[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 179 (Monday, September 16, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56822-56829]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22485]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 61

[Docket No.: FAA-2013-0780; Amdt. No. 61-131]
RIN 2120-AK23

Certified Flight Instructor Flight Reviews; Recent Pilot in
Command Experience; Airmen Online Services

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This rule permits an airman who passes a practical test for
issuance of a flight instructor certificate, a practical test for the
addition of a rating to a flight instructor certificate, a practical
test for renewal of a flight instructor certificate, or a practical
test for the reinstatement of a flight instructor certificate to meet
the 24-calendar month flight review requirements. This rule also
clarifies that the generally applicable recent flight experience
requirements do not apply to a pilot in command who is employed by a
commuter or on-demand operator if the pilot in command is in compliance
with the specific pilot in command qualifications and recent experience
requirements for that commuter or on-demand operator. Finally, this
rule permits replacement airman and medical certificates to be
requested online, or by any other method acceptable to the
Administrator. These changes relieve regulatory burdens and clarify
existing regulations.

DATES: Effective Date: November 15, 2013.
    Submit comments on or before October 16, 2013. If the FAA receives
an adverse comment or notice of intent to file an adverse comment, the
FAA will advise the public by publishing a document in the Federal
Register before the effective date of this direct final rule. This
document may withdraw the direct final rule in whole or in part.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by docket number FAA-2013-
0780 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Allan G. Kash, Airmen Certification and Training
Branch, Flight Standards Service, AFS-810, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For legal questions concerning this action, contact Anne Moore,
Office of the Chief Counsel--International Law, Legislation, and
Regulations Division, AGC-200, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
3123; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on 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 III, Section 447--Safety Regulation.
Under that section, the FAA is charged with promoting safe flight of
civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations necessary for
safety and prescribing regulations for the issuance of airman
certificates. This final rule is within the scope of that authority.

The Direct Final Rule Procedure

    The FAA is adopting this rule without prior notice and prior public
comment as a direct final rule because it alleviates unnecessary
burdens by expanding the exceptions to a flight review, removes
redundant recency requirements for pilots flying for certificated
operators under part 135, and provides a regulatory basis for the
Airmen Certification Branch to provide Airmen Online Services. The
Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation
(DOT) (44 FR 1134, February 26, 1979) provide that, to the maximum
extent possible, operating administrations for the DOT should provide
an opportunity for public comment on regulations issued without prior
notice. Accordingly, the FAA invites interested persons to participate
in this rulemaking by filing comments, data, or views. The agency also
invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or
federalism impacts that might result from adopting this final rule.
    This direct final rule will take effect on November 15, 2013 unless
the FAA receives an adverse comment or a notice of intent to file an
adverse comment within the comment period. An adverse comment explains
why a rule would be inappropriate, or would be ineffective or
unacceptable without a change. It may challenge the rule's underlying
premise or approach. Under the direct final rule process, the FAA does
not consider the following types of comments to be adverse:
     A comment recommending another rule change, in addition to
the change in the direct final rule at issue. The FAA considers the
comment adverse, however, if the commenter states why the direct final
rule would be ineffective without the change.
     A frivolous or insubstantial comment.
    If the FAA receives an adverse comment or notice of intent to file
an adverse comment, the FAA will advise the public by publishing a
document in the Federal Register before the effective date of the final
rule. This document may withdraw the direct final rule in whole or in
part. If the FAA withdraws a direct final rule because of an adverse
comment, the FAA may incorporate the commenter's recommendation into
another direct final rule or may publish a notice of proposed
rulemaking.
    If the FAA does not receive an adverse comment or notice of intent
to file an adverse comment, the FAA will publish a confirmation
document in the Federal Register, generally within 15 days after the
comment period closes.

The confirmation document confirms to the public the effective date of
the rule.
    See the ``Additional Information'' section for information on how
to comment on this direct final rule and how the FAA will handle
comments received. The ``Additional Information'' section also contains
related information about the docket, privacy, and the handling of
proprietary or confidential business information. In addition, there is
information on obtaining copies of related rulemaking documents.

I. Discussion of the Direct Final Rule

Flight Review

    To act as pilot in command of an aircraft, Sec.  61.56(c) of Title
14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) requires a pilot to have
satisfactorily completed a flight review in an aircraft for which that
pilot is rated within 24 calendar months before the month in which the
pilot acts as pilot in command. The flight review must consist of a
minimum of 1 hour flight training and 1 hour ground training.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ There are two exceptions to the minimum time requirement for
a flight review. They are found in Sec.  61.56(b) and (f). Paragraph
(b) pertains to a reduction of time required for glider pilots and
paragraph (f) pertains to 1 hour ground training credited toward a
flight review for successful renewal of a flight instructor
certificate under Sec.  61.197.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the flight review is to provide for a regular
assessment of pilot skills and aeronautical knowledge. When the
requirement was first introduced, the FAA stated that the flight review
would assure that every pilot would have a qualified individual comment
on his or her competency at least once every two years, as discussed in
38 FR 3156 (February 1, 1973). The flight review also offers pilots the
opportunity to design a personal currency and proficiency program in
consultation with an authorized flight instructor. A flight review may
have certain standard features, e.g., review of specific regulations
and procedures; however, both the flight review and any follow-up plan
for training and proficiency may be tailored to each pilot's skill,
experience, aircraft, and personal flying goals.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Federal Aviation Administration, Conducting an Effective
Flight Review http://www.faa.gov/pilots/training/media/flight_review.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 61.56 sets forth certain exceptions to the requirement for
a pilot to accomplish a flight review.\3\ Among these exceptions, a
person who has, within the prescribed 24-month period, ``passed a pilot
proficiency check conducted by an FAA examiner, an approved pilot check
airman, or a U.S. Armed Force, for a pilot certificate, rating, or
operating privilege,'' need not accomplish the required flight review
required by Sec.  61.56(d). This exception is appropriate because a
practical test for a certificate or rating is administered by an FAA
examiner in accordance with the practical test standards. In addition,
pilots employed by a part 119 certificate holder conducting operations
under part 121 and part 135 receive recurring training and proficiency
checks, conducted by an FAA examiner or approved pilot check airman
provided by their employer, which exceed the requirements of a flight
review. As noted in the regulation above, the FAA accepts U.S. Armed
Forces proficiency checks. The content of the listed practical tests
and proficiency checks typically exceeds the requirements of a flight
review and satisfies the stated objective of the flight review, namely,
to ensure that a pilot has had a qualified individual comment on his or
her competency at least once every 24 calendar months. Thus, these
pilots need not accomplish the flight review of Sec.  61.56(a) as they
meet the requirements of Sec.  61.56(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Paragraphs (d), (e), and (g) of Sec.  61.56 are the three
exceptions to this regulatory requirement to complete a flight
review. The exceptions in paragraphs (e) and (g) are not subjects of
this rulemaking. Under paragraph (e), a person who has, within the
previous 24 calendar months, satisfactorily accomplished one or more
phases of an FAA-sponsored pilot proficiency award program need not
accomplish the flight review (14 CFR 61.56(e). Paragraph (g) is an
exception regarding a student pilot and remains as it was previously
written.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a recent legal interpretation, the FAA concluded that a flight
instructor practical test is not included in the listed exceptions in
Sec.  61.56(d) because it is not a ``pilot proficiency check,'' Levy
Interpretation, February 7, 2008.\4\ The FAA explained that, although a
flight instructor practical test does not automatically relieve a pilot
of the requirement to complete a flight review, a person taking a
flight instructor practical test may request that the test be taken in
conjunction with a flight review at the examiner's discretion. The FAA
has received several requests to reconsider the Levy Interpretation and
one request for rulemaking.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Legal interpretations can be found on the FAA Legal
Interpretation & Opinion Web site: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/Interpretations/.
    \5\ Petition from Robert Hadow, dated April 18, 2011. Docket No.
FAA-2011-0437, http://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA finds that good cause exists to amend Sec.  61.56(d) to
include successful completion of flight instructor practical tests
among the exceptions to the flight review requirement. Applicants for
an FAA flight instructor certificate are required to have the
comprehensive knowledge and skills necessary to provide instruction to
airmen seeking pilot certificates and ratings. Part 61 specifies the
areas of operation in which knowledge and skill must be demonstrated by
the applicant before the issuance of an FAA flight instructor
certificate with the associated category and class ratings. All
practical tests administered must meet the knowledge and skill standard
prescribed by the corresponding Flight Instructor Practical Test
Standards Book published by the FAA.
    Although a flight instructor practical test is chiefly focused on
the pilot's instructional skills, a pilot must demonstrate satisfactory
performance of the procedures and maneuvers selected by the examiner--
at least to the commercial pilot skill level--while giving effective
instruction.\6\ Therefore, the flight instructor practical test
standards require the applicant to demonstrate not only the knowledge
but also the skill required of pilots completing the practical tests
that the FAA instructor is authorized to teach. As with the other
exceptions listed in Sec.  61.56, the requirements for passing an FAA
flight instructor practical test exceed those for a pilot accomplishing
a flight review and meet the goal of ensuring that a pilot's competency
is observed by a qualified individual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For example, Flight Instructor Practical Test Standards Book
for Airplane, June 2012 (Effective December 1, 2012), FAA-S-8081-6D
U.S. Department of Transportation (with changes 1 & 2), Satisfactory
Performance No. 6 page 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An FAA flight instructor practical test places the applicant in the
position of having the examiner evaluate the applicant as the applicant
demonstrates the procedures and maneuvers performed in the practical
test to commercial pilot practical test standards. The flight
instructor applicant also performs and demonstrates selected phases of
flight during the flight portion of the practical test. If the pilot
taking a flight instructor practical test does not demonstrate the safe
exercise of the privileges of their pilot certificate while
instructing, the test would not meet commercial pilot practical test
standards and the applicant would not pass the flight instructor
practical test.
    As previously stated, the flight instructor practical test
standards require an airman to demonstrate and simultaneously explain
the tasks required for the issuance of a pilot certificate while
meeting commercial

practical test standards. Industry advocacy groups have indicated they
believe that the flight instructor certification covers much more than
the regulatory requirements of a flight review. These groups have
indicated support for amendment of the regulations to allow for a
flight instructor practical test to be included as an exception to
completing a flight review. The FAA agrees with this view. This rule
modifies Sec.  61.56(d) to allow an airman who passes a practical test
for issuance of a flight instructor certificate, a practical test for
the addition of a rating to a flight instructor certificate, a
practical test for renewal of a flight instructor certificate, or a
practical test for the reinstatement of a flight instructor certificate
to meet the flight review requirements of 14 CFR part 61.

Recent Flight Experience

    Section 61.57 sets forth the recent flight experience requirements
to act as pilot in command of an aircraft. Section 61.57(e)(2) states
that this section does not apply ``to a pilot in command who is
employed by an air carrier certificated under part 121 or 135 and is
engaged in a flight operation under part 91, 121, or 135 for that air
carrier if the pilot is in compliance with'' the pilot-in-command
requirements in Sec.  121.435 or Sec.  121.436, as applicable, and
Sec.  121.439 or Sec. Sec.  135.243 and 135.247, as appropriate. The
FAA has received several requests for clarification of whether, under
the specific language of Sec.  61.57(e)(2), the exception applies only
to a pilot in command employed by the holder of a part 119 air carrier
certificate or whether it also extends to a pilot in command employed
by the holder of a part 119 operating certificate.
    When the FAA first proposed this exception to the recent flight
experience requirements in Sec.  61.57, it stated that the intention
was to provide relief from ``essentially redundant recency
requirements'' for part 121 and part 135 operators and their pilots in
command (59 FR 56385, November 14, 1994). In that final rule, then-
Sec.  61.57(f) stated that the recent flight experience requirements in
part 61 did not apply ``to a pilot in command, employed by a 14 CFR
part 121 or part 135 operator, engaged in flight operations under 14
CFR part 91, 121, or 135 for that operator.'' The FAA refined the
language in a 1997 final rule and, in doing so, introduced the term
``air carrier'' in place of the term ``operator'' (62 FR 16220, April
7, 1997).
    The FAA did not intend to limit the exception to pilots employed by
air carriers operating in parts 121 and 135. The FAA intended to
include any pilot in command who is employed by a part 119 certificate
holder authorized to conduct operations under part 121 or part 135 when
the pilot is engaged in operations under parts 91, 121, or 135 for that
certificate holder if the pilot in command is in compliance with
Sec. Sec.  121.435 or 121.436, as applicable, and Sec.  121.439 or
Sec. Sec.  135.243 and 135.247, as appropriate.
    Consequently, the FAA finds that good cause exists to amend the
language in Sec.  61.57(e) to make clear that the recent flight
experience requirements of that section do not apply to a pilot in
command who is employed by the holder of an operating certificate that
is conducting operations under part 121 or part 135 if the pilot in
command is also in compliance with Sec.  121.435 or Sec.  121.436, as
applicable, and Sec.  121.439, or Sec. Sec.  135.243 and 135.247, as
appropriate. In making this change, the FAA is acting consistently with
the original intent of the regulation--specifically, providing relief
from redundant recency requirements.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The FAA has modified the language in Sec.  61.57(e)(1)
pertaining to pilots in command employed by part 119 certificate
holders conducting operations under part 125. The revision of
paragraph (e)(1) results in no substantive change to the
requirements for part 119 certificate holders conducting operations
under part 125.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Airmen Online Services

    In the case of a lost or destroyed airman or medical certificate,
Sec.  61.29(a) and (b) permit a pilot to request the replacement of a
lost or destroyed airman certificate issued under part 61. Replacement
airman certificates may be requested by letter to the Department of
Transportation, FAA, Airmen Certification Branch, P.O. Box 25082,
Oklahoma City, OK 73124. Replacement medical certificates may be
requested by letter to the Department of Transportation, FAA, Aerospace
Medical Certification Division, P.O. Box 26200, Oklahoma City, OK
73125.
    Although current regulations recognize requests for replacement
certificates only by letter, the FAA has established Airmen Online
Services through which a pilot can request a replacement airman
certificate or obtain a document that provides temporary authority to
exercise the privileges of an airman certificate by facsimile or
through Internet download at the FAA Web site: http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/airmen_certification/certificate_replacement/.
The use of Airmen Online Services is not addressed or recognized in
Sec.  61.29. Therefore, the FAA is amending the language in Sec.  61.29
to reflect the use of Airmen Online Services or any method acceptable
to the FAA for the purpose of obtaining a replacement certificate or
60-day authority to exercise the privileges of a lost or stolen
certificate.
    The FAA is also revising Sec.  61.3 to clarify that temporary
documents issued under Sec.  61.29(e) are acceptable for meeting the
Sec.  61.3 requirement that a pilot have his or her pilot certificate
and medical certificate in the person's physical possession when
serving as a required flightcrew member. The FAA notes that Sec.
61.29(e) already contains language indicating that temporary documents
may be carried ``as an airman certificate [or] medical certificate''
for up to 60 days. As such, the language being added to Sec.  61.3 is
not intended as a change to existing regulations but rather is intended
solely to provide ease of reference for persons seeking such
information in Sec.  61.3. The FAA notes that online services are
currently unavailable for replacement medical certificates and
knowledge test reports; however, the FAA has modified the language of
those provisions in anticipation of other methods becoming available in
the future.

II. Regulatory Analyses and Executive Order Determinations

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Public Law 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that
create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. In developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies
to consider international standards and, where appropriate, that they
be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this direct
final rule.

    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a final rule does not
warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement to that
effect and the basis for it be included in the preamble if a full
regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared. Such a
determination has been made for this direct final rule. The reasoning
for this determination follows.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    This direct final rule relieves regulatory burdens for certified
flight instructor applicants and pilots in command. It also makes clear
that applications for replacement airman and medical certificates may
be obtained using methods other than individual letters mailed to the
Airmen Certification Branch or Aerospace Medical Certification
Division, respectively.
    Since the direct final rule will impose no new costs, and updates
four sections of part 61, the expected outcome will be a minimal impact
with positive net benefits. A regulatory evaluation was not prepared.
    The FAA, therefore, has determined that this direct final rule is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Therefore, this action has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this direct final rule is
not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and
Procedures.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) establishes ``as a
principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor,
consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes,
to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the
businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required to solicit
and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale
for their actions to assure that such proposals are given serious
consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
    This rule relieves regulatory restrictions for certified flight
instructor applicants and pilots in command. It also makes clear that
applications for replacement airmen and medical certificates may be
obtained using methods other than individual letters mailed to the
Airmen Certification Branch or Aerospace Medical Certification
Division, respectively. Small businesses and small entities are not
impacted by this action.
    This direct final rule imposes no new costs and updates and
clarifies four sections of part 61; the expected outcome will have only
a minimal impact on any small entity affected by this rulemaking
action.
    Therefore, as the FAA Administrator, I certify that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has
assessed the potential effect of this direct final rule and determined
that it will have only a domestic impact and therefore no effect on
international trade.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $143.1 million in lieu of $100
million. This direct final rule does not contain such a mandate;
therefore, the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. According to the 1995
amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an
agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor
may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays
a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    This action contains the following revision to the existing
information collection requirements previously approved under OMB
Control Number 2120-0021, Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors,
and Ground Instructors. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA has submitted this information collection
revision to the Office of Management and Budget for its review.
    This direct final rule reduces the recordkeeping burden for an
airman who passes a practical test for issuance of a flight instructor
certificate, a practical test for the addition of a rating to a flight
instructor certificate, a practical test for renewal of a flight
instructor certificate, or a practical test for the reinstatement of a
flight instructor certificate as this rule will now allow passage of
such a test to meet the 24-calendar month flight review requirements
for the airman. This rule also relieves regulatory burdens for airmen
by making clear that the recent flight experience requirements do not
apply to a pilot in command who is employed by an operator certificated
under 14 CFR part 135 if the pilot in command is also in compliance
with the pilot in command qualifications and recent experience
requirements of part 135.
    Flight reviews: The current information collection estimates that,
of the total active pilot population of 700,000, some 190,000 pilots
complete a flight review per year with an average

time of 0.1 hours each (6 minutes) necessary for the flight instructor
to record the flight review. This rule reduces that recordkeeping
burden by permitting an airman who passes a practical test for issuance
of a flight instructor certificate, a practical test for the addition
of a rating to a flight instructor certificate, a practical test for
renewal of a flight instructor certificate, or a practical test for the
reinstatement of a flight instructor certificate to meet the flight
review requirements.
    During calendar year 2012, the FAA issued 4,127 original certified
flight instructor certificates and 4,034 \8\ certified flight
instructor certificates for the addition of a rating. These persons
will no longer be required to complete the flight review. Thus, the FAA
estimates that 8,161 airmen annually will no longer be required to
complete flight reviews because they passed a practical test for
issuance of a flight instructor certificate, a practical test for the
addition of a rating to a flight instructor certificate, a practical
test for renewal of a flight instructor certificate, or a practical
test for the reinstatement of a flight instructor certificate.
Therefore, the FAA estimates that this rule will reduce the burden by
816.1 hours annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ This number reflects practical tests for an additional
rating to a flight instructor certificate, for renewal of a flight
instructor certificate, and for reinstatement of a flight instructor
certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recent flight experience: The current information collection
estimates that 290,000 pilots are subject to these recordkeeping
requirements at an average of 0.1 hours (6 minutes) each. While this
rule clarifies that the recent flight experience requirements do not
apply to a pilot in command who is employed by the holder of a part 119
operating certificate that authorizes operations under 14 CFR part 135
if the pilot in command is also in compliance with the pilot in command
qualifications and recent experience requirements of part 135, the FAA
does not believe that the burden related to this information collection
will change in a manner that is quantifiable. Based on the information
received from the industry, the FAA believes that part 119 certificate
holders have been interpreting the regulations to permit pilots who
complete the recency requirements under part 135 to use this provision
regardless of whether they are employed by a certificate holder that
holds an air carrier certificate or an operating certificate. While a
small number of persons may benefit from this regulatory change, the
FAA believes that those numbers are small as most part 119 certificate
holders have already been operating in a manner similar to the
regulations being revised and clarified by this rule. Therefore, the
FAA is not revising the burden associated with the recent flight
experience element of this information collection.
    Based on the change made by this direct final rule to the
information collection related to certified flight instructor flight
reviews, the recordkeeping requirements associated with 14 CFR 61.56
are reduced from 19,000 annual burden hours to 18,184 annual burden
hours, reflecting the reduction in number of annual responses for this
aspect of the information collection from 190,000 responses to 181,839
responses.
Information Collection 2120-0021: Certification: Pilots, Flight
Instructors, and Ground Instructors
    Type of information collection: Revision of a currently approved
collection.
    Form(s): FAA form 8710-1.
    Frequency: The information is collected on occasion.
    Abstract: 14 CFR Part 61 prescribes certification standards for
pilots, flight instructors, and ground instructors. The information
collected is used to determine compliance with applicant eligibility,
via FAA form 8710-1.
    The following table provides information regarding annual responses
and annual burden hours.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average time
                      Provision CFR Sec.                             Number of     per response    Total annual
                                                                     responses        (hours)      burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Reporting
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
61.13...........................................................         100,000            0.1           10,000
61.197..........................................................          40,000            0.1            4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Recordkeeping
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
61.39...........................................................         100,000            0.05           5,000
61.49...........................................................          13,600            0.05             680
61.51...........................................................         190,000            1.0          190,000
61.56(a)........................................................         181,839            0.1           18,184
61.57...........................................................         290,000            0.1           29,000
61.87...........................................................          80,000            0.05           4,000
61.93...........................................................          80,000            0.1            8,000
61.125..........................................................           9,500            0.2            1,900
61.185..........................................................           5,800            0.1              580
61.189..........................................................          30,000            1.0           30,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................       1,120,739  ..............         301,344
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency is soliciting comments to--
     Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
     Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden;
     Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
     Minimize the burden of collecting information on those who
are to respond, including by using appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology.
    Individuals and organizations may send comments on the information

collection requirement to the address listed in the ADDRESSES section
at the beginning of this preamble by October 16, 2013. Comments also
should be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for FAA,
New Executive Office Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and
has identified no differences with these regulations.

Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation

    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) promotes international
regulatory cooperation to meet shared challenges involving health,
safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues and to reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed this action under the policies and
agency responsibilities of Executive Order 13609, and has determined
that this action would have no effect on international regulatory
cooperation.

Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 312f and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.

Administrative Procedure Act

    An agency may find good cause to exempt a rule from certain
provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553),
including notice of proposed rulemaking and the opportunity for public
comment, if it is determined to be unnecessary, impracticable, or
contrary to the public interest. This rule relieves regulatory
restrictions by permitting an airman who passes a practical test for
issuance of a flight instructor certificate, a practical test for the
addition of a rating to a flight instructor certificate, a practical
test for renewal of a flight instructor certificate, or a practical
test for the reinstatement of a flight instructor certificate to meet
the 24-calendar month flight review requirements of part 61. This rule
also clarifies that the recent flight experience requirements of Sec.
61.57 do not apply to a pilot in command who is employed by an operator
certificated under 14 CFR part 135 if the pilot in command is in
compliance with the pilot in command qualifications and recent
experience requirements of part 135. Finally, this rule permits
replacement airmen and medical certificates to be requested online, or
by any other method acceptable to the Administrator. Therefore, the FAA
finds good cause to publish this action as a direct final rule. Please
see the ``Direct Final Rule Procedure'' section for more information.

Executive Order 13132

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has
determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect
on the States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have
Federalism implications.

Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
is not a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order, and
it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.

III. Additional Information

A. Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The agency
also invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy,
or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the rulemaking
action in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific
portion of the rulemaking action, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket
does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one
copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically,
commenters should submit only one time.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this rulemaking. Before confirming this direct
final rule, the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The agency may change this rulemaking
action in light of the comments it receives.
    Proprietary or Confidential Business Information: Do not file
proprietary or confidential business information in the docket. Such
information must be sent or delivered directly to the person identified
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document, and
marked as proprietary or confidential. If submitting information on a
disk or CD-ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM, and identify
electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that
is proprietary or confidential.
    Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is aware of proprietary
information filed with a comment, the agency does not place it in the
docket. It is held in a separate file to which the public does not have
access, and the FAA places a note in the docket that it has received
it. If the FAA receives a request to examine or copy this information,
it treats it as any other request under the Freedom of Information Act
(5 U.S.C. 552). The FAA processes such a request under Department of
Transportation procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.

B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the
Internet by--
     Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
     Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
     Accessing the Government Printing Office's Federal Digital
System Web page at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Commenters

must identify the docket or amendment number of this rulemaking.
    All documents the FAA considered in developing this rulemaking
action, including economic analyses and technical reports, may be
accessed from the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
referenced above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 61

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Teachers.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 61--CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND
INSTRUCTORS

0
1. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707,
44709-44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.

0
2. Section 61.3 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text, (a)(1), (b), and (i)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.3  Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.

    (a) Required pilot certificate for operating a civil aircraft of
the United States. No person may serve as a required pilot flight
crewmember of a civil aircraft of the United States, unless that
person:
    (1) Has in the person's physical possession or readily accessible
in the aircraft when exercising the privileges of that pilot
certificate or authorization--
    (i) A pilot certificate issued under this part and in accordance
with Sec.  61.19;
    (ii) A special purpose pilot authorization issued under Sec.
61.77;
    (iii) A temporary certificate issued under Sec.  61.17;
    (iv) A document conveying temporary authority to exercise
certificate privileges issued by the Airmen Certification Branch under
Sec.  61.29(e); or
    (v) When operating an aircraft within a foreign country, a pilot
license issued by that country may be used.
* * * * *
    (b) Required pilot certificate for operating a foreign-registered
aircraft within the United States. No person may serve as a required
pilot flight crewmember of a civil aircraft of foreign registry within
the United States, unless--
    (1) That person's pilot certificate or document issued under Sec.
61.29(e) is in that person's physical possession or readily accessible
in the aircraft when exercising the privileges of that pilot
certificate; and
    (2) Has been issued in accordance with this part, or has been
issued or validated by the country in which the aircraft is registered.
* * * * *
    (i) Ground instructor certificate. (1) Each person who holds a
ground instructor certificate issued under this part must have that
certificate or a temporary document issued under Sec.  61.29(e) in that
person's physical possession or immediately accessible when exercising
the privileges of that certificate.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 61.29 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and
(e) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.29  Replacement of a lost or destroyed airman or medical
certificate or knowledge test report.

    (a) A request for the replacement of a lost or destroyed airman
certificate issued under this part must be made:
    (1) By letter to the Department of Transportation, FAA, Airmen
Certification Branch, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125, and must
be accompanied by a check or money order for the appropriate fee
payable to the FAA; or
    (2) In any other manner and form approved by the Administrator
including a request online to Airmen Services at http://www.faa.gov,
and must be accompanied by acceptable form of payment for the
appropriate fee.
    (b) A request for the replacement of a lost or destroyed medical
certificate must be made:
    (1) By letter to the Department of Transportation, FAA, Aerospace
Medical Certification Division, P.O. Box 26200, Oklahoma City, OK
73125, and must be accompanied by a check or money order for the
appropriate fee payable to the FAA; or
    (2) In any other manner and form approved by the Administrator and
must be accompanied by acceptable form of payment for the appropriate
fee.
    (c) A request for the replacement of a lost or destroyed knowledge
test report must be made:
    (1) By letter to the Department of Transportation, FAA, Airmen
Certification Branch, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125, and must
be accompanied by a check or money order for the appropriate fee
payable to the FAA; or
    (2) In any other manner and form approved by the Administrator and
must be accompanied by acceptable form of payment for the appropriate
fee.
* * * * *
    (e) A person who has lost an airman certificate, medical
certificate, or knowledge test report may obtain, in a form or manner
approved by the Administrator, a document conveying temporary authority
to exercise certificate privileges from the FAA Aeromedical
Certification Branch or the Airman Certification Branch, as
appropriate, and the:
    (1) Document may be carried as an airman certificate, medical
certificate, or knowledge test report, as appropriate, for up to 60
days pending the person's receipt of a duplicate under paragraph (a),
(b), or (c) of this section, unless the person has been notified that
the certificate has been suspended or revoked.
    (2) Request for such a document must include the date on which a
duplicate certificate or knowledge test report was previously
requested.

0
4. Section 61.56 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  61.56  Flight review.

* * * * *
    (d) A person who has, within the period specified in paragraph (c)
of this section, passed any of the following need not accomplish the
flight review required by this section:
    (1) A pilot proficiency check or practical test conducted by an
examiner, an approved pilot check airman, or a U.S. Armed Force, for a
pilot certificate, rating, or operating privilege.
    (2) A practical test conducted by an examiner for the issuance of a
flight instructor certificate, an additional rating on a flight
instructor certificate, renewal of a flight instructor certificate, or
reinstatement of a flight instructor certificate.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 61.57 is amended by--
0
A. Revising paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2),
0
B. Redesignating paragraph (e)(3) as paragraph (e)(4) and revising the
introductory text of newly redesignated paragraph (e)(4), and
0
C. Adding new paragraph (e)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.57  Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

* * * * *
    (e) Exceptions. (1) Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section do not
apply to a pilot in command who is employed by a part 119 certificate
holder authorized to conduct operations under part 125

when the pilot is engaged in a flight operation for that certificate
holder if the pilot in command is in compliance with Sec. Sec.  125.281
and 125.285 of this chapter.
    (2) This section does not apply to a pilot in command who is
employed by a part 119 certificate holder authorized to conduct
operations under part 121 when the pilot is engaged in a flight
operation under parts 91 and 121 for that certificate holder if the
pilot in command is in compliance with Sec. Sec.  121.435 or 121.436,
as applicable, and Sec.  121.439 of this chapter.
    (3) This section does not apply to a pilot in command who is
employed by a part 119 certificate holder authorized to conduct
operations under part 135 when the pilot is engaged in a flight
operation under parts 91 and 135 for that certificate holder if the
pilot in command is in compliance with Sec. Sec.  135.243 and 135.247
of this chapter.
    (4) Paragraph (b) of this section does not apply to a pilot in
command of a turbine-powered airplane that is type certificated for
more than one pilot crewmember, provided that pilot has complied with
the requirements of paragraph (e)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section:
* * * * *

    Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a),
and 44703, in Washington, DC, on August 27, 2013.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-22485 Filed 9-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 25, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29826-29828]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13374]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0334; FRL-9995-33-Region 7]

Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan Requirements for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submission from the State of Missouri addressing the applicable
requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2015
Ozone (O3) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
Section 110 requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP revision to
support the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each new or
revised NAAQS promulgated by the EPA. These SIPs are commonly referred
to as ``infrastructure'' SIPs. The infrastructure requirements are
designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's air
quality management program are adequate to meet the state's
responsibilities under the CAA. The EPA is also proposing to approve a
request from the state to exempt all counties in the Metropolitan
Kansas City Interstate Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) and all of
Jefferson and most of Franklin (except Boles Township) counties in the
Metropolitan St. Louis Interstate AQCR from needing an ozone
contingency plan meeting the requirements of our regulations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2019-0334 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Tracey Casburn Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number (913) 551-
7016; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA. A technical support document (TSD) is
included in this proposed rulemaking docket.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a sip revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2019-
0334, at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    The EPA is proposing to approve the infrastructure SIP submission
received from the state on April 11, 2019, in accordance with section
110(a)(1) of the CAA. Specifically, the EPA is proposing to approve the
following infrastructure elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA: (A)
through (C), (D)(i)(II)- prevent significant deterioration of air
quality (prong 3) and protection of visibility (prong 4), (D)(ii), (E)
through (H), and (J) through (M). Elements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--significant contribution to nonattainment (prong 1)
and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQs (prong 2) were not
addressed in the submission. The state has provided public notice of a
SIP revision addressing prongs 1 and 2, and the EPA expects to receive
that submission from the state later. Section 110(a)(2)(I) was also not
addressed in the submission, however, the EPA does not expect
infrastructure SIP submissions to address element (I). Section
110(a)(2)(I) requires states to meet the applicable SIP requirements of
part D of the CAA relating to designated nonattainment areas. The
specific part D submissions for designated nonattainment areas are
subject to different submission schedules than those for section 110
infrastructure elements. The EPA will act on part D attainment plan SIP
submissions through a separate rulemaking governed by the requirements
for nonattainment areas, as described in part D.

    The EPA is also proposing to approve a request from the state to
exempt all counties in the Kansas City AQCR and Jefferson and Franklin
(except Bowles Township) counties in the St. Louis AQCR from needing to
meet the requirement to have an ozone contingency plan found in at 40
CFR part 51 subpart H.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 51.152(d) (1) allows the Administrator to exempt portions of
a Priority I, IA, or II AQCR which have been designated as
attainment or unclassifiable for national primary and secondary
standards under section 107 of the Act from the requirement to have
a contingency plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A technical support document (TSD) is included as part of the
docket to this action and it includes an analysis of how the EPA
determined that the submission meets the applicable 110(a)(1) and (2)
requirements for infrastructure SIPs and has meet the criteria for an
exemption from needing an ozone contingency plan for all counties in
the Kansas City AQCR and for Jefferson and Franklin (except Bowles
Township) counties in the St. Louis AQCR.

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

    The submission has met the public notice requirements of 40 CFR
51.102. The submission also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40
CFR part 51, appendix V. The state provided a public comment period for
the submission from December 31, 2018, to February 7, 2019, and held a
public hearing on January 31, 2019. The state received comments from
the EPA during the public comment period; the EPA was the only
commenter. The state addressed the EPA's comments. As explained in more
detail in the TSD, the submission meets the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing
regulations.

IV. What action is the EPA taking?

    The EPA is proposing to approve the April 11, 2019, submission
addressing the infrastructure elements for the 2015 O3
NAAQS. Specifically, the EPA is proposing to approve the following
infrastructure elements of section 110(a)(2): (A) through (C),
(D)(i)(II)--prong 3 and prong 4, (D)(ii), (E) through (H), and (J)
through (M). The EPA is not acting on the elements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prong 1 and prong 2 because those elements were not
addressed in the submission. Section 110(a)(2)(I) was not addressed in
the submission and the EPA would not expect it to be.
    The EPA is also proposing to approve a request from the state to
exempt all counties in the Kansas City AQCR and Jefferson and Franklin
(except Bowles Township) counties in the St. Louis AQCR from needing to
meet the requirement to have an ozone contingency plan found in at 40
CFR part 51 subpart H.
    The EPA is processing this as a proposed action because it is
soliciting comments. Final rulemaking will occur after consideration of
any comments.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     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 (Public Law 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 the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not
involve technical standards; 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Air quality
control region, Contingency plan, Incorporation by reference,
Infrastructure, Intergovernmental relations, Exemption, Ozone.

    Dated: June 18, 2019.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
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 AA Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
the entry ``(78)'' in numerical order to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                               EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Applicable
  Name of non-regulatory SIP      geographic or         State
           provision              nonattainment    submittal date     EPA Approval date         Explanation
                                       area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
(78) Sections 110 (a)(1) and    Statewide........       4/11/2019  [Date of publication    This action proposes
 110(a)(2) Infrastructure                                           of the final rule in    to approve the
 Requirements for the 2015                                          the Federal             following CAA
 Ozone NAAQS. Ozone                                                 Register], [Federal     elements: 110(a)(1)
 Contingency Plan Exemptions.                                       Register citation of    and 110(a)(2)(A),
                                                                    the final rule].        (B), (C),
                                                                                (D)(i)(II)--prongs 3
                                                                                and 4, (D)(ii), (E),
                                                                                (F), (G), (H), (J),
                                                                                (K), (L), and (M).
                                                                                110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--
                                                                                prongs 1 and 2 were
                                                                                not included in the
                                                                                submission.
                                                                                110(a)(2)(I) is not
                                                                                applicable.
                                                                                This action proposes
                                                                                to approve ozone
                                                                                contingency plan
                                                                                exemptions for all
                                                                                counties in the
                                                                                Kansas City AQCR and
                                                                                Jefferson and
                                                                                Franklin (except
                                                                                Bowles Township)
                                                                                counties in the St.
                                                                                Louis AQCR.
                                                                                [EPA-R07-OAR-2019-033
                                                                                4; FRL-9995-33-
                                                                                Region 7].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2019-13374 Filed 6-24-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life and improved my personal quality of life. I wish to provide you with my personal success story of how my family and I can breathe happy thanks to electronic cigarettes, as well as well as science and evidence based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 10, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21748-21749]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09383]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0645 FRL-9962-10-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Commissioner's Orders for SABIC
Innovative Plastics

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve as a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP) a
submittal from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management
(IDEM) to EPA, dated December 5, 2016. The submittal consists of an
order issued by the Commissioner of IDEM that establishes permanent and
enforceable sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission limits for SABIC
Innovative Plastics (SABIC). IDEM submitted this order so the area near
SABIC can be designated ``attainment'' of the 2010 primary
SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards, a matter that
will be addressed in a separate future rulemaking. EPA's approval of
this order would make these SO2 emission limits and
applicable reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance demonstration
requirements part of the federally enforceable Indiana SIP.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 9, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0645 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Ko, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For
additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in
the Rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: April 20, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2017-09383 Filed 5-9-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 195)]
[Notices]
[Page 58579]
[DOCID:fr07oc08-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-475-000]

Pecan Pipeline (North Dakota), Inc.; Notice of Petition for
Declaratory Order

October 1, 2008.
    Take notice that on September 18, 2008, Pecan Pipeline (North
Dakota), Inc., filed a petition for a declaratory order under Rule
207(a)(2) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.207(a)(2) (2008), requesting that the Commission disclaim
jurisdiction over proposed construction and operation of certain
natural gas facilities because such facilities perform a gathering
function exempt from the Commission's jurisdiction under section 1(b)
of the Natural Gas Act.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated
below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time October 30, 2008.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-23620 Filed 10-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 52 (Friday, March 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 14942]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05805]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4513-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Virgin Islands; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the territory of the U.S. Virgin Islands (FEMA-4513-DR), dated
April 2, 2020, and related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on February 27, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Thomas J.
Fargione, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of David I. Maurstad as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-05805 Filed 3-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


MEMORANDUM

TO:		Amy Hambrick, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/FIG

FROM:	Bradley Nelson, EC/R, Inc.

DATE:	December 1, 2015

SUBJECT:	Summary of the November 30, 2015, Meeting with ConocoPhillips and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I.	INTRODUCTION

ConocoPhillips requested this meeting with EPA to present an overview of their comments on the September 18, 2015 proposed Oil and Natural Gas Sector NSPS (80 FR 56593).

II.	ATTENDEES

The following is a list of participants in the meeting.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Bruce Moore
David Cozzie
Amy Hambrick
Lisa Thompson
Jodi Howard
Ravi Srivastava
Alex McPherson
Charlene Spells
Gerri Garwood

ConocoPhillips
Laura Perry
Jenny Yang
Josh Kindred (Alaska Oil and Gas Association)

EC/R Incorporated
Bradley Nelson
David Hendricks

III.	SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION

Bruce Moore opened the meeting and explained to the attendees that since the EPA is in the post-proposal phase of the NSPS, EPA personnel would listen to their comments but cannot respond to any of the issues raised. However, the EPA welcomed the comments.

As a background, ConocoPhillips provided an overview of their operations on the Alaskan North Slope (See attached presentation) and offered the following comments.

NSPS Proposal
 Fugitive Emissions Monitoring Program
 Asked for clarification of the affected facility provisions in 60.5365a(i)(2). They noted that a well pad on the Alaskan North Slope may contain 10-40 wells, with each well housed in a small building only containing a heater. Each of the wells from a well pad are piped to a manifold or pipeline and directed to a central processing facility. No separation or processing takes place at the well pad. Noted that some facilities may have methanol storage tanks. The methanol is used to prevent freezing in the well heads, manifold and pipeline.
 Recommended that the well site definition be revised to take into account the operations in the Alaskan North Slope. Noted that there is no condensate produced from the wells and any gas generated from the well is used to fuel engines or turbines, or reinjected back into the well. Oil storage tanks are only located at the central processing facility.
 Pointed out that the OGI camera operating range is -4°F to 122°F and the temperatures on the Alaskan North Slope can be below this operating range.
 Noted that the well pads are remote and equipment leak repairs may take longer than a typical well site.

ConocoPhillips requested a meeting after the end of the comment period to discuss their submitted comments.

            ConocoPhillips Meeting Presentation Provided to the EPA


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 75 (Friday, April 18, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21986-21988]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08822]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71941; File No. SR-BATS-2014-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Related to
Fees for Use of BATS Exchange, Inc.

April 14, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on April 1, 2014, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BATS'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
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)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to BATS Rules
15.1(a) and (c). Changes to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal
are effective upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A Member is any registered broker or dealer that has been
admitted to membership in the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify its fee schedule applicable to use
of the Exchange effective April 1, 2014, in order to modify the fees
applicable to executions occurring through certain routing strategies
at the Exchange's affiliate, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'').
    BYX currently provides a base rebate of $0.0001 per share when
removing liquidity. To create a direct pass through of the applicable
economics of executions at BYX through the Destination Specific,\6\
TRIM (including TRIM2 and TRIM3),\7\ and SLIM \8\ routing strategies,
the Exchange proposes to increase the rebate to $0.0016 per share for
orders routed through such strategies and executed on BYX. The proposed
change represents a pass through of the rate BATS Trading, Inc., the
Exchange's affiliated routing broker-dealer, is provided for routing
orders that remove liquidity from BYX. The proposed change is in
response to BYX's April 2014 fee change where BYX increased its rebate
from $0.0001 per share to $0.0016 per share for orders in securities
priced at or above $1.00.\9\ Accordingly, when BATS Trading, Inc.
routes to and removes liquidity on BYX, it will now receive a standard
rebate of $0.0016 per share.\10\ The Exchange is not proposing any
other changes to its routing fees at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As defined in BATS Rule 11.9(c)(12).
    \7\ As defined in BATS Rule 11.13(a)(3)(G).
    \8\ As defined in BATS Rule 11.13(a)(3)(H).
    \9\ See the BYX Fee Schedule available at http://www.batstrading.com/resources/regulation/rule_book/BYX_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
    \10\ The Exchange notes that to the extent DE Route does or does
not achieve any volume tiered rebates on BYX, its rebate for Flag BY
will not change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\11\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\12\ in that it provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls. The Exchange notes that it operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the Exchange's
rebate for TRIM (including TRIM2 and TRIM3), SLIM and Destination
Specific Orders executed on BYX are equitably allocated, fair and
reasonable, and non-discriminatory in that they are equally applicable
to all Members and are designed to mirror the rebate applicable to the
execution if such routed orders were executed directly by the Member at
BYX.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
Because the market for order execution is extremely competitive,
Members may readily opt to disfavor the Exchange's routing services if
they believe that alternatives offer them better value. For orders
routed through the Exchange and executed at BYX through the TRIM
(including TRIM2 and TRIM3), SLIM and Destination Specific Order
strategies, the proposed fee change is designed to equal the rebate
that a Member would have received if such routed orders would have been
executed directly by a Member at BYX. As stated above, the Exchange
notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues if the
deem fee structures to be unreasonable or excessive.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\14\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BATS-2014-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BATS-2014-011. This
file number should be included on the

subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and
review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The
Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site
(http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all
subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the
proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all
written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-BATS-2014-011 and should be submitted on or before May
9, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-08822 Filed 4-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P