[Federal Register: November 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 221)]
[Notices]
[Page 64688-64694]
[DOCID:fr16no07-162]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56779; File No. S7-26-07]

Notice of Application of the National Association of Realtors for
Exemptive Relief Under Sections 15 and 36 of the Exchange Act and
Request for Comment

November 9, 2007
    The National Association of Realtors[supreg] (``NAR'') has
requested an exemption pursuant to sections 15(a)(2) and 36(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') from the broker-
dealer registration requirements of section 15(a)(1) and the reporting
and other requirements of the Exchange Act (other than sections
15(b)(4) and 15(b)(6)), and the rules and regulations thereunder, that
apply to a broker or dealer that is not registered with the Commission.
Subject to the conditions specified in NAR's application
(``Application'') and discussed below, the requested exemption would
permit a licensed real estate agent or broker who is predominantly
engaged in and has substantial experience in the commercial real estate
market and the real estate brokerage firm with which such agent or
broker is licensed to receive compensation in the form described below
for the sale of a TIC Security, as defined below.

    In order to provide an opportunity for interested persons to
comment on the Application, the Commission is publishing this notice
and request for comment pursuant to Rule 0-12 under the Exchange Act.
The Commission will carefully consider all comments submitted, and,
should it determine to issue an exemption, could eliminate or add to,
or modify, the conditions discussed below.

Background

    Section 15(a)(1) of the Exchange Act generally requires any broker
or dealer who makes use of the mails or any instrumentality of
interstate commerce to effect transactions in, or induce the purchase
or sale of, any security to register with the Commission. Section
3(a)(4)(A) of the Exchange Act generally defines a ``broker'' as ``any
person engaged in the business of effecting transactions in securities
for the account of others.'' Absent an exemption, a licensed real
estate agent or real estate broker who receives compensation for the
sale of a TIC Security would be required to be registered as a broker
with the Commission or to be a registered associated person of a
registered broker-dealer. Similarly, a real estate brokerage firm that
receives compensation for the sale of a TIC Security would be required
to register as a broker-dealer.
    Section 15(a)(2) of the Exchange Act authorizes the Commission to
conditionally or unconditionally exempt from the broker-dealer
registration requirements of section 15(a)(1) any broker or dealer or
class of brokers or dealers, by rule or order, as it deems consistent
with the public interest and the protection of investors.\1\ Similarly,
but more broadly, section 36 of the Exchange Act authorizes the
Commission to conditionally or unconditionally exempt any person,
security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons,
securities, or transactions, from any provision or provisions of the
Exchange Act or any rule or regulation thereunder, by rule, regulation,
or order, to the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, and is consistent with the protection of
investors.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 15 U.S.C. 78o(a)(2).
    \2\ See 15 U.S.C. 78mm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of the Application

    NAR requests an exemption to allow any licensed real estate agent
or broker who is predominantly engaged in and has substantial
experience \3\ in the sale of commercial real estate \4\ (``Commercial
Real Estate Professional'') and the real estate brokerage firm with
which he or she is licensed (``Real Estate Firm'') (collectively, a
``RE Participant'') to receive a real estate advisory fee (``Real
Estate Advisory Fee'') from a purchaser of an undivided tenant-in-
common interest in real property (``TIC Interest'') \5\ that is offered
and sold together with other arrangements that cause it to be deemed to
be a security under the federal securities laws (``TIC Security'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Application defines ``substantial experience'' to mean a
Commercial Real Estate Professional who (1) has received a Certified
Commercial Investment Member designation from the Commercial
Investment Real Estate Institute, a designation from the Society of
Industrial and Office REALTORS[supreg], or an Accredited Land
Consultant designation from the REALTORS[supreg] Land Institute; (2)
has education and transaction experience that is equivalent to those
required to obtain those designations; or (3) has participated in at
least five commercial real estate transactions having an aggregate
value of at least $3 million in the prior five years or at least 10
commercial real estate transactions having an aggregate value of at
least $10 million in the prior 10 years, including 3 transactions in
the prior 3 years. Alternatively, the Application provides that a
Commercial Real Estate Professional will satisfy the ``substantial
experience'' requirement based on a combination of at least two of
the following factors: education in commercial real estate; the
length of time during which the person has engaged in commercial
real estate transactions; the dollar value of commercial real estate
transactions in which the individual has participated; and the
number of commercial real estate transactions in which the
individual has participated.
    \4\ For purposes of the Application, ``commercial real estate''
includes all real estate categories other than single-family and
one- to four-unit residential dwellings, including office, retail,
raw land, multifamily (i.e., greater than four dwellings),
industrial and others. It does not include TIC Securities.
    \5\ TIC Interests are generally offered as a replacement
property to individuals seeking to complete tax-deferred exchange
transactions pursuant to Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended.
    \6\ TIC Securities are sold by a sponsor through a registered
broker-dealer acting as a placement agent (``Lead Placement
Agent''). Such Lead Placement Agent may be the sole distributor of
the TIC Securities or may enter into an agreement with one or more
other registered broker-dealers to sell the TIC Securities as
participating brokers (each, a ``Selling Broker-Dealer''). A Lead
Placement Agent also may act as a Selling Broker-Dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under NAR's exemptive request, a Real Estate Advisory Fee could be
paid by the purchaser directly or on behalf of the purchaser by the
sponsor or issuer of the TIC Security, which could, thereby, reduce the
commission or other compensation received by a registered broker-dealer
involved in the TIC Security transaction. The Real Estate Advisory Fee
generally would be paid to the Real Estate Firm with which the
Commercial Real Estate Professional is licensed. The Firm would
distribute all or a previously agreed upon percentage of the Real
Estate Advisory Fee to the Commercial Real Estate Professional that
signed a buyer's agent agreement with the client and to any other
Commercial Real Estate Professional or Real Estate Firm that was added
to the agreement with the consent of the client.
    As proposed by NAR, in order for any Commercial Real Estate
Professional or any Real Estate Firm with which such person is licensed
to receive or share in a Real Estate Advisory Fee in reliance on the
requested exemption, the Commercial Real Estate Professional, the Real
Estate Firm, the Selling Broker-Dealer and the Lead Placement Agent for
the TIC Security transaction would comply with the following
conditions, as applicable:
(1) General Conditions
    a. A Real Estate Advisory Fee shall only be paid to or shared with
a Commercial Real Estate Professional who is predominantly engaged in
sales of real estate other than TIC Securities, has substantial
experience in commercial real estate,\7\ is appropriately licensed in
compliance with the applicable state real estate laws, and is
identified in the buyer's agent agreement (as further described below)
with the client.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See note 3.
    \8\ Although not proposed as a condition to NAR's requested
exemption, NAR states in its application that it ``believes'' the
buyer's agent agreement ``should include'' a representation that the
Commercial Real Estate Professional who receives or shares a Real
Estate Advisory Fee has substantial experience in commercial real
estate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b. Each client of the RE Participant purchasing a TIC Security must
receive at closing a deed representing his or her undivided fractional
interest in the TIC Security property and the TIC Security must qualify
as a ``replacement property'' for purposes of an IRC section 1031
exchange, regardless of whether the client is purchasing the TIC
Security for that purpose.
    c. The TIC Security transaction must be effected through a
registered broker-dealer.
(2) Buyer's Agent Agreement and Introduction to Selling Broker-Dealer
    a. Prior to the Commercial Real Estate Professional discussing a
specific TIC Security property with his or her client, the client must
enter into a written buyer's agent agreement with the RE Participant,
which shall obligate the RE Participant to solely represent the client
in connection with the purchase of a TIC Security.
    b. The buyer's agent agreement must identify any other RE
Participant who is

to receive or share in the Real Estate Advisory Fee and any such other
RE Participant may only be added to the buyer's agent agreement with
the consent of the client.
    c. The buyer's agent agreement must state the aggregate maximum
amount of the Real Estate Advisory Fee to be paid by the client to all
RE Participants, including any RE Participant that is added to the
agreement, which shall be expressed as either a fixed dollar amount or
as a dollar amount that is determined in accordance with a
predetermined formula (e.g., a fixed percentage of the property's full
purchase price or a fixed percentage of the cash paid for the
property).
    d. The aggregate maximum amount of Real Estate Advisory Fee that is
actually paid by the client to all RE Participants, including any RE
Participant that is added to the buyer's agent agreement, will not
exceed the amount of the contracted Real Estate Advisory Fee even if
the client, the sponsor, or another person is willing to pay a higher
fee.
    e. The Commercial Real Estate Professional may discuss the real
estate characteristics of a TIC Security property with the client and
arrange for the client to inspect a TIC Security property and any other
non-securities property before introducing the client to the Selling
Broker-Dealer, but shall arrange such introduction upon the client
advising the Commercial Real Estate Professional that he or she is
considering the purchase of a specific TIC Security property.
(3) Restrictions on Conduct of the RE Participant
    A RE Participant that, directly or indirectly, receives a portion
of a Real Estate Advisory Fee will not:
    a. List or otherwise advertise the availability of TIC Securities
or advertise that the RE Participant represents clients in connection
with the purchase of TIC Securities;
    b. Share a Real Estate Advisory Fee with any person not permitted
to receive such Fee under the requested exemption;
    c. Handle customer funds or securities in a TIC Security
transaction;
    d. Negotiate the terms and conditions of the purchase of any TIC
Security on behalf of the client with a broker-dealer or sponsor
selling a TIC Security or have any power to bind the client in the TIC
Security transaction, but may transmit documents and information
between the parties and may attend meetings between the Lead Placement
Agent, Selling Broker-Dealer, and the sponsor and the client (solely in
order to assist the client);
    e. Represent the client as a ``purchaser representative,'' as
defined in Rule 501(h) of the Securities Act of 1933;
    f. Participate in the structuring of a TIC Security investment
offered to the client;
    g. Have the authority to close a purchase of a TIC Security on a
client's behalf; or
    h. Assist a client that purchases a TIC Security to obtain
financing, except to provide a list of potential lenders.
(4) Other Obligations of the RE Participant
    a. The RE Participant must deliver a copy of the executed buyer's
agent agreement to the Lead Placement Agent at closing.
    b. Any Commercial Real Estate Professional that is to receive,
directly or indirectly, a portion of a Real Estate Advisory Fee must
not be subject to any ``statutory disqualification,'' as that term is
defined in section 3(a)(39) of the Exchange Act (other than
subparagraph (E) of that section), and will deliver a representation in
writing to that effect to the Lead Placement Agent at closing. To the
extent the statutory disqualification representation is included in the
buyer's agent agreement, it must be updated at closing with respect to
each Commercial Real Estate Professional that may, directly or
indirectly, receive any portion of a Real Estate Advisory Fee.
(5) Obligations of the Selling Broker-Dealer and Lead Placement Agent
    a. Before the TIC Security transaction is effected, the Selling
Broker-Dealer must perform a suitability analysis of the TIC Security
transaction in accordance with the rules of the Selling Broker-Dealer's
applicable self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') as if the Selling
Broker-Dealer had recommended the TIC Security transaction and must
deliver a representation in writing to that effect to the Lead
Placement Agent at closing or, if the Selling Broker-Dealer is the Lead
Placement Agent, must make a representation in writing to that effect
at closing.
    b. The Selling Broker-Dealer will inform the customer if the
Selling Broker-Dealer determines that the TIC Security transaction to
be effected for the customer is not suitable under the rules of the
Selling Broker-Dealer's applicable SRO, and will not effect the TIC
Security transaction unless it obtains the customer's written
affirmation that the customer wants to proceed with the TIC Security
transaction notwithstanding the Selling Broker-Dealer's determination.
The Selling Broker-Dealer must deliver the written affirmation to the
Lead Placement Agent at closing or, if the Selling Broker-Dealer is the
Lead Placement Agent, must maintain the written affirmation as
specified below.
    c. The Lead Placement Agent must maintain a copy of each of the
documents that is to be made and/or delivered at closing pursuant to
the requested exemption (i.e., the buyer's agent agreement, the
statutory disqualification representations, the suitability
representation, and, if applicable, the customer's written
affirmation), the relevant part of the real estate closing documents
that evidences the amount of the Real Estate Advisory Fee paid to any
RE Participant involved in the TIC Security transaction, and any other
records that are required to be maintained in accordance with the
recordkeeping requirements of the federal securities laws for a period
of three (3) years in accordance with Exchange Act Rule 17a-4(f).

Summary of Reasons for the Exemption

    NAR states that the requested exemption would allow a potential
purchaser of a TIC Security to benefit from the real estate expertise
of a Commercial Real Estate Professional, while receiving necessary
protections afforded by federal and state securities laws and
regulations. NAR states that the proposed conditions would limit the
role of a Commercial Real Estate Professional and Real Estate Firm with
which such person is licensed that would receive a Real Estate Advisory
Fee. As a result, NAR states that an exemption from registration and
regulation of the Commercial Real Estate Professional and the Real
Estate Firm with which such person is licensed as a broker-dealer would
be appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the
protection of investors.
    NAR has waived its request for confidential treatment and the
Application is available on the Commission's Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml
) and at the Commission's Public Reference

Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business
days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m.

Request for Comment

    The Commission invites any person to submit comments or other
information that relates to the exemptions requested in the
Application, including whether the exemption should be granted, whether
the conditions are appropriate, and whether conditions should be added,
eliminated, or modified. In

particular, the Commission requests comment as to the following:
     Is the Application's definition of ``substantial
experience in commercial real estate'' appropriate? Should
``substantial experience in commercial real estate'' be defined
differently? If so, how?
     Should a Commercial Real Estate Professional be considered
to have ``substantial experience in commercial real estate'' if he or
she meets a combination of two subjective factors (such as education
and dollar value of transactions), or should substantial experience
only be demonstrated by the specific education or transactional
benchmarks enumerated in the Application?
     Should the quantitative factors included in the
Application's definition of ``substantial experience in commercial real
estate'' be periodically adjusted for inflation? If so, how often and
which measure of inflation should be used?
     Are there education and experience designations from
groups other than those affiliated with NAR that would be appropriate
to name specifically as evidencing ``substantial experience in
commercial real estate''?
     Should the exemption include a quantitative threshold to
describe when a Commercial Real Estate Professional would be
``predominantly engaged'' in the sale of real estate other than TIC
Securities? If so, what should that threshold be? For example, should
85 percent of the dollar value of a Commercial Real Estate
Professional's sales during one or more prior calendar years be in real
estate other than TIC securities in order to meet the predominance
requirement?
     Should the exemption be conditioned on the buyer's agent
agreement including a representation that the Commercial Real Estate
Professional who receives or shares a Real Estate Advisory Fee has
substantial experience in commercial real estate?
     Is there a possibility that the exemption, if granted,
could create an incentive for Commercial Real Estate Professionals to
sell TIC Securities instead of non-security forms of commercial real
estate investments to their clients? Are there countervailing factors
that would mitigate or neutralize any such incentive? Should the
possibility of any such incentive be addressed by one or more
conditions, for example, by requiring Commercial Real Estate
Professionals to disclose in the buyer's agent agreement the various
fees they would receive for selling TIC Securities and non-security
forms of commercial real estate investments? Are there other conditions
that could address this incentive?
     Are the proposed conditions that would impose obligations
on registered broker-dealers appropriate? Would they be sufficient to
accomplish the desired goals, including maintaining investor
protection? Should any be eliminated or modified, or should additional
conditions be included? Commenters are invited to suggest conditions
and explain their purpose.
    For further information, contact Catherine McGuire, Chief Counsel;
Brian Bussey, Assistant Chief Counsel; or Michael Hershaft, Special
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Chief Counsel, Division of Market
Regulation, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-6628.

Submission of Comments

    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. S7-26-07 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. S7-26-07. This file number
should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please
use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the
Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml).

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 No. S7-26-07 and should
be submitted on or before December 17, 2007. The Commission will take
final action on the Application no earlier than December 18, 2007.

Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    Certain provisions of the requested exemption contain ``collection
of information'' requirements within the meaning of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.\9\ The Commission has submitted these
information collections to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for review in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(c) and 5 CFR
1320.10. These collections of information under the requested exemption
are new, and OMB has not yet assigned a control number for them. An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid control number.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
    \10\ 44 U.S.C. 3512.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Delivery of the Buyer's Agent Agreement to the Lead Placement Agent
at Closing

1. Collection of Information
    The requested exemption would be conditioned on the RE Participant
delivering a copy of the executed buyer's agent agreement to the Lead
Placement Agent at closing.
2. Proposed Use of the Information
    The proposed buyer's agent agreement is designed to assist in
implementing the requested exemption and monitoring for compliance. The
proposed delivery requirement is designed to ensure that the Lead
Placement Agent has a copy of the buyer's agent agreement in order to
comply with its recordkeeping obligations discussed below, which would
facilitate monitoring compliance with the requested exemption.
3. Respondents
    The proposed collection of information would apply to RE
Participants who rely on the requested exemption.
4. Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
    The Commission estimates that approximately 800 RE Participants
\11\ would rely on the requested exemption and each RE Participant
would, on average, deliver to the Lead Placement Agent a copy of an
executed buyer's agent agreement 6.63 times \12\ a year.

Based on these estimates, the Commission estimates that this
requirement would result in approximately 5,304 disclosures \13\ per
year. The Commission also estimates that a RE Participant would spend
approximately five minutes per disclosure to the Lead Placement Agent.
Thus, the estimated total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this requirement is 442 hours \14\ for the RE Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Based on discussions with industry participants on the
number of registered representatives currently involved in TIC
Security transactions, the Commission estimates that approximately
800 Commercial Real Estate Professionals would rely on the requested
exemption. Although this collection of information covers RE
Participants, which includes Commercial Real Estate Professionals
and the real estate brokerage firms with which they are licensed,
the Commission expects that the Commercial Real Estate
Professionals, and not the firms, would actually fulfill the
delivery requirement.
    \12\ Based on discussions with industry representatives, we
understand that there were approximately 312 TIC Security offerings
in 2006 and approximately 17 participants per offering for a total
of 5,304 TIC Security transactions. For purposes of calculating the
reporting and recordkeeping burden, the Commission estimates that
all TIC Security transactions would be conducted pursuant to the
requested exemption. The Commission recognizes that it is highly
unlikely that all TIC Security transactions would involve a RE
Participant pursuant to the requested exemption in light of the
existing broker-dealer sales channel for TIC Securities. However,
the Commission does not have sufficient information to estimate
participation rates of less than 100 percent, and thus has chosen
the most conservative estimate for calculating the reporting and
recordkeeping burden. Accordingly, 5,304 TIC Security transactions/
800 RE Participants = 6.63. The Commission has rounded its
calculation to two decimal places. Assuming a relatively even
distribution of transactions among potential respondents, some
respondents would deliver to the Lead Placement Agent a copy of an
executed buyer's agent agreement six times a year, and others would
do so seven times a year.
    \13\ 6.63 x 800 = 5,304.
    \14\ 5,304 TIC Security transactions x five minutes per
transaction = 26,520/60 = 442.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Collection of Information is Mandatory
    This proposed collection of information would be mandatory for RE
Participants who rely on the requested exemption.
6. Confidentiality
    The proposed collection of information would be provided by the RE
Participant to the Lead Placement Agent and would be available for
inspection by the Commission and the applicable SRO.
7. Record Retention Period
    The requested exemption does not contain a separate record
retention period.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Lead Placement Agent, as a registered broker-dealer,
would be subject to the record retention provisions of Exchange Act
Rule 17a-4. OMB has approved the collection of information related
to these record retention provisions. See OMB control number 3235-
0279.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Delivery of the Statutory Disqualification Representation at Closing

1. Collection of Information
    The requested exemption would require any Commercial Real Estate
Professional that is to receive, directly or indirectly, a portion of a
Real Estate Advisory Fee to not be subject to any ``statutory
disqualification,'' as defined in section 3(a)(39) of the Exchange Act
(other than subparagraph (E) of that section), and to deliver a
representation in writing to that effect to the Lead Placement Agent at
closing.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Although the requested exemption would require a Commercial
Real Estate Professional to update the ``statutory
disqualification'' representation at closing, if the ``statutory
disqualification'' notice were already included in the buyer's agent
agreement, there would be no requirement to include the
representation in the buyer's agent agreement. Commercial Real
Estate Professionals would have only one ``statutory
disqualification'' representation disclosure requirement per
transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Proposed Use of the Information
    The proposed ``statutory disqualification'' representation would be
used in implementing the requested exemption and monitoring its use.
The proposed delivery requirement is designed to ensure that the Lead
Placement Agent has a copy of the statutory disqualification
representation in order to comply with its recordkeeping obligations
discussed below, which would facilitate monitoring compliance with the
exemption.
3. Respondents
    The proposed collection of information would apply to Commercial
Real Estate Professionals who would receive, directly or indirectly, a
portion of a Real Estate Advisory Fee pursuant to the requested
exemption.
4. Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
    The Commission estimates that approximately 800 Commercial Real
Estate Professionals \17\ would rely on the requested exemption and
each Commercial Real Estate Professional would on average deliver the
written statutory disqualification representation 6.63 times \18\ a
year. Based on these estimates, the Commission anticipates that this
requirement would result in 5,304 disclosures \19\ per year. The
Commission estimates that approximately 95 percent of Commercial Real
Estate Professionals would spend approximately five minutes for each
representation to the Lead Placement Agent. The Commission also
estimates that approximately five percent of Commercial Real Estate
Professionals \20\ would spend approximately 30 minutes for their first
representation to the Lead Placement Agent,\21\ and five minutes for
each of the 5.63 subsequent representations. Thus, the estimated total
annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for these requirements is
458.67 hours \22\ for Commercial Real Estate Professionals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See note 11.
    \18\ See note 12. The Commission has rounded its calculation to
two decimal places. Assuming a relatively even distribution of
transactions among potential respondents, some respondents would
deliver to the Lead Placement Agent a written statutory
disqualification representation six times a year, and others would
do so seven times a year.
    \19\ See note 13.
    \20\ Based on the Commission's experience with disciplinary
disclosures by registered representatives on Forms U-4, the
Commission estimates that five percent of Commercial Real Estate
Professionals could be subject to a statutory disqualification and
would require more time to make such a determination.
    \21\ The Commission estimates that these Commercial Real Estate
Professionals would spend 25 minutes to determine whether they would
be subject to a statutory disqualification and to generate the
representation, and five minutes to disclose the representation.
    \22\ 800 x .95 x 6.63 x 5 = 25,194/60 = 419.90 total burden
hours for 95 percent of the Commercial Real Estate Professionals.
800 x .05 x 1 x 30 = 1,200/60 = 20 hours for the first
representation by five percent of the Commercial Real Estate
Professionals. 800 x .05 x 5.63 x 5 = 1,126/60 = 18.77 hours for the
second and third representations by five percent of the Commercial
Real Estate Professionals. Thus total burden hours would be 419.90 +
20 + 18.77 = 458.67. The Commission has rounded its calculations to
two decimal places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Collection of Information Is Mandatory
    This proposed collection of information would be mandatory for
Commercial Real Estate Professionals who rely on the requested
exemption.
6. Confidentiality
    The collection of information would be provided by the Commercial
Real Estate Professional to the Lead Placement Agent and to the
customer and would be available for inspection by the Commission and
the applicable SRO.
7. Record Retention Period
    The requested exemption does not contain a separate record
retention period.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See note 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Suitability Determination by the Selling Broker-Dealer

1. Collection of Information
    The requested exemption would require a Selling Broker-Dealer to
deliver a representation in writing that the Selling Broker-Dealer
performed a suitability analysis to the Lead Placement Agent at
closing, or, if the Selling Broker-Dealer is the Lead Placement Agent,
to make such a representation in writing at closing.
2. Proposed Use of the Information
    The proposed suitability representation would be used in

implementing the requested exemption and monitoring its use. The
proposed delivery requirement is designed to ensure that the Lead
Placement Agent has a copy of the suitability analysis in order to
comply with its recordkeeping obligations discussed below, which would
facilitate monitoring compliance with the exemption.
3. Respondents
    The proposed collection of information would apply to Selling
Broker-Dealers, who deliver or make a suitability determination
pursuant to the requested exemption.
4. Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
    The Commission estimates that approximately 150 Selling Broker-
Dealers \24\ would either deliver or make a representation at closing
and each Selling Broker-Dealer would on average deliver or make such a
representation 33.59 times \25\ a year. Based on the simplicity of the
record to be created, the Commission also estimates that a Selling
Broker-Dealer would spend approximately five minutes on each
disclosure. Thus, the estimated total annual reporting and
recordkeeping burden for this requirement is 419.90 hours \26\ for
Selling Broker-Dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The approximate number of Selling Broker-Dealers is based
on discussions with industry participants.
    \25\ The Commission estimates that there would be approximately
5,304 TIC Security transactions a year. See note 12. The Commission
estimates that approximately five percent of all proposed TIC
Security transactions would be determined to be not suitable for a
customer under the requested exemption. This estimate is based on
discussions with industry, which indicated that currently
approximately five percent of proposed TIC Security transactions are
determined to be not suitable for a potential purchaser.
Accordingly, the Commission estimates that Selling Broker-Dealers
would make or deliver a suitability determination in approximately
95 percent of all transactions. Thus, a Selling Broker-Dealer would
make or deliver approximately ((5,304 x .95)/150) = 33.59
determinations. The Commission has rounded its calculation to two
decimal places. Assuming a relatively even distribution of
transactions among potential respondents, some respondents would
make or deliver a suitability representation 33 times a year, and
others would do so 34 times a year.
    \26\ (5,304 x .95) x five minutes per transaction = 25,194/60 =
419.90.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Collection of Information Is Mandatory
    This proposed collection of information would be mandatory for
Selling Broker-Dealers who rely on the requested exemption.
6. Confidentiality
    The proposed collection of information would be provided by the
Selling Broker-Dealer to the Lead Placement Agent, or if the Selling
Broker-Dealer is the Lead Placement Agent, to create the collection of
information and would be available for inspection by the Commission and
the applicable SRO.
7. Record Retention Period
    The requested exemption does not contain a separate record
retention period.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See note 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Customer Affirmation by the Selling Broker-Dealer

1. Collection of Information
    The requested exemption would require a Selling Broker-Dealer that
determines that a TIC Security transaction is not suitable to obtain a
written affirmation that the customer wants to proceed with the TIC
Security transaction notwithstanding the Selling Broker-Dealer's
determination. It also would require the Selling Broker-Dealer to
deliver the written affirmation to the Lead Placement Agent at closing
or, if the Selling Broker-Dealer is the Lead Placement Agent, to
maintain the written affirmation consistent with the record retention
provisions of Exchange Act Rule 17a-4.
2. Proposed Use of the Information
    This proposed information is designed to ensure that the customer
is informed if a Selling Broker-Dealer determines a transaction is not
suitable, and, if the customer wants to proceed with the transaction,
that the customer has made such a decision in light of the broker-
dealer's determination. In addition, the proposed delivery requirement
is designed to ensure that the Lead Placement Agent has a copy of the
customer affirmation in order to comply with its recordkeeping
obligations discussed below, which would facilitate monitoring
compliance with the exemption.
3. Respondents
    The proposed collection of information would apply to Selling
Broker-Dealers who deliver or maintain a customer affirmation
determination pursuant to the requested exemption.
4. Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
    The Commission estimates that there are approximately 150 Selling
Broker-Dealers that are potential respondents, those Selling Broker-
Dealers would obtain and then deliver or maintain a written affirmation
from 265.20 customers who are clients \28\ of Commercial Real Estate
Participants a year, and each Selling Broker-Dealer would on average
obtain and then deliver or maintain such an affirmation 1.77 \29\ times
a year. The Commission also estimates that a customer would spend
approximately 30 minutes on each disclosure and the Selling Broker-
Dealer would spend approximately 35 minutes on each disclosure.\30\
Thus, the estimated total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this proposed requirement is an aggregate of 132.60 hours for customers
\31\ and 154.70 hours for the Selling Broker-Dealers.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ As discussed in note 25, the Commission estimates that
approximately five percent of all proposed TIC Security transactions
would be determined to be not suitable. 5,304 x .05 = 265.20. The
Commission has rounded its calculation to two decimal places. In
other words, in any given year the Commission estimates there would
be either 265 or 266 customers whose Selling Broker-Dealer
determines that a TIC Security transaction is not suitable.
    \29\ The Commission estimates that there would be approximately
5,304 TIC Security transactions under the requested exemption. See
note 12. The Commission estimates that Selling Broker-Dealers would
obtain and then deliver or maintain the customer affirmation in five
percent of all transactions under the requested exemption. This
estimate is based on discussions with industry, which indicated that
currently approximately five percent of proposed TIC Security
transactions are determined to be not suitable for a potential
purchaser. For purposes of calculating the reporting and
recordkeeping burden, the Commission estimates that all customers
whose Selling Broker-Dealer determines that a TIC Security
transaction is not suitable would provide a written affirmation
pursuant to the requested exemption. The Commission recognizes that
it is highly unlikely that all customers would provide a written
affirmation in the face of a Selling Broker-Dealer's determination
that a TIC Security transaction is not suitable. However, the
Commission does not have sufficient information to estimate
affirmation rates of less than 100 percent, and thus has chosen the
most conservative estimate for calculating the reporting and
recordkeeping burden. Thus, a Selling Broker-Dealer would obtain
approximately ((5,304 x .05)/150) = 1.77 affirmations a year. The
Commission has rounded its calculation to two decimal places.
Assuming a relatively even distribution of transactions among
potential respondents, some respondents would obtain an affirmation
one time a year, and others would do so two times a year.
    \30\ We estimate that it would take the Selling Broker-Dealer 30
minutes to explain to its customer that the transaction is not
suitable, and to discuss with and obtain the subsequent affirmation
from the customer, and five minutes to deliver or maintain the
affirmation.
    \31\ 265.20 TIC Security transactions (5,304 x .05) x 30 minutes
per transaction = 7,956/60 = 132.60.
    \32\ 265.20 TIC Security transactions (5,304 x .05) x 35 minutes
per transaction = 9,282/60 = 154.70.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Collection of Information Is Mandatory
    This collection of information would be mandatory for Selling
Broker-Dealers who rely on the requested exemption.
6. Confidentiality
    The proposed collection of information would be provided by the
Selling Broker-Dealer to the Lead Placement Agent, or retained as a

record, if the Selling Broker-Dealer is the Lead Placement Agent, and
would be available for inspection by the Commission and the applicable
SRO.
7. Record Retention Period
    The requested exemption does not contain a separate record
retention period.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See note 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Recordkeeping by the Lead Placement Agent

1. Collection of Information
    The requested exemption would require the Lead Placement Agent to
maintain a copy of each of the documents that is to be made and/or
delivered at closing, as discussed above (i.e., the buyer's agent
agreement, the statutory disqualification representations, the
suitability representation, and, if applicable, the customer's written
affirmation), and the relevant part of the real estate closing
documents that evidences the amount of the Real Estate Advisory Fee
paid to any RE Participant involved in the TIC Security
transaction.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ The requested exemption also would require the Lead
Placement Agent to maintain a copy of any other records that are
required to be maintained in accordance with the recordkeeping
requirements of the federal securities laws. See note 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Proposed Use of the Information
    The proposed use of this information is to facilitate monitoring
compliance with the exemption by compelling the Lead Placement Agent to
maintain records of all documents that are required to be delivered at
closing.
3. Respondents
    The proposed collection of information would apply to Lead
Placement Agents that act pursuant to the requested exemption.
4. Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
    The Commission estimates that approximately 45 Lead Placement
Agents \35\ would act pursuant to the requested exemption. On average,
a Lead Placement Agent would maintain copies of the relevant documents
for approximately 117.87 TIC Security transactions \36\ a year. The
Commission also estimates that a Lead Placement Agent would spend 10
minutes per closing to maintain a copy of these documents. Thus, the
estimated total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
requirement is 884 hours.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Based on discussions with industry representatives, the
Commission estimates that there are 45 sponsors of TIC Security
transactions and that each would have a Lead Placement Agent.
    \36\ 5,304 TIC Security transactions/45 Lead Placement Agents =
117.87. The Commission has rounded its calculation to two decimal
places. Assuming a relatively even distribution of transactions
among potential respondents, some Lead Placement Agents would
maintain copies of the relevant documents for 117 transactions a
year, and others would do so for 118 transactions a year.
    \37\ 5,304 TIC Security transactions x 10 minutes = 53,040/60 =
884.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Collection of Information Is Mandatory
    This proposed collection of information would be mandatory for Lead
Placement Agents that act pursuant to the requested exemption.
6. Confidentiality
    The proposed collection of information does not address the
confidentiality of information prepared under this rule; however, the
collection of information would be available for inspection by the
Commission and the applicable SRO.
7. Record Retention Period
    As specified, the Lead Placement Agent would be required to
maintain copies of these documents for a period of three years in
accordance with its existing obligations under Exchange Act Rule 17a-
4(f).

F. Request for Comment

    Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Commission solicits
comments to:
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the information would have practical
utility;
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the
burden of the proposed collections of information;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those
required to respond, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    Persons desiring to submit comments on the proposed collection of
information requirements should direct them to the Office of Management
and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington,
DC 20503, and should send a copy of their comments to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090, and refer to File No. S7-26-07. OMB is
required to make a decision concerning the collection of information
between 30 and 60 days after publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. Therefore, comments to OMB are best assured of having full
effect if OMB receives them within 30 days of this publication.
Requests for materials submitted to OMB by the Commission with regard
to this collection of information should be in writing, refer to File
No. S7-26-07, and be submitted to the Securities and Exchange
Commission, Branch of Records Management, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1110.

    By the Commission.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-22425 Filed 11-15-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 36 (Thursday, February 23, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11510-11512]
[FR Doc No: 2023-03708]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2022-0016]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the
Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval: Request for
Comment; Consumer Complaint Information

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

ACTION: Notice and request for comments on a reinstatement of a
previously approved collection of information.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR)
summarized below is being forwarded to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The ICR describes the nature of
the information collection and its expected burden. A Federal Register
Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the
following information collection was published on April 7, 2022. One
comment was received.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 27, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection, including suggestions for reducing burden,
should be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget at
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. To find this particular information
collection, select ``Currently under Review--Open for Public Comment''
or use the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to

background documents, contact Randy Reid, Office of Defects
Investigation (NEF-100),<PHONE_NUMBER>, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, W48-335, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, email: [email protected]. Please
identify the relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB
Control Number (2127-0008).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), a
Federal agency must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) before it collects certain information from the public and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information by a
Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid OMB control
number. In compliance with these requirements, this notice announces
that the following information collection request will be submitted
OMB.
    Title: Consumer Complaint Information.
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0008.
    Form Number: O.M.B No. 2127-0008.
    Type of Request: Reinstatement of a previously approved information
collection.
    Type of Review Requested: Regular.
    Length of Approval Requested: Three years from date of approval.
    Summary of the Collection of Information:
    Chapter 301 of title 49 of the United States Code authorizes the
Secretary of Transportation (NHTSA by delegation) to require
manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to conduct
owner notification and remedy, i.e., a recall campaign, when it has
been determined that a safety defect exists in the performance,
construction, components, or materials in motor vehicles and motor
vehicle equipment. Pursuant to title 49 of the United States Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 573 and 577, manufacturers are required
to notify NHTSA, as well as motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment
owners, dealers, and distributors, that a determination has been made
to remedy a defect through the issuance of a safety recall.
Manufacturers often initiate safety recalls voluntarily, while other
recalls are influenced by NHTSA investigations or ordered by NHTSA via
a court ruling. A manufacturer of each such motor vehicle or item of
replacement equipment presented for remedy pursuant to such
notification is required to remedy the safety defect at no charge to
the owner. The manufacturer shall cause the vehicle to be remedied by
any of the following means: (1) by repairing such vehicle or equipment;
(2) by replacing such motor vehicle or equipment with an identical or
similar product; or (3) by refunding the purchase price less
depreciation.
    In order to help NHTSA identify safety-related defects, the agency
solicits information from vehicle owners. This information is used to
identify and evaluate possible safety-related defects and provide the
necessary evidence of the existence of such a defect. NHTSA also uses
the information to monitor the adequacy of a manufacturer's recall
efforts. Consumers of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment
voluntarily submit complaints through NHTSA's Vehicle Safety Hotline,
NHTSA's website (www.nhtsa.gov), or through correspondence.
    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information:
    NHTSA uses input from consumers to help identify potential safety-
related defects that could lead to a safety recall or recall
inadequacies. The complaints disclose consumers' allegations of a
safety defect that they experienced with their vehicle or vehicle
equipment, including defects that resulted in injuries, crashes,
property damage, or death. All complaints are converted to a Vehicle
Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) format and reviewed by NHTSA investigation/
engineer staff. A NHTSA investigator may respond to a consumer
submitting a complaint if more information is required. NHTSA staff
review complaints/VOQs and determines whether further action by the
agency is warranted. The agency has used this information to develop
technical foundations of evidence with which to prove to manufacturers
and a court that safety-related defects exist which require remedy. The
information collection provides valuable information that helps NHTSA
identify unreasonable safety risks in specific makes, models, and model
years of vehicles and equipment and helps the agency determine when to
open an investigation or initiate a recall. In this way, the
information collection helps to reduce the number of crashes, fires,
injuries, and fatalities that occur on our Nation's highways.
    60-Day Notice:
    On April 7, 2022, NHTSA published a 60-day notice requesting
comment on NHTSA's intention to submit this ICR to OMB for approval (87
FR 20504). NHTSA received 1 comment, from the National Association of
Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC). In its comment, NAMIC stated that
it fully supports NHTSA's proposed collection of information as
necessary and appropriate and states that it believes the information
surveyed will have significant practical utility. NAMIC also stated
that NHTSA's estimate of the burden and the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected seem appropriate. NAMIC's
comment also suggested that NHTSA consider regulations or
recommendations to manufacturers that will ensure that the vehicle
owner/policyholder can access and control vehicle data. NAMIC also
provided a list of data elements for consideration in a regulation or
recommendation.
    We appreciate the comments and recommendations from NAMIC. However,
the recommendations and suggestions regarding data availability are
beyond the scope of the current information collection request. NHTSA
will consider enhanced data collection and retrieval capabilities for
vehicle owners and policy holders in future actions.
    Affected Public: Consumers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle
equipment.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 55,433.
    There is an average of 58,350 complaints submitted per year
(average of 160 complaints submitted each day). Some individuals submit
multiple complaints to NHTSA. To estimate the total of unique
respondents per year, NHTSA estimates that the number of unique
respondents is 95 percent of the total number of complaints. Therefore,
NHTSA estimates that there will be approximately 55,433 respondents
each year (58,250 x .95).
    Frequency: On-occasion.
    The submission of complaints is triggered by the occurrence of a
problem with a consumer's vehicle.
    Number of Responses: 58,350.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 9,725 hours.
    Respondents have averaged 58,350 consumer complaints per year to
NHTSA between January 2018 and December 2020. NHTSA anticipates that a
respondent can complete a VOQ in approximately 10 minutes. The consumer
is asked to provide his/her name, complete mailing address, product
information, failed component information, and incident information,
copies of supporting documentation, and his/her signature. NHTSA
estimates the total annual burden respondents to be 9,725 hours (58,350
respondents x 10 minutes per VOQ = 9,725 annual hourly burden). To
calculate the opportunity cost to respondents associated with the
collection, NHTSA used the national average hourly earnings of all
employees on private nonfarm payrolls which the Bureau of Labor
Statistics

lists at $30.44.\1\ Therefore, opportunity cost associated with annual
burden hours associated with respondents submitting complaints is
estimated to be $296,029 (9,725 hours x $30.44 per hour = $296,029
annual opportunity cost burden).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all
employees on private nonfarm payrolls, June 2021, available at
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t19.htm (accessed September
16, 2021).

                                                          Table 1--Annual Hour Burden Estimates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Estimated time                                                           Total annual
            Annual number of respondents/responses                per response     Average hourly   Opportunity cost    Total annual       opportunity
                                                                    (minutes)     opportunity cost   per submission     burden hours          costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
58,350........................................................                10            $30.44             $5.07             9,725          $296,029
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: $0.
    Participation in this collection is voluntary, and there are no
costs to respondents beyond the time spent submitting a complaint.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimate
of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. The agency will
summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB's
clearance of this information collection.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 1351.29A.

Stephen Ridella,
Director, Office of Defects Investigation, NHTSA.
[FR Doc. 2023-03708 Filed 2-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 38 (Monday, March 1, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11870-11872]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04057]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0370; FRL-10019-18-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; KY; Updates to Attainment Status Designations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted
by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Kentucky Division for Air
Quality (KDAQ), on December 9, 2019. The SIP revision updates the
description and attainment status designations of geographic areas
within the Commonwealth for several National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS or standards). The updates are being made to conform
Kentucky's attainment status tables with the federal attainment status
designations for these areas. EPA is approving Kentucky's SIP revision
because it is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's
regulations.

DATES: This rule is effective March 31, 2021.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0370. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials can either
be retrieved electronically via www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday
through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Larocca, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9144. Ms. Larocca can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Sections 108 and 109 of the CAA require EPA to set NAAQS for
criteria air pollutants (ozone (O3), particulate matter
(PM), carbon monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and
nitrogen dioxide) and to undertake periodic review of these standards.
After EPA sets a new NAAQS or revises an existing standard, the CAA
requires EPA to determine if areas of the country meet the new
standards and to designate areas as either nonattainment, attainment,
or unclassifiable.\1\ Such designations inform the state's planning and
implementation of requirements to achieve and maintain the NAAQS for
each area within that state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ An area is designated nonattainment if it is found to be an
area that does not meet (or that contributes to ambient air quality
in a nearby area that does not meet) the NAAQS; an area is
designated attainment if it is an area that meets the NAAQS and does
not contribute to an area violating the NAAQS; and an area is
designated unclassifiable if it cannot be classified on the basis of
available information as meeting or not meeting the NAAQS. See CAA
section 107(d)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 107(d) of the CAA governs the process for these initial
area designations. Under this process, states and tribes submit
recommendations to EPA as to whether or not an area is attaining the
NAAQS for criteria air pollutants. EPA then considers these
recommendations as part of its obligation to promulgate the area
designations for the new or revised NAAQS. EPA codifies its
designations for areas within each state in 40 CFR part 81.\2\ Under
section 107(d) of the CAA, a designation for an area remains in effect
until redesignated by EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA's attainment status designations for Kentucky are found
at 40 CFR 81.318.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on October 19,
2020 (85 FR 66295), EPA proposed to approve changes to Kentucky rule
401 Kentucky Administrative Regulation (KAR) 51:010, Attainment status
designations, which update the description and attainment or
nonattainment status of geographic areas within the Commonwealth with
regard to a number of the NAAQS. The Commonwealth of Kentucky last
amended Regulation 401 KAR 51:010 in 2016.\3\ Since that time, EPA
promulgated the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS and redesignated several areas
within the Commonwealth. Kentucky amended 401 KAR 51:010 in 2019 by
updating the attainment status designations in Sections 7 through 9 for
O3, PM less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5),
and SO2 to conform with EPA's attainment status designations
in 40 CFR 81.318. Regulation 401 KAR 51:010 has also been amended by
making one minor textual modification to the NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND
CONFORMITY section. The details of Kentucky's submission and the
rationale for EPA's action are explained in the proposed rulemaking.
Comments on the October 19, 2020, NPRM were due on or before November
18, 2020. EPA did not receive any comments on the October 19, 2020,
NPRM. EPA is now taking final action to approve the above-referenced
changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA approved those amendments into the SIP in 2018. See 83
FR 65088 (December 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this notice, EPA is finalizing EPA rule regulatory text that
includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of
1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of
Kentucky regulation 401 KAR 51:010, Attainment status designations,
state effective November 19, 2019, which was revised to be consistent
with the federal attainment status designations for the areas within
the Commonwealth. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the
EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for
inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's
approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the
Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve portions of the Commonwealth
of Kentucky's SIP revision submitted on December 9, 2019, because the
changes are consistent with the CAA and EPA regulations. The submission
amends

and updates Kentucky regulation 401 KAR 51:010, Attainment status
designations, to conform with EPA's attainment status designations in
40 CFR 81.318. EPA is proposing to approve these changes because they
are consistent with the CAA and EPA regulations.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 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. This action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 30, 2021. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: February 23, 2021.
John Blevins,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
as follows:

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 S--Kentucky

0
2. In 52.920, amend Table 1 in paragraph (c) under the heading Chapter
51 Attainment and Maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards by revising the entry for ``401 KAR 51:010 Attainment status
designations'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.920   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                   Table 1--EPA-Approved Kentucky Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          State
         State citation             Title/subject    effective date   EPA approval date        Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Chapter 51 Attainment and Maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
401 KAR 51:010.................  Attainment status       11/19/2019  3/1/2021, [Insert
                                  designations.                       citation of
                                                                      publication].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-04057 Filed 2-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 135)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 34509-34511]
[DOCID:fr16jy09-5]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0615; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-043-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222
Airplanes and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

    An A300-600 operator reported two events of IPECO pilot seat
moved in the aft position, one during take-off roll and one during
climb out. The investigation of these events showed that a broken/
missing spring contributed to the seat not being correctly locked.
    An unwanted movement of pilot or co-pilot seat in the aft
direction is considered as potentially dangerous, especially during
the take-off phase when the speed of the aeroplane is greater than
100 knots and until landing gear retraction.
* * * * *

The unsafe condition is potential loss of control of the airplane
during take-off and landing. The proposed AD would require actions that
are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 17, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Airbus SAS-EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 44 51; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.airbus.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0615;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-043-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2009-0045, dated February 27, 2009 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    An A300-600 operator reported two events of IPECO pilot seat
moved in the aft position, one during take-off roll and one during
climb out. The investigation of these events showed that a broken/
missing spring contributed to the seat not being correctly locked.
    An unwanted movement of pilot or co-pilot seat in the aft
direction is considered as potentially dangerous, especially during
the take-off phase when the speed of the aeroplane is greater than
100 knots and until landing gear retraction.
    To prevent further incidents of inadvertent flight crew seat aft
movement, this AD requires repetitive inspections of the affected
seat springs and replacement of missing or broken parts. In
addition, this AD requires replacement of the affected seats with
modified P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 seats. Installation of both pilot and
co-pilot seats P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 on an aeroplane constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of
this AD for that aeroplane.

The unsafe condition is potential loss of control of the airplane
during take-off and landing. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Mandatory Service Bulletins A300-25A6210 and
A310-25A2199, both dated July 9, 2008; and A300-25-6214 and A310-25-
2202, both dated February 3, 2009. Airbus has also issued A300-600
Operations Engineering Bulletin 121/1, dated May 2008; and A300
Operations Engineering Bulletin 160/2, dated October 2008. The

actions described in this service information are intended to correct
the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 132 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 11 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $1,214 per product. Where
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these
costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties,
some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $276,408, or $2,094 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2009-0615; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-
043-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by August 17, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of the AD, certificated in any category, having
IPECO part number (P/N) 3A218-000X-01-1 pilot or co-pilot mechanical
seats installed.
    (1) Airbus Model A310-203, A310-221, and A310-222 airplanes, all
serial numbers.
    (2) Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and A300 F4-622R airplanes, all
serial numbers.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25:
Equipment/Furnishings.

Reason

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

    ``An A300-600 operator reported two events of IPECO pilot seat
moved in the aft position, one during take-off roll and one during
climb out. The investigation of these events showed that a broken/
missing spring contributed to the seat not being correctly locked.
    ``An unwanted movement of pilot or co-pilot seat in the aft
direction is considered as potentially dangerous, especially during
the take-off phase when the speed of the aeroplane is greater than
100 knots and until landing gear retraction.
    ``To prevent further incidents of inadvertent flight crew seat
aft movement, this AD requires repetitive inspections of the
affected seat springs and replacement of missing or broken parts. In
addition, this AD requires replacement of the affected seats with
modified P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 seats. Installation of both pilot and
co-pilot seats P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 on an aeroplane constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of
this AD for that aeroplane.''

The unsafe condition is potential loss of control of the airplane
during take-off and landing.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30 days, do a detailed visual
inspection of the two springs of the pilot seat and co-pilot seat
locking device, in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, as
applicable.
    (i) If only one spring is missing or found damaged during any
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, within 10 days
after the inspection or before further flight, whichever occurs
later, replace the spring with a serviceable part, in accordance
with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210,
both dated July

9, 2008, as applicable. Before an airplane may be dispatched with
one spring missing or damaged, the instructions contained in Airbus
A310 Operations Engineering Bulletin 160/2, dated October 2008; or
A300-600 Operations Engineering Bulletin 121/1, dated May 2008; as
applicable; must be accomplished by the flightcrew.
    (ii) If two springs are missing or found damaged during any
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further
flight, replace the springs in accordance with Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9,
2008, as applicable.
    (2) Replacing parts in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, as
applicable, is not a terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
    (3) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install an IPECO
pilot or co-pilot mechanical seat P/N 3A218-000X-01-1 on any
airplane, unless the seat has been inspected and modified, as
applicable in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, as
applicable.
    (4) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, modify
the airplane by replacing the pilot and co-pilot mechanical seats P/
N 3A218-000X-01-1 with P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 seats, in accordance with
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-25-2202 or A300-25-6214, both
dated February 3, 2009, as applicable.
    (5) Installing both pilot and co-pilot seats P/N 3A218-000X-01-2
in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-25-2202 or
A300-25-6214, both dated February 3, 2009, as applicable, on any
airplane is a terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD for that airplane.
    (6) As of 6 months after the effective date of this AD, do not
install an IPECO pilot or co-pilot mechanical seat P/N 3A218-000X-
01-1 on any airplane.
    (7) Although Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletins A310-25A2199 and
A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, specify to submit certain
information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that
requirement.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: Although the MCAI and service information
request to submit reporting information to Airbus, paragraph (f)(7)
of this AD specifies that such submittal is not required.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal
avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal
inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. The AMOC
approval letter must specifically reference this letter.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2009-0045, dated February 27, 2009, and the service
information listed in Table 1 of this AD for related information.

                      Table 1--Service Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Airbus service information                      Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A300-600 Operations Engineering    May 2008.
 Bulletin 121/1.
A310 Operations Engineering        October 2008.
 Bulletin 160/2.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-   February 3, 2009.
 25-6214.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-   July 9, 2008.
 25A6210.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-   February 3, 2009.
 25-2202.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-   July 9, 2008.
 25A2199.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 6, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-16939 Filed 7-15-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


From: Holloway, Thomas C. ( Tom) Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 11: 18 AM To: ' records@ adem. state. al. us' Subject: Magnetic tape facility information As I discussed on the phone with Rebecca Hall of ADEM, I am with RTI Internation al working with the US EPA gathering information on magnetic tape manufacturing facilities. Magnetic tape is used in audio recording, video recording, or any k ind of information storage and includes products such as audio tape, video tape, floppy disks, and magnetic strips for credit cards, toll tickets, airline board ing passes, and security badges. The magnetic tape manufacturing NESHAP ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart EE) was promulgated in December 1994, and EPA is required to e valuate the risk remaining ( residual risk) for source categories several years a fter standards have been put in place. There are four facilities in Alabama whi ch appeared on our source list for magnetic tape manufacturing, and we would lik e to gather some information about these facilities for EPA's residual risk anal ysis. Attached are two files, one file ( in Excel) listing the four facilities i n Alabama and one file ( in WordPerfect) listing the questions we have about thes e facilities. If someone at ADEM could help us out with this information, we wo uld greatly appreciate it. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

Thanks, Tom Holloway RTI International 3040 Cornwallis Rd., P. O. Box 12194 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 2194 tcholloway@ rti. org Phone: ( 919) 316 3733 Fax: ( 919) 541 7155