[Federal Register: February 18, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 31)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 7554-7557]
[DOCID:fr18fe09-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0054; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-222-AD;
Amendment 39-15802; AD 2009-03-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Learjet Model 55, 55B, and 55C
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Learjet Model 55, 55B, and 55C airplanes. This AD requires inspecting
the installation of the forward light

assembly in the aft lavatory to determine the location of the terminal
connector; inspecting for damage of the light assembly terminals,
wires, and oxygen lines; inspecting to determine if the cable nipple is
installed over the light assembly terminal; and doing corrective
actions if necessary. This AD also requires installing a clamp to the
forward side of the frame to maintain a positive distance between the
light assembly and oxygen line. This AD results from a report of a
cabin fire in the left-hand upper cabin fuselage above the aft cabin
window at frame 23. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
improper installation of the lavatory light assembly, which could
result in contact between the electrical terminals of the light
assembly and an adjacent oxygen supply line, and consequent short
circuit or fire hazard.

DATES: This AD is effective March 5, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 5,
2009.
    We must receive comments on this AD by April 20, 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 W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Learjet,
Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, Kansas 67209-2942; telephone 316-946-
2000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.bombardier.com.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Hilton, Aerospace Engineer,
Electrical Systems and Avionics Branch, ACE-119W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent
Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (316)
946-4107.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We received a report of a cabin fire in the left-hand upper cabin
fuselage above the aft cabin window at frame 23 on a Learjet Model 55
airplane. If installed incorrectly, the power lead terminals of the
lavatory light assembly have the potential to chafe against the oxygen
line, causing deterioration of the insulation on the light assembly
wiring. This condition, if not corrected, could result in contact
between the electrical terminals of the light assembly and an adjacent
oxygen supply line, and consequent short circuit or fire hazard.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A55-25-7, dated
December 17, 2008. The alert service bulletin describes procedures for
an inspection of the installation of the forward light assembly in the
aft lavatory to determine the location of the terminal connector (as
shown in Figure 1, detail A of the alert service bulletin); an
inspection for damage of the light assembly terminals, wires, and
oxygen line; an inspection to determine if the cable nipple is
installed over the light assembly terminal; and corrective actions if
necessary. The corrective actions include turning the light assembly to
locate the terminal connector in the forward position; replacing
damaged light assembly terminals, wires, and oxygen line; and
installing a new cable nipple. The alert service bulletin also
describes procedures for installing a clamp to the forward side of the
frame to maintain a positive distance between the light assembly and
oxygen line.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the(se) same type
design(s). This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the AD and the Service Information.''

Differences Between the AD and the Service Information

    Operators should note that, although the Accomplishment
Instructions of the Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A55-25-7, dated
December 17, 2008, describes procedures for submitting information to
the manufacturer, this AD does not require that action.
    Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A55-25-7, dated December 17,
2008, refers only to doing ``inspections.'' We have determined that the
procedures in the alert service bulletin should be described as
``general visual inspections.'' Note 1 has been included in this AD to
define this type of inspection.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    This condition has the potential to compromise the integrity of the
oxygen line due to the chafing between the light assembly terminals and
oxygen line and has the potential to become an oxygen-fueled ignition
source. Because of our requirement to promote safe flight of civil
aircraft and thus the critical need to ensure the risk of fire is
mitigated by proper installation of the forward light assembly in the
aft lavatory and proper positive distance maintained between the oxygen
line and light assembly, and the short compliance time involved with
this action, this AD must be issued immediately.
    Because an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate
adoption of this AD, we find that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments before it becomes effective. However, we invite
you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send
your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include
``Docket No. FAA-2009-0054; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-222-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend this AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any

personal information you provide. We will also post a report
summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this AD.

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

    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) Is not a ``significant rule'' under 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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 AD:

2009-03-01 Learjet: Amendment 39-15802. Docket No. FAA-2009-0054;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-222-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 5,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Learjet Model 55, 55B, and 55C airplanes,
certificated in any category; serial numbers 002 through 147
inclusive.

Subject

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

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report of a cabin fire in the left-
hand upper cabin fuselage above the aft cabin window at frame 23. We
are issuing this AD to detect and correct improper installation of
the lavatory light assembly, which could result in contact between
the electrical terminals of the light assembly and an adjacent
oxygen supply line, and consequent short circuit or fire hazard.

Compliance

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

Inspections, Corrective Actions, and Installation

    (g) Within 30 days or 25 flight hours after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first, do the actions specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD. Do the actions in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert
Service Bulletin A55-25-7, dated December 17, 2008.
    (1) Do a general visual inspection of the installation of the
forward light assembly in the aft lavatory to determine the location
of the terminal connector; do a general visual inspection for damage
of the light assembly terminals, wires, and oxygen lines; do a
general visual inspection to determine if the cable nipple is
installed over the light assembly terminal; and do all applicable
corrective actions. Do all applicable corrective actions before
further flight.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection
is: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior area,
installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or
irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching
distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to
ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This
level of inspection is made under normally available lighting
conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or
droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or
doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain
proximity to the area being checked.''

    (2) Install a clamp and hardware to the forward side of the
frame to maintain the distance specified in Bombardier Alert Service
Bulletin A55-25-7, dated December 17, 2008, between the light
assembly and oxygen line.

No Reporting

    (h) Although Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A55-25-7, dated
December 17, 2008, specifies to submit certain information to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (i)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 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:
Daniel Hilton, Aerospace Engineer, Electrical Systems and Avionics
Branch, ACE-119W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801
Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas
67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
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
(FSDO). The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A55-25-7,
dated December 17, 2008, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, Kansas 67209-2942;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the 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>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 21, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-3023 Filed 2-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 231 (Friday, December 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 74138]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26264]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Staff Attendance at North American Electric Reliability
Corporation Reliability and Security Technical Committee Meetings

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby gives notice that
members of the Commission staff may attend the following meetings:
    North American Electric Reliability Corporation Reliability and
Security Technical Committee Virtual Meetings on:

December 6 (11 a.m.-4:30 p.m. eastern time) and December 7 (11 a.m.-
4:30 p.m. eastern time), 2022

    Further information regarding these meetings may be found at:
http://www.nerc.com/Pages/Calendar.aspx.
    The discussions at the meetings, which are open to the public, may
address matters at issue in the following Commission proceeding:

Docket No. RD22-4-000 Registration of Inverter-Based Resources

    For further information, please contact Jonathan First, 202-502-
8529, or [email protected].

    Dated: November 28, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-26264 Filed 12-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 15, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 71263]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27155]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 10853-000]

Otter Tail Power Company; Notice of Authorization for Continued
Project Operation

    On November 27, 2019, Otter Tail Power Company, licensee for the
Otter Tail River Hydroelectric Project No. 10853, filed an Application
for a New Major License for Otter Tail River Hydroelectric Project
pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA) and the Commission's
regulations thereunder. The Otter Tail River Hydroelectric Project
consists of five developments on the Otter Tail River that starts in
the Township of Friberg, Minnesota and extends downstream (south) of
the City of Fergus Falls, Minnesota.
    The license for Project No. 10853 was issued for a period ending
November 30, 2021. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1),
requires the Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue
from year-to-year an annual license to the then licensee(s) under the
terms and conditions of the prior license until a new license is
issued, or the project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section
15 or any other applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior
license waived the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based
on section 9(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c),
and as set forth at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project
has filed an application for a subsequent license, the licensee may
continue to operate the project in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the license after the minor or minor part license
expires, until the Commission acts on its application. If the licensee
of such a project has not filed an application for a subsequent
license, then it may be required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to
continue project operations until the Commission issues someone else a
license for the project or otherwise orders disposition of the project.
    If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that an annual license for Project No. 10853 is issued to
Otter Tail Power Company, for a period effective December 1, 2021
through November 30, 2022 or until the issuance of a new license for
the project or other disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first.
If issuance of a new license (or other disposition) does not take place
on or before November 30, 2022, notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to 18 CFR 16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1) of the FPA
is renewed automatically without further order or notice by the
Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise.
    If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that Otter Tail Power Company, is authorized to continue
operation of the Otter Tail River Hydroelectric Project, until such
time as the Commission acts on its application for a new major license.

    Dated: December 9, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-27155 Filed 12-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 12 (Tuesday, January 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2758-2760]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00704]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74046; File No. SR-FICC-2014-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Rules of the
Government Securities Division and the Mortgage-Backed Securities
Division on Insolvency and Ceasing To Act

January 13, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On November 25, 2014, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation
(``FICC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') proposed rule change SR-FICC-2014-06 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\2\ The proposed change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on December 12, 2014.\3\ The Commission
received one comment supporting the proposed rule change.\4\ For the
reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73787 (December 8,
2014), 79 FR 73927 (December 12, 2014) (SR-FICC-2014-06).
    \4\ Letter from ``Anonymous,'' Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (Jan. 1, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The rule change, as proposed, amends the rulebooks of FICC's
Government Securities Division (``GSD'') and FICC's Mortgage-Backed
Securities Division (``MBSD'') to simplify those rules relating to the
insolvency of a member and ceasing to act, in order to simplify certain
aspects of FICC's process in a cease to act situation and provide
greater legal certainty for FICC and its members, particularly in an
intra-day cease to act situation.

A. Background

    In connection with lessons learned from a recent close-out
simulation exercise conducted by FICC's parent company, The Depository
Trust & Clearing Corporation, in which FICC participated, and a related
review of the GSD and MBSD rules, specific challenges were identified
relating to the administration of certain aspects of GSD and MBSD
insolvency and ceasing to act rule provisions, particularly in an
intra-day cease to act situation.

B. ``Time of Insolvency'' and ``Cut-Off Time''

    GSD and MBSD include in their current insolvency rules \5\ and
cease to act rules \6\ the concept of a ``Time of Insolvency,'' which
is defined to mean the time at which FICC determines to its reasonable
satisfaction that a member is ``insolvent'' within the meaning of GSD
Rule 22 or MBSD Rule 16, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ FICC, Government Securities Division Rulebook (``GSD
Rulebook''), Rule 22; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation, Mortgage-
Backed Securities Division Rulebook (``MBSD Rulebook''), Rule 16.
    \6\ GSD Rulebook, Rule 22A; MBSD Rulebook, Rule 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This ``Time of Insolvency'' concept is distinguished from the time
at which FICC ceases to act for a member. The GSD and MBSD rules
currently use ``Time of Insolvency'' as a line of demarcation when
determining FICC's obligations with respect to pending transactions
involving the insolvent member. Specifically, transactions with the
insolvent member that are not compared or deemed compared in accordance
with the GSD or MBSD rules, respectively, prior to the ``Time of
Insolvency'' are not eligible to be part of the close-out process,
unless otherwise determined by FICC's Board of Directors in order to
promote orderly settlement.
    For a non-insolvency cease to act situation, the GSD rules and the
MBSD rules on ceasing to act \7\ currently include the concept of a
``Cut-Off Time,'' which is defined to mean a time specified in advance
by FICC in a notice to its members at which it will cease to act for a
member. Like the ``Time of Insolvency'' concept, ``Cut-Off Time'' is
currently used in the GSD rules and the MBSD rules when determining
FICC's obligations with respect to pending transactions involving the
defaulted member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ GSD Rulebook, Rule 22A; MBSD Rulebook, Rule 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Identifying an exact time at which a member has become
``insolvent'' for purposes of establishing a ``Time of Insolvency'' may
pose potential challenges for FICC in circumstances where the member is
deemed ``insolvent'' based upon the determination or action of a third
party, such as the member's regulator, supervisory authority or a court
of competent jurisdiction. In an intra-day cease to act situation where
transaction data is being submitted to FICC in real-time, such
potential challenges may create a lack of legal certainty for FICC and
its members regarding FICC's obligations with respect to pending
transactions involving the insolvent member. The rule change removes
the ``Time of Insolvency'' concept from the GSD rules and the MBSD
rules and instead simply relies on the single time FICC ceases to act
for an insolvent member for purposes of determining its obligations
with respect to pending transactions involving such insolvent member.
    In order to also simplify its process in non-insolvency cease to
act situations, the rule change removes the separate ``Cut-Off Time''
concept from the GSD rules and the MBSD rules, and instead relies on
the single time FICC ceases to act for a defaulted member for purposes
of determining its obligations with respect to pending transactions
involving such defaulted member.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In addition to simplifying FICC's rules relating to the
insolvency of a member and ceasing to act, the rule change more
closely aligns the GSD rules and the MBSD rules with the rules of
FICC's affiliate, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC''). Under its Rule 18 (Procedures for When the Corporation
Declines or Ceases to Act), NSCC relies on the time it declines or
ceases to act for a member when determining which transactions
involving such member will be excluded from its operations, rather
than on a separate ``Time of Insolvency'' or ``Cut-Off Time,'' as
applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Transactions Deemed Compared Based Solely on Non-Defaulting Member
Data

    Currently, the provisions of the GSD's rules and the MBSD's rules
on ceasing to act,\9\ and the related prongs of the ``Compared Trade''
definition in Rule 1 of the each of GSD's rules and MBSD's rules
provide that, in the context of FICC ceasing to act for a member, a
transaction involving such member that would not otherwise be compared
or deemed compared under the GSD rules or the MBSD rules, respectively,
may, in certain circumstances, be deemed a compared trade based solely
on data submitted by a non-defaulting member. The determination of
whether such a

transaction should be deemed a compared trade is currently based on a
multi-pronged facts-and-circumstances-based test, including
determinations as to whether the transaction was executed prior to FICC
ceasing to act for the defaulted member, whether the transaction was
entered into in good faith and not primarily in order to take advantage
of the defaulted member's financial condition and whether the
transaction is an ``Off-the-Market Transaction'' as defined in Rule 1
of each of GSD's rules and MBSD's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ GSD Rulebook, Rule 22A; MBSD Rulebook, Rule 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Administering such a multi-pronged facts-and-circumstances-based
test for individual transactions in a cease to act situation,
particularly an intra-day cease to act situation where transaction data
is being submitted to FICC in real-time, may pose potential challenges
to FICC and create a lack of legal certainty for FICC and its members
regarding FICC's obligations with respect to individual pending
transactions involving the insolvent or otherwise defaulted member. In
order to simplify FICC's process in a cease to act situation and
provide FICC and its members with greater ex ante legal certainty
regarding the rules applicable to pending transactions involving an
insolvent or otherwise defaulted member, the rule change removes the
multi-pronged facts and circumstances-based test and the related
provisions of each of GSD's rules and MBSD's rules, and instead simply
relies on the compared trade definitions under each of GSD's and MBSD's
rules, subject to the discretion of FICC's Board of Directors to
determine otherwise in order to promote orderly settlement with respect
to transactions the data on which have been submitted only by non-
defaulting members.

D. GSD Rule Changes

    The rule change, as approved, amends the GSD rules as follows:
    In Rule 1--``Definitions,'' the following definitions have been
revised:
    The term ``Compared Trade'' is revised to remove the prong of the
definition which provides that, in the context of FICC ceasing to act
for a member under GSD Rule 22A, a transaction involving such member
that would not otherwise be a Compared Trade under the GSD rules may,
in certain circumstances, be deemed a Compared Trade based solely on
data submitted by a non-defaulting member.
    The term ``Off-the-Market Transaction'' is revised to conform the
text and the numbering of the definition with the text and numbering of
the parallel ``Off-the-Market Transaction'' definition in the MBSD
rules.
    In Rule 3A--``Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members,'' Sections
15(a) and 16(a) of Rule 3A are revised to remove references to Rule 22,
current Section 3 (Notification of Insolvency) and related conforming
changes to the text of such sections are made. Section 15(b) of Rule 3A
is revised to remove the reference to the ``Time of Insolvency''
concept and to align the text regarding the actions taken by FICC in
connection with the insolvency of a Sponsored Member with the parallel
text included in Section 16 of Rule 3A relating to the actions taken by
FICC in connection with the insolvency of a Sponsoring Member.
Consistent with the numbering of Section 15 of Rule 3A, Section 16(a)
of Rule 3A is revised to make the second paragraph a new subsection
(b). New Section 16(b) is also revised to align the text regarding the
actions taken by FICC in connection with the insolvency of a Sponsoring
Member with the parallel text included in Section 15(b) relating to the
actions taken by FICC in connection with the insolvency of a Sponsored
Member.
    In Rule 22--``Insolvency of a Member,'' current Section 3, which
provides for FICC to notice its membership and the Commission regarding
the insolvency of a GSD member, is removed in order to clarify that GSD
members and the Commission will only receive one notice from FICC at
the time it ceases to act for a GSD member in accordance with the
provisions of Section 1 of Rule 22A (Procedures for When the
Corporation Ceases to Act), whether FICC ceases to act for the member
for insolvency or non-insolvency related reasons. Section 4 of Rule 22
(Ceasing to Act for the Member) is renumbered as new Section 3 and
revised to remove the reference to the ``Time of Insolvency'' concept.
    In Rule 22A--``Procedures for When the Corporation Ceases to Act,''
Section 1 (Notification) is revised to clarify that FICC will notice
the Commission and GSD members of every decision to cease to act for a
member. Section 1 is further revised to remove the requirement that
FICC establish a separate ``Time of Insolvency,'' in the event it
ceases to act because of a member's insolvency, or ``Cut-Off Time,'' in
the event it ceases to act for a member for non-insolvency related
reasons.
    Sections 2, 2(a) and 2(b) of Rule 22A are revised remove the ``Time
of Insolvency'' and ``Cut-Off Time'' concepts, and instead rely on the
time FICC ceases to act for a member for purposes of determining its
obligations with respect to pending transactions involving such member.
Section 2(a) is further revised to use the defined term ``Compared
Trade'' for purposes of clarifying which transactions are eligible to
be part of the close-out process as of the time FICC ceases to act for
a member, subject to the discretion of FICC's Board of Directors to
determine otherwise in order to promote orderly settlement.
    Section 2(c) of Rule 22A, which provides that, in the context of
FICC ceasing to act for a member, a transaction involving such member
that would not otherwise be compared or deemed compared under the GSD
rules may, in certain circumstances, be deemed compared based solely on
data submitted by a non-defaulting member, based on a multi-pronged
facts and circumstances-based test, is removed. FICC will instead rely
on the ``Compared Trade'' definition in GSD Rule 1 when determining its
obligations with respect to pending transactions involving an insolvent
or otherwise defaulted member, subject to the discretion of FICC's
Board of Directors to determine otherwise in order to promote orderly
settlement with respect to transactions the data on which have been
submitted only by non-defaulting members.

E. MBSD Rule Changes

    The rule change, as approved, amends the MBSD rules as follows:
    In Rule 1--``Definitions,'' the following definitions have been
revised:
    The term ``Compared Trade'' is revised to remove the prong of the
definition which provides that, in the context of FICC ceasing to act
for a member under MBSD Rule 17, a transaction involving such member
that would not otherwise be compared or deemed compared under the MBSD
rules may, in certain circumstances, be deemed a Compared Trade based
solely on data submitted by a non-defaulting member. The ``Compared
Trade'' definition is further clarified to reference the specific MBSD
rules \10\ pursuant to which a transaction would be compared or deemed
compared by MBSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ MBSD Rulebook, Rule 5 and Rule 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Rule 16--``Insolvency of a Member,'' current Section 3 of Rule
16, which provides for FICC to notice its membership and the Commission
regarding the insolvency of a member, is removed in order to clarify
that MBSD members and the Commission will only receive one notice from
FICC at the time FICC ceases to act for a MBSD member in accordance
with the provisions of Section 1 of Rule 17 (Procedures for When the
Corporation Ceases to Act), whether FICC ceases to act for a MBSD

member for insolvency or non-insolvency related reasons. Section 4 of
Rule 16 (Ceasing to Act for the Member) is renumbered as new Section 3
and revised to remove the reference to the ``Time of Insolvency''
concept.
    In Rule 17--``Procedures for When the Corporation Ceases to Act,''
Section 1 (Notification) is revised to clarify that FICC will notice
the Commission as well as MBSD's members of every decision to cease to
act for a MBSD member. Section 1 of Rule 17 is further revised to
remove the requirement that FICC establish a separate ``Time of
Insolvency,'' in the event it ceases to act because of a member's
insolvency, or ``Cut-Off Time,'' in the event it ceases to act for a
member for non-insolvency related reasons.
    Sections 2, 2(a), 2(d) and 2(e) of Rule 17 are revised to remove
the ``Time of Insolvency'' and ``Cut-Off Time'' concepts, and instead
rely on the time FICC ceases to act for a member for purposes of
determining its obligations with respect to pending transactions
involving such member.
    Section 2(g) of Rule 17, which provides that, in the context of
FICC ceasing to act for a MBSD member, a transaction involving such
member that would not otherwise be compared or deemed compared under
the MBSD rules may, in certain circumstances, be deemed compared based
solely on data submitted by a non-defaulting member, based on a multi-
pronged facts and circumstances-based test, is removed. FICC will
instead rely on the compared trade definitions in the MBSD rules when
determining its obligations with respect to pending transactions
involving an insolvent or otherwise defaulted member, subject to the
discretion of FICC's Board of Directors to determine otherwise in order
to promote orderly settlement with respect to transactions the data on
which have been submitted only by non-defaulting members.

III. Discussion

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \11\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it
finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \12\
requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be
designed to achieve several goals, including promoting the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to
the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission concludes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) \13\ of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the rules and regulations
promulgated thereunder because it will promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a national system for the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions. In particular, the rule change simplifies FICC's process
in a cease to act situation and provide greater legal certainty for
FICC and its members as to FICC's obligations with respect to pending
transactions involving an insolvent or otherwise defaulted member,
particularly in an intra-day cease to act situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,
particularly those set forth in Section 17A,\14\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\15\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FICC-2014-06) be, and hereby
is, approved.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \16\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00704 Filed 1-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21587-21590]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09315]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80581; File No. SR-Phlx-2017-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
of Amendment No. 1 and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine
Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To Permit the Listing and Trading of P.M.-Settled
NASDAQ-100 Index[supreg] Options on a Pilot Basis

May 3, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On January 18, 2017, NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
permit the listing and trading of P.M.-settled NASDAQ-100 Index[supreg]
(``NASDAQ-100'') options on a pilot basis. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on February 3, 2017.\3\
On March 14, 2017, the Commission extended the time period within which
to approve the proposed rule change,

disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.\4\ On May 2,
2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.\5\ The Commission received no comment letters on the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79894 (January 30,
2017), 82 FR 9259 (``Notice'').
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80241, 82 FR 14393
(March 20, 2017).
    \5\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange revised its proposal to add
that raw percentage price change data as well as percentage price
change data normalized for prevailing market volatility, as measured
by an appropriate index as agreed by the Commission and the
Exchange, would be provided as part of the pilot data. When the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 with the Commission, it also
submitted Amendment No. 1 to the public comment file for SR-Phlx-
2017-04 (available at: www.sec.gov/comments/sr-phlx-2017-04/phlx201704.htm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is publishing this notice and order to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1,
from interested persons and to institute proceedings pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \6\ to determine whether to approve or
disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal, as Modified by Amendment No. 1

    The Exchange is proposing to amend its rules to permit the listing
and trading, on a pilot basis, of NASDAQ-100 options with third-Friday-
of-the-month expiration dates, whose exercise settlement value will be
based on the closing index value, symbol XQC, of the NASDAQ-100 on the
expiration day (``P.M.-settled'').
    The Exchange represents that the conditions for listing the
proposed contract (``NDXPM'') on Phlx will be similar to those for Full
Value Nasdaq 100 Options (``NDX''), which are already listed and
trading on Phlx, except that NDXPM will be P.M.-settled.\7\ In
particular, NDXPM will use a $100 multiplier, and the minimum trading
increment will be $0.05 for options trading below $3.00 and $0.10 for
all other series. Strike price intervals will be set at no less than
$5.00. Consistent with existing rules for index options, the Exchange
will allow up to nine near-term expiration months, as well as LEAPS.
The product will have European-style exercise and will not be subject
to position limits, though there would be enhanced reporting
requirements.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 9260.
    \8\ For a more detailed description of the proposed NDXPM
contract, see Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, the proposal would become effective on a pilot basis
for a period of twelve months (``Pilot Program''). If the Exchange were
to propose an extension of the Pilot Program or should the Exchange
propose to make the Pilot Program permanent, then the Exchange would
submit a filing proposing such amendments to the Pilot Program. The
Exchange notes that any positions established under the pilot would not
be impacted by the expiration of the pilot. For example, a position in
a P.M.-settled series that expires beyond the conclusion of the pilot
period could be established during the 12-month pilot. If the Pilot
Program were not extended, then the position could continue to exist.
However, the Exchange notes that any further trading in the series
would be restricted to transactions where at least one side of the
trade is a closing transaction.
    The Exchange proposes to submit a Pilot Program report to the
Commission at least two months prior to the expiration date of the
Pilot Program (the ``annual report''). The annual report would contain
an analysis of volume, open interest, and trading patterns. The
analysis would examine trading in the proposed option product as well
as trading in the securities that comprise the NASDAQ-100. In addition,
for series that exceed certain minimum open interest parameters, the
annual report would provide analysis of index price volatility and
share trading activity. In addition to the annual report, the Exchange
would provide the Commission with periodic interim reports while the
pilot is in effect that would contain some, but not all, of the
information contained in the annual report. The annual report would be
provided to the Commission on a confidential basis. The annual report
would contain the following volume and open interest data:
    (1) Monthly volume aggregated for all trades;
    (2) monthly volume aggregated by expiration date;
    (3) monthly volume for each individual series;
    (4) month-end open interest aggregated for all series;
    (5) month-end open interest for all series aggregated by expiration
date; and
    (6) month-end open interest for each individual series.
    In addition to the annual report, the Exchange would provide the
Commission with interim reports of the information listed in Items (1)
through (6) above periodically as required by the Commission while the
Pilot Program is in effect. These interim reports would also be
provided on a confidential basis. The annual report would also contain
the information noted in Items (1) through (6) above for Expiration
Friday, A.M.-settled NASDAQ-100 options traded on Phlx.
    In addition, the annual report would contain the following analysis
of trading patterns in Expiration Friday, P.M.-settled NASDAQ-100
option series in the Pilot Program: (1) A time series analysis of open
interest; and (2) an analysis of the distribution of trade sizes. Also,
for series that exceed certain minimum parameters, the annual report
would contain the following analysis related to index price changes and
underlying share trading volume at the close on Expiration Fridays: A
comparison of index price changes at the close of trading on a given
Expiration Friday with comparable price changes from a control sample.
The data would include a calculation of percentage price changes for
various time intervals and compare that information to the respective
control sample. Raw percentage price change data as well as percentage
price change data normalized for prevailing market volatility, as
measured by an appropriate index as agreed by the Commission and the
Exchange, would be provided. The Exchange would provide a calculation
of share volume for a sample set of the component securities
representing an upper limit on share trading that could be attributable
to expiring in-the-money series. The data would include a comparison of
the calculated share volume for securities in the sample set to the
average daily trading volumes of those securities over a sample period.
The minimum open interest parameters, control sample, time intervals,
method for randomly selecting the component securities, and sample
periods would be determined by the Exchange and the Commission.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 9261 and Amendment No. 1. The
proposed Pilot Program for NDXPM options is similar to the pilot
program approved for the listing and trading of P.M.-settled S&P 500
Index options (``SPXPM options''). See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 64011 (March 2, 2011), 76 FR 12775, 12776-77 (March 8,
2011) (``SPXPM Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-Phlx-
2017-04, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, and Grounds for Disapproval
Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \10\ to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, should be approved or
disapproved. Institution of such proceedings is appropriate at

this time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposed
rule change, as discussed below. Institution of proceedings does not
indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with respect
to any of the issues involved. Rather, as stated below, the Commission
seeks and encourages interested persons to provide comments on the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\11\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration, as
discussed below. In particular, Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \12\
requires that the rules of an exchange be designed, among other things,
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has had concerns about the potential adverse effects
and impact of P.M. settlement upon market volatility and the operation
of fair and orderly markets on the underlying cash market at or near
the close of trading, including for cash-settled derivatives contracts
based on a broad-based index.\13\ The Commission believes that the
proposal to allow P.M. settlement of an option on the NASDAQ-100 raises
questions as to the potential effects on the underlying cash equities
markets, and thus as to whether it is consistent with the requirements
of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, including whether the proposal is
designed to prevent manipulation, promote just and equitable principles
of trade, perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and the
national market system, and protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For a detailed discussion of the history of the concerns
related to such P.M. settlement, see Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 64599 (June 3, 2011), 76 FR 33798, 33801-02 (June 9, 2011)
(order instituting proceedings to determine whether to approve or
disapprove a proposed rule change to allow the listing and trading
of SPXPM options) and 65256 (September 2, 2011), 76 FR 55969, 55970-
76 (September 9, 2011) (order approving proposed rule change to
establish a pilot program to list and trade SPXPM options).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Commission solicits comment, analysis, and data
concerning whether the Exchange's proposal is consistent with the Act.
The Commission is asking commenters to address the merits of Phlx's
statements in support of its proposal, in addition to any other
comments they may wish to submit about the proposed rule change or any
data or analysis that commenters think may be relevant to the
Commission's consideration of the proposal. Specifically, the
Commission seeks input from commenters to inform its evaluation of
whether P.M. settlement for Phlx's proposed options on the NASDAQ-100
could impact volume and volatility on the underlying cash equities
markets at the close of the trading day, and the potential consequences
this might have for investors and the overall stability of the markets.
    In addition, the Commission seeks input from commenters with
respect to the operation and structure of the markets today in
comparison to their operation and structure at the time of the shift to
A.M. settlement of cash-settled index options, and whether the current
operation and structure of the markets support, or do not support,
allowing NASDAQ-100 options on Phlx to be P.M.-settled.
    More generally, the Commission seeks commenters' views on whether
there are differences between Phlx's proposed product and other P.M.-
settled, cash-settled options that raise novel issues and, if so,
whether commenters believe such differences warrant different treatment
or a different pilot design.
    As noted above, the Exchange's proposal seeks to allow the listing
and trading of NDXPM options on a pilot basis, and the Pilot Program,
including its associated data and reports, are key in assisting the
Commission and its staff to analyze the impact of the proposal,
including with respect to the concerns described above. Thus, the
Commission is considering and requesting comment on whether commenters
believe the proposed Pilot Program is appropriate. As noted above, the
proposed Pilot Program is similar to the pilot program for the listing
and trading of SPXPM options.\14\ The Commission requests commenters'
views on whether the proposed Pilot Program would adequately
demonstrate whether the Commission's concerns about the adverse effect
and impact of P.M. settlement are, or are not, implicated by the
listing and trading of P.M.-settled options on the NASDAQ-100 and, if
not, what information or data the pilot should include. The Commission
seeks public comment on whether there are differences between the
listing and trading of SPXPM options and the proposed NDXPM options
that would warrant differences in the data, analyses, or reports that
should be required for the Exchange's proposed pilot. In addition,
Amendment No. 1 of the proposal added that ``[r]aw percentage price
change data as well as percentage price change data normalized for
prevailing market volatility, as measured by an appropriate index as
agreed by the Commission and the Exchange'' would be included as part
of the pilot. The Commission seeks input on what commenters believe
would be appropriate data to use with respect to measuring volatility
for the proposed pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See SPXPM Notice, supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission requests any comment, data, or analysis
that commenters think may be relevant to the Commission's consideration
of the Exchange's proposal for P.M.-settled options on the NASDAQ-100.

IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written
views of interested persons concerning whether the proposal, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) or any
other provision of the Act, or the rules and regulations thereunder.
Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views,
data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule
19b-4, any request for an opportunity to make an oral presentation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Act Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on
Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposal, as modified by Amendment No.
1, should be approved or disapproved by May 30, 2017. Any person who
wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's submission must file
that rebuttal by June 13, 2017.
    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-Phlx-2017-04 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-Phlx-2017-04. 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 these filings 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-Phlx-2017-04 and should be
submitted on or before May 30, 2017. Rebuttal comments should be
submitted by June 13, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-09315 Filed 5-8-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 1, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 20)]
[Notices]
[Page 5154-5156]
[DOCID:fr01fe10-117]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-29125; File No. 812-13746]

Assurant, Inc., et al.; Notice of Application and Temporary Order

January 26, 2010.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Temporary order and notice of application for a permanent order
under section 9(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'').

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

Summary of Application: Applicants have received a temporary order
exempting them from section 9(a) of the Act, with respect to an
injunction entered against Assurant, Inc. (``Assurant'') on January 26,
2010 by the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York (``Injunction''), until the Commission takes final action on
an application for a permanent order. Applicants also have applied for
a permanent order. APPLICANTS: Assurant, Union Security Insurance
Company (``USIC'') and Union Security Life Insurance Company of New
York (``USLICNY,'' and, together with USIC, the ``Depositor
Applicants'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request that any relief granted pursuant to the
application also apply to any other company of which Assurant is or
may become an affiliated person (together with the Applicants, the
``Covered Persons'').

DATES: Filing Date: The application was filed on January 21, 2010, and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
amended on January 26, 2010.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving Applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on February 22, 2010, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on Applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants: Assurant, One Chase
Manhattan Plaza, 41st Floor, New York, NY 10005; USIC, 2323 Grand
Boulevard, Kansas City, MO 64108-2670; USLICNY, 212 Highbridge Street,
Suite D, Fayetteville, NY 13066.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Yoder, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
Michael W. Mundt, Assistant Director, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of
Investment Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a temporary order and a
summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained
via the Commission's website by searching for the file number, or an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/
search.htm, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Applicants' Representations:
    1. Assurant, through its subsidiaries and affiliates, is a provider
of specialized insurance products and related services. The Depositor
Applicants are indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries of Assurant and,
before 2002, issued and sold variable life insurance and annuity
contracts. In April 2001, Assurant's predecessor, Fortis, Inc., sold
its entire variable life insurance and annuity contract business to The
Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. (``Hartford'') through modified
coinsurance (the ``Hartford Transaction''). As a result, the Depositor
Applicants remained the issuers of the outstanding life insurance and
annuity products, but Hartford has assumed all day-to-day
responsibility for the administration of the policies. The Depositor
Applicants currently serve as depositors for three separate accounts
organized as unit investment trusts and

registered under the Act (``Separate Accounts'').
    2. On January 26, 2010, the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York entered the Injunction against Assurant
in a matter brought by the Commission.\2\ The Commission alleged in the
complaint (``Complaint'') that Assurant violated sections 13(a),
13(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act, and rules 12b-20, 13a-
11 and 13a-13 under the Exchange Act, in connection with Assurant's
accounting and public reporting practices. The Complaint related to
Assurant's inaccurate recording of income for third quarter of 2004 in
the consolidated financial statements included in its periodic and
other filings for 2004. The inaccuracies in the financial statements
relate to recorded income from a purported reinsurance contract. The
Complaint alleged that Assurant violated the corporate reporting,
recordkeeping, and internal controls provisions of the Exchange Act.
Without admitting or denying any of the allegations in the Complaint,
except as to jurisdiction, Assurant consented to the entry of the
Injunction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Securities and Exchange Commission v. Assurant, Inc., Final
Judgment as to Defendant Assurant, Inc., 10-CV-0484 (S.D.N.Y,
January 26, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Applicants' Legal Analysis:
    1. Section 9(a)(2) of the Act, in relevant part, prohibits a person
who has been enjoined from engaging in or continuing any conduct or
practice in connection with the purchase or sale of a security from
acting, among other things, as an investment adviser or depositor of
any registered investment company or a principal underwriter for any
registered open-end investment company, registered unit investment
trust, or registered face-amount certificate company (the registered
investment companies are collectively referred to as ``Funds'').
Section 9(a)(3) of the Act makes the prohibition in section 9(a)(2)
applicable to a company, any affiliated person of which has been
disqualified under the provisions of section 9(a)(2). Section 2(a)(3)
of the Act defines ``affiliated person'' to include, among others, any
person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under
common control, with the other person and any person directly or
indirectly owning, controlling, or holding with the power to vote, 5
percent or more of the outstanding voting securities of such other
person. Applicants state that Assurant is an affiliated person of each
of the other Applicants within the meaning of section 2(a)(3).
Applicants state that, as a result of the Injunction, they would be
subject to the disqualification provisions of section 9(a).
    2. Section 9(c) of the Act provides that the Commission shall grant
an application for an exemption from the disqualification provisions of
section 9(a) of the Act if it is established that these provisions, as
applied to applicants, are unduly or disproportionately severe or that
the conduct of the applicants has been such as not to make it against
the public interest or the protection of investors to grant the
exemption. Applicants have filed an application pursuant to section
9(c) seeking temporary and permanent orders exempting them from the
disqualification provisions of section 9(a).
    3. Applicants believe that they meet the standards for exemption
specified in section 9(c). Applicants state that the prohibitions of
section 9(a) as applied to them would be unduly and disproportionately
severe and that it would not be against the public interest or the
protection of investors to grant the requested exemption from section
9(a).
    4. Applicants state that the alleged conduct giving rise to the
Injunction did not involve any of the Applicants acting in the capacity
of investment adviser, subadviser, depositor or principal underwriter
for any Fund. Applicants state that the alleged conduct did not involve
the assets of any of the Separate Accounts. Applicants state that,
except as discussed below, since the closing of the Hartford
Transaction in 2001, (i) none of the current or former directors,
officers or employees of the Applicants (other than Assurant itself and
its predecessor entities) had any knowledge of or had any involvement
in, the conduct alleged in the Complaint and (ii) the personnel at
Assurant who were involved in the violations alleged in the Complaint
have had no, and will not have any future, involvement in the Covered
Persons' serving as investment adviser, depositor, or principal
underwriter for any Fund. In addition, Applicants represent that since
the closing of the Hartford Transaction, Applicants have not been
involved in any investment decisions with respect to the Separate
Accounts.
    5. Applicants state that three persons who are current or former
officers of Assurant received Wells notices in connection with the
Commission's investigation into the facts underlying the Complaint
(``Wells Notice Recipients''). Applicants state that these persons have
served as officers or directors of the Depositor Applicants. Applicants
further state that one of the Wells Notice Recipients has overall
responsibility for Assurant's health insurance business and therefore
continues to serve as an officer of USIC to perform necessary services
solely in connection with that business segment. Applicants state that
neither of the other Wells Notice Recipients is currently an officer,
director or employee of either of the Depositor Applicants.
    6. Applicants state that, other than signing certain public filings
required under the federal securities laws containing representations
with respect to the Separate Accounts and receiving communications that
referenced the Separate Accounts, since the closing of the Hartford
Transaction in 2001, the Wells Notice Recipients have not been involved
in the Depositor Applicants' serving as a depositor for the Separate
Accounts and will not be involved in that capacity in the future.\3\
Applicants further state that, to the extent other current or former
officers, directors, or employees of the Depositor Applicants had any
knowledge of, or any involvement in, the conduct alleged in the
Complaint (``Certain Depositor Applicant Personnel''), since the
closing of the Hartford Transaction in 2001, those individuals have not
been involved in the Depositor Applicants' serving as a depositor for
the Separate Accounts and will not be involved in that capacity in the
future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Certain Wells Notice Recipients may, however, pursuant to
their roles as officers of Assurant, sign, and receive information
regarding the Separate Accounts from the Applicants in connection
with the signing of, Assurant filings required under the applicable
Federal securities laws that make reference to Depositor Applicants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Applicants state that the inability of the Depositor Applicants
to continue to serve as depositors to the Separate Accounts would
result in potential hardships for the Depositor Applicants and the
variable annuity contract holders and variable life insurance
policyholders. If disqualified from serving as depositors for the
Separate Accounts, the Depositor Applicants could no longer hold those
assets and would be forced to cancel and unwind the variable annuity
contracts and variable life insurance policies. Contract holders and
policyholders, through no fault of their own, would incur the costs of
seeking and purchasing viable alternatives. Applicants also state that
the Depositor Applicants have committed substantial resources to serve
as depositors to the Separate Accounts and that prohibiting the
Depositor Applicants from serving as depositors to the Separate
Accounts would render critical terms of the Hartford

Transaction void and would require significant and costly restructuring
of the modified coinsurance transaction structure.
    8. Applicants state that they have not previously applied for an
exemptive order under section 9(c) of the Act.
    Applicants' Conditions:
    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. The Wells Notice Recipients and Certain Depositor Applicant
Personnel will not be involved in the Covered Persons' serving as an
investment adviser, depositor, or principal underwriter to any Fund.
Applicants will develop and implement procedures designed reasonably to
assure compliance with this condition.
    2. Any temporary exemption granted pursuant to the application
shall be without prejudice to, and shall not limit the Commission's
rights in any manner with respect to, any Commission investigation of,
or administrative proceedings involving or against, Covered Persons,
including, without limitation, the consideration by the Commission of a
permanent exemption from section 9(a) of the Act requested pursuant to
the application or the revocation or removal of any temporary
exemptions granted under the Act in connection with the application.
    Temporary Order:
    The Commission has considered the matter and finds that the
Applicants have made the necessary showing to justify granting a
temporary exemption. Accordingly,
    It Is Hereby Ordered, pursuant to section 9(c) of the Act, that
Assurant, USIC, USLICNY, and any other Covered Persons are granted a
temporary exemption from the provisions of section 9(a), solely with
respect to the Injunction, subject to the conditions in the
application, from January 26, 2010, until the Commission takes final
action on their application for a permanent order.

    By the Commission.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-1950 Filed 1-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55111-55112]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23010]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: PR15-42-000.
    Applicants: TPL SouthTex Transmission Company LP.
    Description: Submits tariff filing per 284.123(e)/.224: Filing of
Revised Operating Statement to be effective 9/1/2015 Filing Type: 770.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5161.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: PR15-43-000.
    Applicants: Enable Illinois Intrastate Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Submits tariff filing per 284.123(e)/.224: 2015
Housekeeping to be effective 9/28/2015; Filing Type: 770.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5288.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1209-000.
    Applicants: Enable Mississippi River Transmission, L.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 2015 Housekeeping Filing to
be effective 9/28/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/26/15.
    Accession Number: 20150826-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1210-000.
    Applicants: Northwest Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 2015 Winter Fuel Filing to
be effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/26/15.
    Accession Number: 20150826-5132.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1211-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 20150826 Negotiated Rate to
be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5064.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1212-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Cash Out Reference Spot
Prices to be effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5084.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1213-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: September 1-30 2015 Auction
to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5108.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1214-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Fuel Filing on 8-27-15 to be
effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5123.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1215-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement
Update (APS Sept 2015) to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5210.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.
    Docket Numbers: RP15-1216-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Park and Loan Locations
Filing to be effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5215.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1217-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Exhibit A Filing to be
effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5217.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1219-000.
    Applicants: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Non-Conforming (Range
Resources) to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150827-5277.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/8/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1220-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates--Cherokee
AGL--Replacement Shippers--Sep 2015 to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1221-000.
    Applicants: Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates Filing on
8-28-15 to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5054.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1222-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: BBPC 2015-09-01 Releases to
EDF Trading to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5059.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1223-000.
    Applicants: Ruby Pipeline, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: FL&U and EPC to be effective
10/1/15 to be effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1224-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: DTI--August 28, 2015
Negotiated Rate Agreement to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1226-000.
    Applicants: MarkWest Pioneer, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Quarterly FRP Filing to be
effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1227-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Carolina Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: 2015 Penalty Revenue Sharing Report of Dominion
Carolina Gas Transmission, LLC under RP15-1227.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5235.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1182-001.
    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing RP15-1182 filing for Record 36 to be
effective 9/14/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/28/15.
    Accession Number: 20150828-5257.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/9/15.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 31, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-23010 Filed 9-11-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 7, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38945-38947]
[FR Doc No: 2010-16517]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0678; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-020-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 777-200 and -
300 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Model 777-200 and -300 series airplanes. This proposed AD would
require installing new operational software in the cabin management
system, and loading new software into the mass memory card. This
proposed AD results from an in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems
review. We are proposing this AD to ensure that the flightcrew is able
to turn off electrical power to the IFE system and other non-essential
electrical systems through a switch in the flight compartment in the
event of smoke or flames. In the event of smoke or flames in the
airplane flight deck or passenger cabin, the flightcrew's inability to
turn off electrical power to the IFE system and other non-essential
electrical systems could result in the inability to control smoke or
flames in the airplane flight deck or passenger cabin during a non-
normal or emergency situation.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 23, 2010.

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 W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Salameh, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; 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-2010-0678;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-020-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    In response to numerous reports of smoke or flames in the passenger
cabin of various models of transport category airplanes, we conducted a
comprehensive in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems review. Earlier
investigation of the reports had revealed that the source of the smoke
and flames

was from cabin IFE system components, including electronic seat boxes
mounted under passenger seats, IFR wirings, IFE monitors, cabin
lighting, wall outlets, and other non-essential cabin electrical
systems.
    The systems review disclosed that in order to minimize the risk of
smoke or flames in the passenger cabin, a switch is needed in the
flight compartment to enable the flightcrew to turn off electrical
power to the IFE system and other non-essential electrical systems. In
the event of smoke or flames in the airplane flight deck or passenger
cabin, the flightcrew's inability to turn off power to the IFE system
and other non-essential electrical systems, if not corrected, could
result in the inability to control smoke or flames in the airplane
flight deck or passenger cabin during a non-normal or emergency
situation.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 777-23-0175, Revision 2,
dated October 12, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for
installing new operational software in the cabin management system as
follows:
     At the cabin system control panel (CSCP), remove the
installed mass memory card (MMC) 285W0925-1 or 285W0925-2.
     Install the new MMC 285W0925-3.
     Install a new cabin system management unit (CSMU) software
part number 2313-BCE-01T-03.
     Install a new cabin area control panel (CACP) software
part number 2313-BCE-01U-02.
     Install a new zone management unit (ZMU) software part
number 2374-BCE-021-02.
     Install a new overhead electronics unit (OEU) operational
software (OPS) (12 port) part number 2310-BCE-01V-02, if the airplane
configuration has OEU hardware 285W0029-5 installed.
     Install a new configuration database (CDB).
     Install the new CDB to the cabin service system.
    Boeing Service Bulletin 777-23-0175, Revision 2, dated October 12,
2006, specifies prior or concurrent accomplishment of Boeing Component
Service Bulletin 285W0925-23-02, dated July 11, 2002, which describes
procedures for loading the new cabin services system central storage
device software and CSCP OPS into the MMC.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 59 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S.
operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                                 Table--Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
                         Action                             Work hours     Average labor       Parts         Cost per       registered      Fleet cost
                                                                           rate per hour                      product        airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification--New software in the cabin management                     4             $85              $0            $340              59         $20,060
 system.................................................
Concurrent modification--New software in the mass memory               1              85               0              85              59           5,015
 card...................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance 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:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2010-0678; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-020-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by August 23, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777-200 and -300
series airplanes, certificated in any category; as

identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 777-23-0175, Revision 2, dated
October 12, 2006.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 23:
Communications.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from an in-flight entertainment (IFE)
systems review. We are proposing this AD to minimize the risk of
smoke or flames in the passenger cabin by installing a switch in the
flight compartment to enable the flightcrew to turn off electrical
power to the IFE system and other non-essential electrical systems.
In the event of smoke or flames in the airplane flight deck or
passenger cabin, the flightcrew's inability to turn off electrical
power to the IFE system and other non-essential electrical systems
could result in the inability to control smoke or flames in the
airplane flight deck or passenger cabin during a non-normal or
emergency situation.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Modification

    (g) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD:
Replace the mass memory card (MMC) with a new MMC; install new cabin
system management unit (CSMU) software, cabin area control panel
(CACP) software, and new zone management unit (ZMU) software;
install new overhead electronics unit (OEU) operational program
software, if applicable; install a new configuration database (CDB);
and install the new CDB to the cabin service system; in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 777-
23-0175, Revision 2, dated October 12, 2006.

Concurrent Requirement

    (h) Prior to or concurrently with accomplishing the requirements
of paragraph (g) of this AD, load the new cabin services system
central storage device software and cabin system control panel
operational software into the MMC, in accordance with Boeing
Component Service Bulletin 285W0925-23-02, dated July 11, 2002.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Joe Salameh, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch,
ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-
6454; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be e-mailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
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 AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 29, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-16517 Filed 7-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P