[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 62 (Friday, April 2, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17278-17280]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06772]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1114; Project Identifier 2019-SW-058-AD; Amendment
39-21443; AD 2021-04-21]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus Helicopters Model EC120B helicopters. This AD was
prompted by a report of broken and bent attachment bolts of the main
rotor (MR) hub scissors assembly. This AD requires an inspection of the
attachment bolts of the MR hub scissors assembly for discrepancies and
repair if necessary; part marking of the attachment bolts of the MR hub
scissors assembly; and repetitive inspections of the part marking of
the attachment bolts, and repair if necessary; as specified in a
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated
by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 7, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 7, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
phone: +49 221 8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet:
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in
the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1114.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
1114; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hal Jensen, Aerospace Engineer,
Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 470 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC
20024; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0139, dated June 12, 2019 (EASA
AD 2019-0139) (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for all Airbus Helicopters Model EC120B helicopters. Although the EASA
AD applies to all Model EC120B helicopters, this AD applies to that
model helicopter with an affected part installed instead.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus
Helicopters Model EC120B helicopters. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on December 10, 2020 (85 FR 79435). The NPRM was prompted by a
report of broken and bent attachment bolts of the MR hub scissors
assembly. The NPRM proposed to require an inspection of the attachment
bolts of the MR hub scissors assembly for discrepancies and repair if
necessary; part marking of the attachment bolts of the MR hub scissors
assembly; and repetitive inspections of the part marking of the
attachment bolts, and repair if necessary; as specified in an EASA AD.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address broken and bent attachment
bolts of the MR hub scissors assembly, which could lead to detachment
of a MR hub scissors attachment bolt, possibly resulting in complete
loss of control of the helicopter. See the MCAI for additional
background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
except for minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0139 describes procedures for an inspection of the
attachment bolts of the MR hub scissors assembly for discrepancies
(discrepancies include corrosion, fretting, wear, cracking, bolt play,
and bolt tightening torque); and repair if necessary; part marking of
the attachment bolts of the MR hub scissors assembly; and repetitive
inspections, after part marking, of the attachment bolts for
discrepancies, and repair if necessary. The inspections of the
attachment bolts of the MR hub assembly include checking the play and
torque of the scissors attachment bolts and making sure that there are
no hard spots in the scissors link hinge.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 160 helicopters of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 work-hours x $85 per hour = $425...........................              $0             $425          $68,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 hour per product to
comply with the reporting requirement in this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA estimates the
cost of reporting on U.S. operators to be $13,600, or $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
helicopters that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $85 per hour = $340....             $40             $380
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation
Administration, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

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.
    The FAA is 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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2021-04-21 Airbus Helicopters: Amendment 39-21443; Docket No. FAA-
2020-1114; Project Identifier 2019-SW-058-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 7, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model EC120B helicopters,
certificated in any category, having an affected part as defined in
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0139, dated
June 12, 2019 (EASA AD 2019-0139).

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 6200, Main Rotor
System.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of broken and bent attachment
bolts of the main rotor (MR) hub scissors assembly. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address broken and bent attachment bolts of the
MR hub scissors assembly, which could lead to detachment of a MR hub
scissors attachment bolt, possibly resulting in complete loss of
control of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2019-0139.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0139

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0139 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where EASA AD 2019-0139 refers to September 5, 2018 (the
effective date of EASA AD 2018-0186, dated August 29, 2018), this AD
requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (3) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0139 does not apply
to this AD.
    (4) Where EASA AD 2019-0139 refers to flight hours (FH), this AD
requires using hours time-in-service.
    (5) Paragraphs (3) and (4) of EASA AD 2019-0139 refer to
``discrepancies.'' For this AD, discrepancies include corrosion,
fretting, wear, cracking, bolt play, and bolt tightening torque.
    (6) Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2019-
0139 specifies to discard certain parts, this AD does not include
that requirement.
    (7) Where EASA AD 2019-0139 specifies to contact the
manufacturer for repair instructions, repair using a method approved
by the Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA. For a
repair method to be approved by the Manager, Strategic Policy
Rotorcraft Section, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's
approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.
    (8) Paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2019-0139 specifies to report
inspection results to Airbus Helicopters within a certain compliance
time. For this AD, report inspection results at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (h)(8)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date
of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section,
send it to: Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Hal Jensen,
Aerospace Engineer, Operational Safety Branch, FAA, 470 L'Enfant
Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20024; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0139,
dated June 12, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2019-0139, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be
found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2020-1114.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on February 11, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-06772 Filed 4-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23348-23349]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09069]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Policy Clarification for Acceptance of Documents With
Digital Signatures by the Federal Aviation Administration Aircraft
Registry

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of FAA policy clarification.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the FAA's clarification of its
policy regarding the acceptance of documents submitted to the FAA
Aircraft Registry with digital signatures in support of aircraft
registration under 14 CFR 47.13 and conveyances or security documents
submitted to the FAA Aircraft Registry regarding claims and interests
under 14 CFR 49.13.

DATES: Effective Date: The policy described herein is effective May 1,
2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ladeana G. Peden at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Office of Aeronautical Center Counsel (AMC-7), Federal Aviation
Administration, 6500 S. MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73169.

Background

    The FAA reviewed policies and practices regarding the acceptance of
digital signatures on documents filed with the FAA Aircraft Registry.
Based on that review we find that signatures, other than hand scribed
signatures, are acceptable under State law. (Historically, the FAA has
accepted instruments, for recording, based on their validity under
state law. See generally 49 U.S.C. 44108(c)) Specific court cases have
held that it is immaterial with what kind of instrument a signature is
made. See Maricopa County v. Osborn, 60 Ariz 290 (1943); and State of
North Carolina v. David Leroy Watts, 222 SE. 2d 389 (1976). Selected
State statutes also provide that digitally signed communications are
signed writings. See Ca. Gov't Code 16.5 (West 1995); also the Illinois
Financial Institutions Digital Signature Act, 205 Ill. Comp. Stat. 705/
10 (West 1998). For a general discussion of Signatures, see Corpus
Juris Secundum, 80 C.J.S. Signatures, Sec.  7 (2000).
    On October 21, 1998, Public Law 105-277, Government Paperwork
Elimination Act, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to
develop procedures for the use and acceptance of electronic signatures
by Federal agencies. The Act requires that, when practicable, Federal
agencies should use electronic forms, electronic filing, and digital
signatures to conduct official business with the public.
    The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act,
Public Law (Pub. L.) 106-229, enacted June 30, 2000, provides that the
use of electronic records and electronic signatures is an acceptable
practice when conducting interstate and foreign commerce.
    On October 31, 2008, the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
Aviation Administration, published FAA Order 1370.104, Digital
Signature Policy. This Order established the FAA policy for the use of
digital signatures. The Order states ``Electronic signatures describe
digital markings used to bind a party or, to authenticate a record. It
is considered the digital equivalent of the traditional handwritten
signature used to sign a contract or document.'' The policy defines a
digital signature as:

. . . a type of electronic signature that is legally acceptable and
offers both signer and transaction authentication. The digital
signature is the most secure and full-featured type of electronic
signature. Digital signatures are federally acceptable types of
electronic signatures for business transactions as specified in the
National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines.

    14 CFR 47.13(a) provides ``Each person signing an Aircraft
Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1, or a document submitted as
supporting evidence under this part, must sign in ink or by other means
acceptable to the FAA.'' (emphasis added) 14 CFR 49.13(a) provides
``Each signature on a conveyance must be in ink.''
    Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edition (``Black's''), defines a
signature as ``[a] person's name or mark written by that person or at
the person's direction. 2. . . . Any name, mark or writing used with
the intention of authenticating a document.'' Black's defines a digital
signature as ``[a] secure, digital code attached to an electronically
transmitted message that uniquely identifies and authenticates the
sender.''
    Based on the foregoing, the FAA Civil Aviation Registry, Aircraft
Registration Branch determined that ink signatures and legible digital
signatures, comply with the signature requirements of 14 CFR parts 47
and 49.

Policy Clarification

    Effective May 1, 2016 the FAA Civil Aircraft Registry, Aircraft
Registration Branch (the ``Aircraft Registry'') will accept printed
duplicates of electronic documents that display legible, digital
signatures that are filed in compliance with Parts 47 and 49 of the FAA
Regulations (14 CFR parts 47 & 49). These documents include but are not
limited to the following:
    (i) Aircraft Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1;
    (ii) Aircraft Bill of Sale, AC Form 8050-2, or equivalent transfer
documents;
    (iii) Security documents;
    (iv) Conditional Sales Contracts;
    (v) Leases; and,
    (vi) Any supporting authorization documents such as Powers of
Attorney, Trust Agreements, and supplements of related documents, and
Limited Liability Company Statements, et-cetera.
    In order to accommodate applicants for aircraft registration, the
Aircraft Registry will make available a downloadable Aircraft
Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1. Applicants may sign the form
using a legible digital signature. A printed duplicate of the digitally
signed application may be submitted in support of aircraft registration
and a second duplicate copy may be retained in the aircraft as
temporary 47.31 authority to operate the aircraft within the United
States, in lieu of the pink copy of Form 8050-1 permitted under 14 CFR
47.31(c), pending registration of the aircraft.
    Upon receipt of a document with a digital signature by the FAA
Civil Aircraft Registry, Aircraft Registration Branch (the Aircraft
Registry), FAA Legal Instrument Examiners will review each document and
determine whether the document has a legible and acceptable digital
signature. A legible and acceptable digital signature will have, at
minimum, the following components:
    (1) Shows the name of the signer and is applied in a manner to
execute or validate the document;
    (2) Includes the typed or printed name of the signer below or
adjacent to the signature when the signature uses a digitized or
scanned version of the signer's hand scribed signature or the name is
in a cursive font;
    (3) Shows the signer's corporate, managerial, or partnership title
as part of or adjacent to the digital signature when the signer is
signing on behalf of an organization or legal entity;

    (4) Shows evidence of authentication of the signer's identity such
as the text ``digitally signed by'' along with the software provider's
seal/watermark, date and time of execution; or, have an authentication
code or key identifying the software provider; and
    (5) Has a font, size and color density that is clearly legible and
reproducible when reviewed, copied and scanned into a black on white
format.
    Documents digitally signed in the forgoing manner will be
considered facially valid and will be acceptable for review and
consideration by the FAA Civil Aircraft Registry, Aircraft Registration
Branch (the Aircraft Registry) for recordation and registration
purposes.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 13, 2016.
John S. Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-09069 Filed 4-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 238 (Friday, December 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77057-77058]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31282]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76586; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-147]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to
Amend Nasdaq Rule 7018

December 8, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 30, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq is proposing changes to amend Nasdaq Rule 7018(a), governing
fees and credits assessed for execution and routing of securities.
    While these amendments are effective upon filing, the Exchange has
designated the proposed amendments to be operative on December 1, 2015.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at
nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at Nasdaq's principal office, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 7018, governing fees and
credits assessed for execution and routing of securities listed on
Nasdaq,\3\ listed on the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') \4\ and
listed on exchanges other than Nasdaq and NYSE \5\ (collectively, the
``Tapes'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(1).
    \4\ Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(2).
    \5\ Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to increase a current
credit tier for all three Tapes from $0.0029 per share executed to
$0.00295 per share executed. Specifically, this credit tier is
available to members for displayed quotes/orders (other than
supplemental orders or designated retail orders) that provide liquidity
and, as stated in Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(1), (2) and (3), ``Adds Customer,
Professional, Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and/or Broker-Dealer liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of 1.15% or more
of total industry ADV in the customer clearing range for Equity and ETF
option contracts per day in a month on the Nasdaq Options Market''.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or
system which the Exchange operates or controls, and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation
NMS, for example, the Commission indicated that market forces should
generally determine the price of non-core market data because national
market system regulation ``has been remarkably successful in promoting
market competition in its broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.'' \8\ Likewise, in NetCoalition v. NYSE
Arca, Inc., 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 2010), (``NetCoalition'') the DC
Circuit upheld the Commission's use of a market-based approach in
evaluating the fairness of market data fees against a challenge
claiming that Congress mandated a cost-based approach.\9\ As the court
emphasized, the Commission ``intended in Regulation NMS that `market
forces, rather than regulatory requirements' play a role in determining
the market data . . . to be made available to investors and at what
cost.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Exchange Act Release No. 34-51808 (June 9, 2005)
(``Regulation NMS Adopting Release'').
    \9\ See NetCoalition, at 534.
    \10\ Id. at 537.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is
`fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of
order flow from broker dealers'. . . .'' \11\ Although the court and
the SEC were discussing the cash equities markets, the Exchange
believes that these views apply with equal force to the options
markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id. at 539 (quoting ArcaBook Order, 73 FR at 74782-74783).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change to Nasdaq Rule
7018(a)(1), (2) and (3) is reasonable because it is competitive with
the credits of other exchanges and also may result in increased
participation in the marketplace. Currently, for all three Tapes a
member receives a credit of $0.0029 per share executed for displayed
quotes/orders (other than supplemental orders or designated retail
orders) that provide liquidity and, as stated in Nasdaq Rule
7018(a)(1), (2) and (3), the member ``Adds Customer, Professional,
Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and/or Broker-Dealer liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options and/or Non- Penny Pilot Options of 1.15% or more of total
industry ADV in the customer clearing range for Equity and ETF option
contracts per day in a month on the Nasdaq Options Market''. Under the
proposal, the credit will increase to $0.00295 per share executed.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is an
equitable allocation and is not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange will provide the same credit to all similarly situated members
and is available across all Tapes.

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in a burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.\12\ In terms of
inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to
be excessive, or credit opportunities available at other venues to be
more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
adjust its fees and credits to remain competitive with other exchanges
and with alternative trading systems that have been exempted from
compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges.
Because competitors are free to modify their own fees and credits in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this instance, the proposed change to the credits provided for
all three Tapes to member firms for displayed quotes/orders (other than
supplemental orders or designated retail orders) that provide
liquidity, does not impose a burden on competition because the
Exchange's execution services are voluntary and subject to extensive
competition both from other exchanges and from off-exchange venues. In
sum, if the change proposed herein is unattractive to market
participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as
a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
change will impair the ability of members or competing order execution
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\13\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-147 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-147. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-147, and should
be submitted on or before January 4, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-31282 Filed 12-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 227)]
[Notices]
[Page 68589]
[DOCID:fr27no06-71]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-62-000]

East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes in
FERC Gas Tariff

November 16, 2006.
    Take notice that on November 13, 2006, East Tennessee Natural Gas,
LLC (East Tennessee) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed in
Appendix A of the filing to be effective December 14, 2006.
    East Tennessee states that the purpose of this filing is to modify
the East Tennessee Tariff to (i) Reorganize the definitions contained
in GT&C Section 1 of the General Terms and Conditions (GT&C) into
alphabetical order, and (ii) make non-substantive housekeeping changes
to the imbalance resolution procedures set forth in Section 8 of Rate
Schedule LMS-MA and Sections 6, 7 and 8 of Rate Schedule LMS-PA.
    East Tennessee states that copies of its filing have been mailed to
all affected customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-19931 Filed 11-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P