (a)-(c) No change.
    (d)(1)-(2) No change.
    (3) The provisions of paragraph (d) of this Rule shall not apply to
matching [1[cent]] buy and sell orders under Rule 6.54.
    (4) No change.
    (e)-(f) No change.
. . . Interpretations and Policies
    No change.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    An ``accommodation'' or ``cabinet'' trade refers to trades in
listed options on the Exchange that are worthless or not actively
traded. Cabinet trading is generally conducted in accordance with CBOE
rules; CBOE Rule 6.54, Accommodation Liquidations, sets forth specific
procedures for engaging in cabinet trades. CBOE Rule 6.54 currently
provides for cabinet trades to occur via open outcry whether or not the
security class trades on the Exchange's Hybrid Trading System.
    The purpose of the rule change is to amend CBOE Rule 6.54 to
clarify through proposed Interpretation and Policy .02 that PAR
Officials \6\ may perform the functions that Order Book Officials
perform with respect to cabinet trading. Clarifying that PAR Officials
are authorized to represent cabinet orders and effect cabinet trades is
consistent with recent amendments to the CBOE rules that established
the PAR Official position on the Exchange.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A PAR Official is an Exchange employee or independent
contractor whom the Exchange may designate as being responsible for
(i) operating the PAR workstation in a DPM trading crowd with
respect to the classes of options assigned to him/her; (ii) when
applicable, maintaining the book with respect to the classes of
options assigned to him/her; and (iii) effecting proper executions
of orders placed with him/her. See CBOE Rule 7.12.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52798 (November 18,
2005), 70 FR 71344 (November 28, 2005) (File No. SR-CBOE-2005-46)
(order approving amendments relating to the removal of agency
responsibilities from DPMs and establishing Exchange PAR Officials).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing to amend CBOE Rule 6.54 to authorize
Floor Brokers to represent cabinet orders and effect cabinet trades. As
a result, in addition to the existing procedures which permit cabinet
orders to be placed with an Order Book Official (which, as this rule
change clarifies, would include a PAR Official fulfilling the duties of
an Order Book Official) for representation and execution, a Floor
Broker may now represent and execute a cabinet order in the trading
crowd, thereby saving the additional time and steps involved in first
placing a cabinet order with an Order Book Official who would then in
turn represent and execute the order. Thus, permitting Floor Brokers to
handle cabinet orders and trades in accordance with the procedures
described in Rule 6.54 will provide members with additional flexibility
and assist in the fair, orderly and efficient handling of cabinet
transactions on the Exchange.
    The revised cabinet trading procedures set forth in the proposed
rule change will be substantially similar to the procedures that
currently exist. Under the revised procedures, limit orders labeled at
a price of $1 per option contract may be still be placed with the Order
Book Official or, as this rule change proposes, with a Floor Broker or
a PAR Official. As is the case under the current procedures, cabinet
orders may be placed for the accounts of customers, firms, and Market-
Makers. To the extent such orders are placed with an Order Book
Official, priority will continue to be based on the sequence in which
such orders are placed with the Order Book Official. Also as under the
current procedures, bids and offers for opening transactions at a price
of $1 per option contract may be placed with the Order Book Official
only to the extent that the cabinet contains unexecuted contra closing
orders with which those opening orders immediately may be matched.
Under the proposed revisions, bids and offers (whether opening or
closing a position) at a price of $1 per option contract may also be
provided in response to a request for quotes by an Order Book Official
or a Floor Broker, but must yield priority to all orders in the Order
Book Official's cabinet book. All cabinet transactions will continue to
be reported to the Exchange following the close of each business day
and the procedures for maintaining quotation, order and transaction
information for cabinet transactions will remain unchanged.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Accommodation liquidations as described in CBOE Rule 6.54
are exempt from the requirements of CBOE Rule 6.24, Required Order
Information, pertaining to the Consolidated Options Audit Trail.
However, the Exchange maintains quotation, order and transaction
information for accommodation liquidations in the same format as the
COATS data is maintained, and will make such information available
to the Commission upon request. See Interpretation and Policy .04 to
CBOE Rule 6.24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The responsibilities of the Order Book Official under the revised
cabinet trading procedures will be substantially similar to his current
responsibilities. The Order Book Official will continue to be
responsible for $1 orders that are placed with him. Further, all bids
and offers that are submitted to the Order Book Official must continue
to be submitted in writing and displayed as such in accordance with
CBOE Rule 7.7. The Order Book Official will continue to effect cabinet
transactions during the day by matching such orders placed with him or,
under the revised procedures, by executing orders placed with him with
a Floor Broker representing a contra order. The Order Book Official
will also continue to

supply reports of cabinet transactions he executes back to member
firms. In addition, the Order Book Official will continue to report
cabinet transactions to the Exchange after the close of each business
day.
    Finally, the rule change makes various non-substantive changes to
reorganize and update the existing text in CBOE Rule 6.54 and update
references in the heading of Chapter VII of the CBOE rulebook and CBOE
Rule 7.4.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act \9\ in general and furthers the objectives
of section 6(b)(5) of the Act \10\ in particular in that it is designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 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

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \12\
thereunder because it (i) does not significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become operative
for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time
as the Commission may designate, provided that the self-regulatory
organization has given the Commission written notice of its intent to
file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the
filing date of the proposed rule change.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange
provided the Commission with written notice of its attempt to file
the proposed rule change at least five days prior to the filing
date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay of Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) so that the proposed rule
change may become effective immediately. The Commission believes that
waiving the pre-filing requirement and the operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
The Commission notes that the proposal does not substantially change
the existing cabinet trading procedures, but does provide market
participants on the Exchange with additional flexibility for handling
cabinet trades, which should promote the fair, orderly and efficient
handling of these transactions. Therefore, the Commission has
determined to waive the 30-day operative delay and allow the proposed
rule change to become operative immediately.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate the 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 No. SR-CBOE-2006-33 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2006-33. 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 Commissions Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. 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-CBOE-2006-33 and should be submitted on or before June
12, 2006.

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

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-7718 Filed 5-19-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 45 (Monday, March 9, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12335-12336]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0601; Airspace Docket No. 14-ANE-7]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Manchester, NH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E Airspace at Manchester, NH, as a
new approach procedure has been developed, requiring airspace redesign
at Manchester Airport. This enhances the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This action
also updates the geographic coordinates of the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 30, 2015. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points can be viewed online at the FAA Air Traffic Plans and
Publications Web site at http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/JO_7400.9Y.pdf. An additional link on this site entitled Airspace
Amendments is updated routinely with the most current airspace
designations and reporting points. It may also be viewed online at
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. The Order is also
available for inspection 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.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15. For further
information, you can contact the Airspace Policy and Regulations Group,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington DC, 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On October 16, 2014, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Class E airspace at
Manchester Airport, Manchester, NH, (79 FR 62079). Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. One anonymous, positive
comment was received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6003 of
FAA Order 7400.9Y dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15,
2014, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15,
2014. FAA Order 7400.9Y is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this final rule. FAA Order 7400.9Y lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 amends Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class C
surface area, at Manchester Airport, Manchester, NH. Airspace
reconfiguration extending from the 5-mile radius of the airport to 8.3-
miles northwest of the airport is necessary due to the development of
the RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 17 approach, and for continued safety and
management of IFR operations at the airport. Also, the geographic
coordinates of Manchester Airport are adjusted to coincide with the
FAAs aeronautical database. An editorial change is made to correct the
title of paragraph 6003 of FAA Order 7400.9Y, to read ``Class E
Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class C Surface area''.
    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, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); 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
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 amends controlled airspace at Manchester Airport, Manchester, NH.

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 Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 6, 2014, effective September 15, 2014, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6003 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a
Class C Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANE NH E3 Manchester, NH [Amended]

Manchester Airport, NH
    (Lat. 42[deg]55'58'' N., long. 71[deg]26'09'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3.3-miles
each side of the 337[deg] bearing of Manchester Airport extending
from the 5-mile radius to 8.5-miles northwest of the airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on February 25, 2015.
Gerald E. Lynch,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2015-05112 Filed 3-6-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P