78798 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2010 / Notices 

9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 10 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The Exchange does not believe that 

the proposed rule change will impose 

any burden on competition not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were either 

solicited or received. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The foregoing rule change has become 

effective pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.9 At any time 

within 60 days of the filing of the 

proposed rule change, the Commission 

summarily may temporarily suspend 

such rule change if it appears to the 

Commission that such action is 

necessary or appropriate in the public 

interest, for the protection of investors, 

or otherwise in furtherance of the 

purposes of the Act. If the Commission 

takes such action, the Commission shall 

institute proceedings to determine 

whether the proposed rule should be 

approved or disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views, and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s Internet 

comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

Number SR–Phlx–2010–175 on the 

subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to File 

Number SR–Phlx–2010–175. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if e-mail is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for Web site viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 

10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing 

also will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. All comments received will 

be posted without change; the 

Commission does not edit personal 

identifying information from 

submissions. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. All submissions 

should refer to File Number SR–Phlx2010–175 and should be submitted on 

or before January 6, 2011. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.10

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31630 Filed 12–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[File No. 500–1] 

In the Matter of Alternate Energy 

Holdings, Inc.; Order of Suspension of 

Trading 

December 14, 2010. 

It appears to the Securities and 

Exchange Commission that there is a 

lack of current and accurate information 

concerning the securities of Alternate 

Energy Holdings, Inc. (‘‘AEHI’’) because 

of questions regarding the accuracy and 

adequacy of disclosures by AEHI 

concerning, among other things: (1) The 

stock sales of certain AEHI officers, (2) 

the status and viability of funding to 

build a nuclear reactor, and (3) 

executive compensation. AEHI is quoted 

on the OTC Bulletin Board and on the 

Pink Sheets operated by Pink OTC 

Markets, Inc. under the ticker symbol 

‘‘AEHI.’’ 

The Commission is of the opinion that 

the public interest and the protection of 

investors require a suspension of trading 

in the securities of the above-listed 

company. 

Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to 

Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange 

Act of 1934, that trading in the 

securities of the above-listed company is 

suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. 

EST, on December 14, 2010 through 

11:59 p.m. EST, on December 28, 2010. 

By the Commission. 

Florence E. Harmon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31698 Filed 12–14–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1220] 

Airport Improvement Program: 

Proposed Changes to Benefit Cost 

Analysis (BCA) Threshold 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Draft 

Guidance and Request for Comments. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) is issuing this 

Notice to advise that FAA has 

developed draft guidance modifying its 

policy requiring benefit cost analyses 

(BCA) for capacity projects when 

applying for Airport Improvement 

Program (AIP) grants for capacity 

projects at the discretion of the 

Secretary of Transportation. This 

modification proposes to raise the 

threshold at which BCAs are required, 

from $5 million to $10 million in AIP 

Discretionary funds. 

FAA invites airport sponsors and 

other interested parties to comment on 

the draft guidance. FAA will consider 

these comments in promulgating final 

BCA guidance for airport sponsors. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before January 31, 2011. The FAA will 

consider comments received on the 

proposed policy guidance. Any 

necessary or appropriate revision to the 

guidance resulting from the comments 

received will be adopted as of the date 

of a subsequent publication in the 

Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dennis Walsh, Financial Analysis and 

Passenger Facility Charge Branch (APP– 

510), Room 619, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2010 / Notices 78799 

telephone: (202) 493–4890, e-mail: 

dennis.walsh@faa.gov. A draft Program 

Guidance Letter is available on-line at 

http://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/ 

bc_analysis/. In addition, hard copies 

can be reviewed at Room 619, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591. 

Comments Invited: ADDRESSES: You 

may send comments [identified by 

Docket Number FAA–2010–1220] using 

any of the following methods: 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, West 

Building, Ground Floor, Room W12– 

140, Routing Symbol M–30, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 

20590. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: To Docket 

Operations, Room W12–140 on the 

ground floor of the West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

Privacy: We will post all comments 

we receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. For 

more information, see the Privacy Act 

discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Docket: To read background 

documents or comments received, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time 

or to Room W12–140 on the ground 

floor of the West Building, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title 49 

U.S.C. Section 47115(d) specifies that, 

in selecting projects for discretionary 

grants to preserve and enhance capacity 

at airports, the Secretary must consider 

the benefits and costs of the projects. In 

1994, FAA established its policy on 

Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) 

requirements for airport capacity 

projects; factors leading to these 

requirements included: 

a. The need to improve the 

effectiveness of Federal airport 

infrastructure investments in light of a 

decline in Federal AIP budgets; 

b. Issuance of Executive Order 12893, 

‘‘Principles for Federal Infrastructure 

Investments’’ (January 26, 1994); 

c. Guidance from Congress citing the 

need for economic airport investment 

criteria; and 

d. Statutory language from 1994 

included in Title 49 U.S.C. Section 

47115(d) specifies that in selecting 

projects for discretionary grants to 

preserve and enhance capacity at 

airports, the Secretary shall consider the 

benefits and costs of the projects (See 49 

U.S.C. 47115. Discretionary Fund). 

The FAA implemented the BCA 

policy to include this requirement for 

capacity projects at all categories of 

airports in order to limit FAA’s risks 

when investing large amounts of 

discretionary funds. The FAA uses the 

conclusions reached in the BCA review 

to determine policy and funding 

decisions on possible future Federal 

investments. 

In 1997, FAA implemented a new 

BCA policy which transferred the 

responsibility of preparing the BCA 

from FAA to the sponsor. In addition, 

the policy lowered the dollar threshold 

from $10 million in AIP Discretionary 

funds (established in 1994) to $5 

million, citing three reasons related to 

Executive Order 12893, technical 

feasibility of lowering the threshold and 

workload considerations. 

The change to the $5 million 

threshold was made policy in 1997 and 

formalized in a 1999 Federal Register 

notice, Federal Aviation Administration 

Policy and Final Guidance Regarding 

Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) on Airport 

Capacity Projects for FAA Decisions on 

Airport Improvement Program (AIP) 

Discretionary Grants and Letters of 

Intent (LOI), 64 FR 70107 (December 15, 

1999). 

Since 1997, policy has required 

sponsors to conduct BCAs for capacity 

projects for which more than $5 million 

in AIP Discretionary funding will be 

requested. In developing the draft 

guidance increasing the threshold, FAA 

reviewed the reasons why the BCA 

threshold amount was lowered in 1997 

and concluded that the previous reasons 

do not present a sufficient basis to 

warrant maintaining the $5 million level 

threshold today. 

FAA has gained valuable experience 

assessing the implementation of the 

policy and the need to further clarify the 

threshold requirements for BCA. The $5 

million threshold has remained 

unchanged for over 13 years while the 

cost of construction has risen 

significantly. A construction cost of $5 

million in 1997 was equivalent to $9.8 

million in July 2008. The $5 million 

threshold has required both FAA and 

sponsors of non-primary and non-hub 

primary airports to devote substantial 

financial and staff resources in 

preparing and evaluating BCAs for 

relatively small projects with readily 

apparent capacity benefits. 

Based on the increase in construction 

costs, FAA has concluded that $10 

million in AIP Discretionary funds is 

the appropriate threshold for fiscal year 

2011 and beyond. Further explanation 

for this conclusion is detailed in the 

draft PGL. Under the draft guidance, the 

BCA threshold is being increased to $10 

million, the FAA would retain the right 

to require a BCA for any capacity 

project, in order to evaluate the 

reasonableness of project costs relative 

to project benefits. 

Additionally, FAA is inviting airport 

sponsors and other interested parties to 

comment on the new $10 million 

threshold for which a BCA must be 

performed. 

Issued in Washington, DC on December 8, 

2010. 

Frank San Martin, 

Manager, Airports Financial Assistance 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31614 Filed 12–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Noise Compatibility Program Notice, 

Fort Worth Alliance Airport, Fort 

Worth, TX 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) announces its 

findings on the noise compatibility 

program submitted by the city of Fort 

Worth, Texas under the provisions of 49 

U.S.C. (the Aviation Safety and Noise 

Abatement Act, hereinafter referred to 

as ‘‘the Act’’) and 14 CFR Part 150. These 

findings are made in recognition of the 

description of Federal and nonfederal 

responsibilities in Senate Report No. 

96–52 (1980). On September 7, 2006, the 

FAA determined that the noise exposure 

maps submitted by the city of Fort 

Worth, Texas under Part 150 were in 

compliance with applicable 

requirements. Subsequent to this 

determination, the future condition 

noise exposure map was revised to 

reflect additional military operations 

proposed by the Department of Defense. 

This revision delayed acceptance of the 

future condition noise exposure map 

until May 5, 2009. On December 1, 

2010, the FAA approved the Fort Worth 

Alliance Airport noise compatibility 

program. Most of the recommendations 

of the program were approved. No 

program elements relating to new or 

revised flight procedures for noise 

abatement were proposed by the city of 

Fort Worth. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES