                                                                      9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
 [Docket Number USCG-2021-0751]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Chincoteague Bay, Chincoteague, VA
AGENCY:  Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION:  Temporary final rule.
________________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY:  The Coast Guard is extending the duration of a temporary safety zone for certain navigable waters within a 500-yard radius from centerpoint of a downed aircraft reported within Chincoteague Bay just north of Wildcat Point.  This action is necessary to provide for the safety of persons and the marine environment from the potential safety hazards associated with the damage assessment and salvage of the grounded aircraft, through May 6, 2022.  Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Virginia or designated representative.
DATES:  This rule is effective without actual notice from [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] through May 6, 2022.  For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from April 7, 2022, until [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
ADDRESSES:  To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2021-0751 in the search box and click "Search."  Next, in the Document Type column, select "Supporting & Related Material."
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  If you have questions on this rule, call or email LCDR Ashley Holm, Sector Virginia, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard, Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I.  Table of Abbreviations

CFR		Code of Federal Regulations
COTP		Captain of the Port
DHS		Department of Homeland Security
FR		Federal Register
NPRM		Notice of proposed rulemaking
§		Section
U.S.C.		United States Code

II.  Background Information and Regulatory History
      On March 31, 2022, the Coast Guard issued a temporary final rule establishing a safety zone on the navigable waters of Chincoteague Bay to protect persons and vessels during damage assessment and salvage operations at the aircraft wreck site.  The original rule was effective through April 7, 2022.  However, additional time is needed to conduct the damage assessment and salvage operations, and, as a  result, the Coast Guard needs to extend the safety zone through May 6, 2022.  The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)).  This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are "impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest."  Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this extension because it would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.  The Coast Guard was unable to publish an NPRM and hold a reasonable comment period for this rulemaking due to the emergent nature of the continuing damage assessment and salvage operations and required publication of this extension.
      Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.  Delaying the effective date of this rule would be impracticable because immediate action to restrict vessel traffic within the aircraft wreckage site is needed to protect life, property and the environment, therefore a 30-day notice period is impracticable.  Delaying the effective date would be contrary to the safety zone's intended objectives of providing immediate protection to on-scene emergency personal, creating a working buffer necessary to mitigate any safety and potential pollution threats caused by the wreckage and establishing immediate maritime safety in the vicinity of on-scene salvage and damage assessments.
III.  Legal Authority and Need for Rule
      The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034.  The Captain of the Port Sector Virginia (COTP) has determined that potential hazards exist within the aircraft wreckage site and it is necessary to keep the area clear while assessments and salvage operations are being conducted.   This rule is needed to protect persons who may transit in the vicinity of the wreckage site which involves on-going damage assessments, the potential for floating wreckage debris, potential pollution, and salvage operations.
IV.  Discussion of the Rule
      This rule extends the effective dates of an established safety zone, originally established on March 31, 2022, and effective through April 7, 2022, through May 6, 2022.  The safety zone includes all navigable waters within 500 yards of the wreckage site at approximate position 37° 59.27'N, 075° 18.75'W just north of Wildcat Point.  The extended duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the maritime environment in these navigable waters while damage assessment and salvage operations are conducted.  No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.
V.  Regulatory Analyses
      We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking.  Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
      A.  Regulatory Planning and Review
      Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.  This rule has not been designated a "significant regulatory action," under Executive Order 12866.  Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
      This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and limited duration of the safety zone.  This zone impacts a small designated area of the Chincoteague Bay for a total of no more than 30 days and operations may suspend early at the discretion of the Captain of the Port, Sector Virginia.
       B.  Impact on Small Entities
      The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601 - 612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking.  The term "small entities" comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.  The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
      While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
      Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule.  If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
      Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards.  The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business.  If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247).  The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
      C.  Collection of Information
      This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 - 3520).
      D.  Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
      A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has 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.  We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
      Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
      E.  Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
      The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531 - 1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions.  In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year.  Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
      F.  Environment
      We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 - 4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.  This rule involves a safety zone lasting for 30 days that will prohibit entry within certain navigable waters of the Chincoteague Bay.  It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(d) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023 - 01 - 001 - 01, Rev. 1.
      G.  Protest Activities
      The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.  Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
      Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
      For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165 -- REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
      1.  The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
      Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
      2.  Revise § 165.T05-0751 to read as follows:
§ 165.T05-0751 Safety Zone; Chincoteague Bay, Chincoteague, VA
       (a)  Location.  The following area is a safety zone:  All waters of the Chincoteague Bay extending 500 yards from centerpoint of the wreckage site at approximate position 37° 59.27'N, 075° 18.75'W just north of Wildcat Point.
       (b)  Definitions.  As used in this section, designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Sector Virginia (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone.
      (c)  Regulations.  Under the general safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
      (2)  To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's representative by VHF/FM Chanel 16.  Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
       (d)  Enforcement period.  This rule will be enforced April 7, 2022, through May 6, 2022, unless an earlier end is announced by broadcast notice to mariners.

Dated:  April 7, 2022.

Samson C. Stevens,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard,
Captain of the Port Sector Virginia.


[Federal Register: March 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 50)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13507-13509]
[DOCID:fr13mr08-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-27011; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-175-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier NPRM for an airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and
A321 airplanes. The original NPRM would have superseded an existing AD
that currently requires inspecting to determine the part number and
serial number of the fuel tank boost pumps and, for airplanes with
affected pumps, revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) and the FAA-
approved maintenance program. The existing AD also provides for
optional terminating action for compliance with the revisions to the
AFM and the maintenance program. The original NPRM proposed to require
modifying or replacing the fuel tank boost pumps, which would terminate
the AFM limitations and the maintenance program revisions. The original
NPRM resulted from a report that a fuel tank boost pump failed in
service, due to a detached screw of the boost pump housing that created
a short circuit between the stator and rotor of the boost pump motor
and tripped a circuit breaker. This new action revises the original
NPRM by excluding certain modified airplanes from the applicability,
requiring the AFM/maintenance program revisions on additional
airplanes, and requiring modification or replacement of additional fuel
tank boost pumps. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to prevent
electrical arcing in the fuel tank boost pump motor, which, in the
presence of a combustible air-fuel mixture in the pump, could result in
an explosion and loss of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by April 7,
2008.

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 Airbus, 1
Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

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: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2141; 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-2007-
27011; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-175-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

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (the
``original NPRM'') to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that
supersedes AD 2006-12-02, amendment 39-14626 (71 FR 34814, June 16,
2006). The existing AD applies to all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320,
and A321 airplanes. The original NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3371). The original NPRM proposed
to retain the existing AD's requirements (identifying airplanes with
certain fuel tank boost pumps and, for those airplanes, revising the
airplane flight manual (AFM) and maintenance program, with optional
terminating action). The original NPRM also proposed to require
modifying or replacing the fuel tank boost pumps, which would terminate
the AFM limitations and maintenance program revisions.

Actions Since Original NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the original NPRM, the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of
the European Community, has notified us that the unsafe condition could
exist on airplanes with any Type 8410 fuel pump having part number (P/
N) 568-1-27202-001, -002, or -005. (The original NPRM would have
applied only to airplanes with Type 8410 fuel pumps having P/N 568-1-
27202-005 with serial number 6137 and subsequent.)

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-28-1159, dated January 8,
2007. The service bulletin describes procedures for determining the
type and part number of the fuel pumps, and for modifying or replacing
certain fuel pumps. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The
EASA mandated the service information and issued airworthiness
directive 2007-0218, dated August 10, 2007, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in the European Union.
    The service bulletin refers to EATON Service Bulletin 8410-28-05,
dated October 2, 2006, as an additional source of service information
for the actions associated with the modification.

    Airbus has also issued TR 4.03.00/28, Issue 02, dated May 18, 2007,
to add reference to certain AMM chapters, to clarify the note regarding
inadvertent operation with less than 2,000 kg (4,500 lb) of fuel in the
center tank, and to clarify the instructions for operation of the
center tank fuel pumps. Paragraph (g)(2) of AD 2006-12-02 refers to
Airbus Temporary Revision (TR) 4.03.00/28, dated May 4, 2006.

Comments

    There were no comments on the original NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM

    We have determined that the unsafe condition might exist on
airplanes with any type 8410 fuel pumps having P/N 568-1-27202-001, -
002, or -005, any serial number. It is therefore necessary to include
airplanes with these fuel pumps among the group affected by the
requirement to revise the AFM and maintenance program. We also find it
necessary to mandate the modification/replacement of the affected fuel
boost pumps specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1159 for all
affected airplanes. We have also limited the proposed applicability to
exclude airplanes already modified in production.
    The changes discussed above expand the scope of the original NPRM;
we have therefore determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for public comment on this
supplemental NPRM.

Explanation of ``Concurrent'' Actions

    Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1159 states that the actions
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1153 (previously described
in the original NPRM) must be done concurrently. Because the actions
specified in both service bulletins accomplish the same result for
airplanes equipped with Type 8410 fuel pumps having P/N 568-1-27202-005
with serial number 6137 and subsequent, this supplemental NPRM would
consider a modification done before the effective date of the AD in
accordance with Service Bulletin A320-28-1153 acceptable as terminating
action for the proposed actions on airplanes equipped with Type 8410
fuel pumps having P/N 568-1-27202-005 with serial number 6137 and
subsequent.

Costs of Compliance

    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this supplemental NPRM.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Average
                                          Work      labor                               Cost per       Number of U.S.-
                Action                   hours     rate per            Parts            airplane    registered  airplanes            Fleet cost
                                                     hour
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identification of boost pumps........          1        $80  None....................        $80  670.....................  $53,600.
Revisions to AFM and maintenance               1         80  None....................         80  Up to 670...............  Up to $53,600.
 program.
Modifications........................          3         80  (*).....................        240  Up to 670...............  Up to $160,800.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Eaton states that pumps will qualify for free repair.

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 have 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 that the proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this supplemental NPRM and placed it in the AD docket. See
the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory
evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-14626 (71 FR 34814, June 16, 2006) and adding the
following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2007-27011; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-
175-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by April 7,
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2006-12-02.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
airplanes, certificated in any category, except those airplanes on
which Airbus modification 36734 or 37508 has been incorporated in
production.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report that a fuel tank boost pump
failed in service, due to a

detached screw of the boost pump housing that created a short
circuit between the stator and rotor of the boost pump motor and
tripped a circuit breaker. We are issuing this AD to prevent
electrical arcing in the fuel tank boost pump motor, which, in the
presence of a combustible air-fuel mixture in the pump, could result
in an explosion and loss of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Restatement of Certain Requirements of AD 2006-12-02

Part and Serial Number Inspection

    (f) Within 10 days after July 3, 2006 (the effective date of AD
2006-12-02), inspect to determine the part number (P/N) and serial
number (S/N) of each fuel tank boost pump installed in the wing and
center fuel tanks. A review of maintenance records may be performed
instead of the required inspection if the P/N and S/N of the fuel
boost pump can be conclusively determined from that review. One
approved method for conducting this inspection or records review is
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1152, dated May 5,
2006; or Revision 01, dated July 17, 2006.

Revisions to Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)/Maintenance Program: P/N 568-
1-27202-005 With S/Ns 6137 and Subsequent

    (g) For airplanes equipped with one or more Eaton Aerospace
Limited (formerly FR-HITEMP Limited) fuel boost pumps, having P/N
568-1-27202-005 with S/N 6137 and subsequent: Prior to further
flight after accomplishing the inspection required by paragraph (f)
of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and
(g)(2), as applicable of this AD, until the modifications/
replacements required by paragraph (j) of this AD have been done.
    (1) Revise the Limitations section of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/
A321 AFM and the FAA-approved maintenance program by incorporating
the following. This may be accomplished by inserting copies of this
AD into the AFM and the maintenance program.

    Apply the following procedure at each fuel loading:
    Refueling:
    Before refueling, all pumps must be turned off, in order to
prevent them from automatically starting during the refueling
process.
    Ground fuel transfer:
    For all aircraft, do not start a fuel transfer from any wing
tank, if it contains less than 700 kg (1,550 lb) of fuel.
    For A318, A319, and A320 aircraft with a center tank, do not
start a fuel transfer from the center tank, if it contains less than
2,000 kg (4,500 lb) of fuel.
    If a tank has less than the required quantity, it is necessary
to add fuel (via a transfer from another tank or refueling) to
enable a transfer to take place.
    Defueling:
    For all aircraft, when defueling the wings, do not start the
fuel pumps if the fuel quantity in the inner tank (wing tank for
A321) is below 700 kg (1,550 lb). If the fuel on the aircraft is not
sufficient to achieve the required fuel distribution, then transfer
fuel or refuel the aircraft to obtain the required fuel quantity in
the wing tank.
    For A318, A319, and A320 aircraft with a center tank, when
performing a pressure defuel of the center tank, make sure that the
center tank contains at least 2,000 kg (4,500 lb) of fuel. If it has
less than the required quantity, then transfer fuel to the center
tank. Defuel the aircraft normally, and turn OFF the center tank
pumps immediately after the FAULT light on the corresponding
pushbutton-switch comes on.

    (2) For all airplanes equipped with a center tank (modification
20024) excluding A321 models, revise the Limitations section of the
AFM to incorporate the changes specified in Airbus Temporary
Revision (TR) 4.03.00/28, dated May 4, 2006; or 4.03.00/28, Issue
02, dated May 18, 2007. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy
of the TR into the AFM. When general revisions of the AFM have been
issued that incorporate the revisions specified in the TR, the copy
of the TR may be removed from the AFM, provided the relevant
information in the general revision is identical to that in TR
4.03.00/28.

New Requirements of This AD

Part and Serial Number Inspection

    (h) For all airplanes: Within 10 days after the effective date
of this AD, inspect to determine the type and part number of each
fuel tank boost pump installed in the wing and center fuel tanks. A
review of maintenance records may be performed instead of the
required inspection if the part number and serial number of the fuel
boost pump can be conclusively determined from that review. One
approved method for conducting this inspection or records review is
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1159, dated January 8,
2007.

Revisions to AFM/Maintenance Program: P/Ns 568-1-27202-001 and -002;
and P/N 568-1-27202-005 With S/Ns Below 6137

    (i) For airplanes equipped with one or more Eaton Aerospace
Limited (formerly FR-HITEMP Limited) fuel boost pumps, having P/N
568-1-27202-001 or 568-1-27202-002; or P/N 568-1-27202-005 with any
serial number below 6137: Before further flight after accomplishing
the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, do the actions
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, as applicable,
until the modifications/replacements required by paragraph (j) of
this AD have been done.

Terminating Action

    (j) For airplanes equipped with one or more Eaton Aerospace
Limited (formerly FR-HITEMP Limited) fuel boost pumps, having P/N
568-1-27202-001, -002, or -005: Within 5,000 flight hours or 18
months, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD,
modify or replace affected fuel boost pumps in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1159,
dated January 8, 2007. Modification or replacement of all affected
fuel tank boost pumps on an airplane terminates the requirements of
this AD, and the limitations required by paragraph (g) of this AD
may be removed from the AFM and the maintenance program for that
airplane.

    Note 1: For additional sources of service information for the
fuel pump modification/replacement, Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-
1159 refers to EATON Service Bulletin 8410-28-05, dated October 2,
2006.

Credit for Actions Done Using Previous Service Information

    (k) Modification of a fuel pump before the effective date of
this AD in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1153,
dated May 5, 2006, is acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding requirements of paragraph (j) of this AD, for that
pump only.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (l)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for
this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
    (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 appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (3) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2006-12-02
are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

Related Information

    (m) European Aviation Safety Agency airworthiness directive
2007-0218, dated August 10, 2007, also addresses the subject of this
AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 3, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-5017 Filed 3-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


? Need to return call by / at/ between and . Signature: Project No.: 0<IP_ADDRESS> DISTRIBUTION Page __ 1_ of _ 1_

Project Name: 2004/ 05 304( m) Plan TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Outgoing Call Date: November 18, 2003 Time: 10: 45 AM Company Name: Clearon Corporation, 95 MacCorkle Avenue, S. W., South Charleston, WV 25303 1411 Contact Name: Ken Smith Phone No.: ( 304) 746 4167 Name: Bob Southworth Eastern Research Group, Inc.

GENERAL SUBJECT : SIC Code for Clearon Corporation Facility in South Charleston, WV.

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN On November 18, 2003, I spoke with Ken Smith of Clearon Corporation concerning the SIC code for Clearon's South Charleston, WV., facility. Mr. Smith said that the SIC code for that facility is 2819  inorganic chemicals manufacturing. For this reason, pollutant loads for this facility should be deleted from the pollutant loads in the 2000 Permit Compliance System ( PCS) database for the phosphate category ( SIC Code 2874).


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 163 (Thursday, August 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43849-43851]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18077]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86695; File No. SR-Phlx-2019-28]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange
Rules 605 and 1049

August 16, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 5, 2019, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rules 605 and 1049, titled
``Advertisements, Market Letters, Research Reports and Sales
Literature'' and ``Options Communications.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this rule change is to adopt advertising
requirements within Rules 605 and 1049, titled, ``Advertisements,
Market Letters, Research Reports and Sales Literature'' and ``Options
Communications''. The changes are described in more detail below.
Definitions
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 605 and 1049 to incorporate by
reference Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') Rules
2210 (``FINRA 2210'') and 2220 (``FINRA 2220''), respectively, as rules
of Phlx. These proposed rule changes will apply the same advertising
requirements applicable to members of Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
(``Nasdaq'') and Nasdaq Options Market (``NOM'') to Phlx. Nasdaq
incorporated FINRA 2210 by reference in 2006.\3\ Similarly, Section 22
of Chapter XI of NOM Rules incorporated FINRA rules regarding
communications with the public in 2008.\4\ The proposed rule changes
will require members of Phlx to comply with FINRA 2210 and FINRA 2220
when issuing any communication to the public. Specifically, Phlx Rule
605 would require a Phlx member to comply with FINRA 2210 as if it were
a rule of Phlx itself.\5\ Likewise, Phlx Rule 1049 would require a Phlx
member to comply with FINRA 2220 as if it were a rule of Phlx
itself.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53128, (January 13,
2006), 71 FR 3550 (January 23, 2006) (In the Matter of the
Application of the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC for Registration as a
National Securities Exchange; Findings, Opinion, and Order of the
Commission), which approved the incorporation by reference of NASD
Rule 2210, among others, into the Nasdaq rulebook. See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85188 (February 25, 2019), 84 FR
7138 (March 1, 2019) (SR-NASDAQ-2019-008), approving Nasdaq rule
change updating references to NASD Rule 2210 to FINRA Rule 2210.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57478, (March 12,
2008), 73 FR 14521 (March 18, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-004 and SR-
NASDAQ-2007-080), which approved, among other changes, the
incorporation by reference of certain FINRA rules as NOM rules.
    \5\ We note that Phlx members will not be required to comply
with FINRA 2210(c). This is consistent with Nasdaq Rule 2210 which
excludes FINRA 2210(c) from the public communications rules
applicable to Nasdaq members.
    \6\ The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change would not
subject Phlx members to compliance with FINRA 2210c. As most Phlx
members are currently members of FINRA, those members have already
been subject to FINRA 2210 in its entirety, including sub-part (c).
Only those Phlx members that are not FINRA members, and as a result
do not conduct securities transactions and business with the
investing public, will be relieved of the obligation to comply with
FINRA 2210c (the portion of the rule requiring submission of
communications for review prior to publication). The proposed rule
change will not relieve any existing FINRA member of the obligation
to comply with rules regarding communications with the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that requiring Phlx members to comply with
FINRA 2210 and FINRA 2220 will provide consistency of marketing
materials used by members of Nasdaq, NOM and Phlx as well as harness
the knowledge and expertise of FINRA in their review of marketing
materials.\7\ Furthermore, the proposed rule change will impose a
heightened standard on Phlx members in comparison to existing Phlx Rule
605 which simply calls for either the Phlx member, a general partner or
holder of voting stock in the member to have endorsed their approval of
the communication prior to publication or distribution.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Nasdaq OMX Group and FINRA entered into a Regulatory
Services Agreement (RSA) dated January 1, 2013. Pursuant to this
agreement, FINRA has performed member regulation for all Nasdaq
exchanges. As a result of the proposed rule change, FINRA will now
review all public marketing materials produced by Phlx members.
    \8\ Phlx Rule 605 also calls for retention of a copy of the
communication for a period of three years. Rule 605 also imposes
obligations on firms for whom Phlx serves as the designated
examining authority. Continued application of these requirements
would be superfluous once FINRA Rule 2210 becomes effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA 2210(b)(1)(A) requires an appropriately qualified registered
principal to approve each retail communication before the earlier of
its use or filing with FINRA's Advertising Regulation Department. The
requirements of FINRA 2210(b)(1)(A) may be satisfied by a Supervisory
Analyst approved pursuant to FINRA Rule 1220(a)(14) \9\ with respect to
(i) research reports on debt and equity securities as described in
FINRA Rule 2241(a)(11) and FINRA Rule 2242(a)(3); (ii) retail
communications as described in FINRA Rule 2241(a)(11)(A) and FINRA Rule
2242(a)(3)(A); and (iii) other research communications, provided that
the Supervisory Analyst has technical expertise in the particular
product area. A Supervisory Analyst may not approve a retail
communication that requires a separate registration unless the
Supervisory Analyst also has such other registration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ FINRA Rule 1220(a)(14) lists the Principal Registration
Category of Supervisory Analyst. Each principal as defined in
paragraph (a)(1) of Rule 1220 may register with FINRA as a
Supervisory Analyst if his or her activities are limited to
approving the following: (i) The content of a member's research
reports on equity securities; (ii) the content of a member's
research reports on debt securities; (iii) the content of third-
party research reports; (iv) retail communications as described in
Rule 2241(a)(11)(A); or (v) other research communications that do
not meet the definition of ``research report'' under Rule 2241,
provided that the Supervisory Analyst has technical expertise in the
particular product area. The activities of a Supervisory Analyst
engaged in equity research shall be supervised by a Research
Principal registered pursuant to paragraph (a)(6) of Rule 1220.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the application of FINRA 2210 to the
Exchange's membership will benefit the broader marketplace by adopting
FINRA's requirement that marketing materials be reviewed by
appropriately qualified registered principals of a member. This will
promote the public interest by helping to prevent inaccurate or
misleading information going to investors. We note that Phlx Rule 1049
is similar in substance to FINRA Rule 2220.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ While Phlx Rule 1049 and FINRA 2220 are substantively
similar, there are differences in the rules regarding review of
communications by members found to have departed from the standards
of FINRA 2220. In the event FINRA finds a member to have departed
from the standards of FINRA 2220, FINRA may require the member to
file some or all options communications with the Advertising
Regulation Department at least ten calendar days prior to first use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change will not create a burdensome compliance
obligation for Phlx members. Of the existing one hundred sixteen
members of Phlx, ninety-one are also members of Nasdaq. In light of the
overlap in membership of the two exchanges, the proposed rule changes
will allow for easier compliance with rules of both exchanges since
members of both exchanges will now have identical compliance
obligations with respect to communications with the public.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it
is designed to promote just and equitable

principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest by
bringing greater transparency and consistency to its rules. Requiring
Phlx members to comply with FINRA 2210 and FINRA 2220 will add
conformity to the advertising requirements for members of Nasdaq, NOM
and Phlx exchanges. Conformity in marketing rules will aide member
firms as they will have a uniform set of rules to adhere to when
issuing communications to their customers across multiple markets. This
will reduce the likelihood of confusion as to compliance obligations
and promote compliance with Exchange rules and the delivery of clear,
accurate information to the public. Both outcomes are in the public
interest and further the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
Compliance with FINRA 2210 and FINRA 2220 will also provide greater
protection to the public as FINRA has significant experience in
reviewing marketing and advertising material having done so for various
Nasdaq exchanges and FINRA's own membership. FINRA review of marketing
materials will help protect investors, further meeting the goals of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes will not
impose an undue burden on competition because the requirement to comply
with FINRA Rules 2210 and FINRA 2220 will apply to all Phlx members
equally.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \13\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2019-28 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-2019-28. 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 website (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 website 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 the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SRPhlx-2019-28 and should be submitted on
or before September 12, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-18077 Filed 8-21-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15644-15646]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06620]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74524; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-021]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Fees Assessed Under NASDAQ Rule 7016(a)

March 18, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 6, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and
III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ is proposing to amend fees assessed under NASDAQ Rule
7016(a) for NASDAQ's Risk Management Service. The Exchange will
implement the proposed changes on March 6, 2015.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at

NASDAQ's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ's Risk Management Service provides clearing brokers with a
view of their correspondents' trading activity, notification when pre-
set trading limits have been exceeded and the ability to prevent
certain trades from locking in and clearing when the pre-set limits
have been exceeded. When NASDAQ separated from NASD (now FINRA) in
2006, the Exchange reduced the per side per trade monitored fee
assessed for the Risk Management Service from $0.035 to $0.025 and also
reduced the total monthly fee cap from $10,000 to $7,500 per month.\3\
The Exchange noted that it was reducing the charges for risk management
services to remain competitive with charges of other providers of
similar services. NASDAQ has not increased the fees for the service
since reducing the fees in 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55131 (January 19,
2007), 72 FR 3891 (January 26, 2007) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-066).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Effective November 17, 2014, FINRA migrated the OTC Reporting
Facility (``ORF'') from the NASDAQ OMX ACT technology platform to its
own newly-developed platform, and required members with trade reporting
obligations under its rules in OTC equity securities and reportable
restricted equity securities to migrate to the new platform by that
date.\4\ As a consequence of the migration, NASDAQ's Risk Management
Service no longer receives information and alerts concerning ORF
reported transactions by clearing brokers' correspondents, thereby
resulting in a significant decrease in the number of trades covered by
the service and a number of subscription cancellations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See http://www.finra.org/Industry/Compliance/MarketTransparency/ORF/Notices/P580334.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, NASDAQ assesses a fee on clearing firms that use the
Risk Management Service of $17.25 per month for each correspondent
executing broker monitored by NASDAQ, and a per side per trade
monitored fee of $0.025. The total amount of Risk Management Service
fees per-month for an individual clearing firm is currently capped at
$7,500 per correspondent executing broker. NASDAQ is proposing to
increase the per side per trade monitored fee to $0.030 and add a
minimum ``floor'' fee of $500 per month, per correspondent executing
broker applied to clearing brokers with less than 17,000 total monthly
trades and that fall below 50 correspondents monitored by NASDAQ during
the month, which would be assessed in lieu of the per side per trade
monitored fee.
    NASDAQ is also removing language from the rule text that relates to
the effective date of the fee, which has since passed.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\5\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which the Exchange operates or controls, and is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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; and are not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ believes that the proposed increase to the per-transaction
fee is reasonable because it has experienced a significant decrease in
the number of trades covered by the service and cancellations of
subscriptions to the service coincident with the migration of the ORF,
as discussed above. The costs NASDAQ incurs in supporting the service
have increased since 2006, and have not changed since the significant
decreases in trades covered by the service and the loss of subscribers
to the service. Consequently, the costs incurred by NASDAQ, and any
profit received from subscribers to the service, must be supported by
the remaining subscribers in the form of a fee increase. Similarly, the
Exchange believes that applying a minimum monthly fee of $500 in lieu
of the per side per trade monitored fee is reasonable because NASDAQ
incurs certain fixed costs in offering the service to clearing brokers,
regardless of the number of transactions monitored. Although
subscribers that use the service minimally will experience a fee
increase under the proposed alternative $500 per month fee floor,
NASDAQ has determined that providing the service to clearing brokers
that have less than 17,000 trades and 50 total correspondents is the
point at which the costs of providing the service are not sufficiently
covered by the per side per trade monitored fee.
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed increase to the per-transaction
fee is equitably allocated because all clearing brokers that exceed the
alternative floor fee thresholds will be assessed the same fee rate.
Likewise, the Exchange believes that the alternative floor fee is
equitably allocated because it applies equally to all clearing brokers
that do not utilize the service sufficiently to cover the costs
incurred by NASDAQ in offering the service under the per-transaction
fee. As noted above, NASDAQ has determined that the alternative floor
fee is the minimum fee NASDAQ can charge to cover the costs of offering
the service to a subscriber. Consequently, such clearing brokers would
otherwise receive a subsidy for using the service, whereas other
subscribers to the service would not. Accordingly, the alternative
floor fee is not only allocated equitably among subscribers that have
minimal usage of the service, but it is also allocated equitably among
all subscribers to the service.
    Lastly, the Exchange believes that the proposed increase to the per
side per trade monitored fee does not discriminate unfairly because it
is applied to all subscribers that exceed the new minimum activity
threshold, which is directly based on their usage of the service. The
Exchange believes that applying the alternative floor fee to certain
subscribers that do not exceed the minimum activity threshold does not
discriminate unfairly because the fees provided by such a subscriber
under the per side per trade monitored fee do not currently support the
costs incurred by NASDAQ in offering the service to the subscribers.
Consequently, applying an alternative minimum fee

will ensure that such costs are covered by each subscriber, with no
subscriber being assessed less than the cost of providing the service.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule changes will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.\7\ NASDAQ notes
that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels
at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities
available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment,
NASDAQ must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with
other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been
exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, NASDAQ believes that the degree to which fee
changes in general, and changes to fees for non-mandatory services
particularly, in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited. In this instance, the increases to the fees assessed
for subscription to NASDAQ's Risk Management Service arise from a need
to cover the increase of costs in offering the service since 2006, and
the loss of a significant number trades covered by the service and a
reduction in subscribers due to recent changes to the ORF. Because of
the reduced number of trades and subscribers, the costs of the service
must be supported by those subscribers that remain. To the extent that
the fee increases are too high, subscribers may cancel their
subscriptions and develop their own risk management tools that
replicate the Risk Management Service or use third party risk
management tools. As such, NASDAQ does not believe that any of the
proposed changes will impair the ability of members or competing order
execution venues to maintain their competitive standing in the
financial markets, and to the extent the fees are deemed too high, the
changes may represent an opportunity for other market venues or third
parties to provide competitive services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\8\ At any time within 60 days of the filing
of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily
suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-021 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-021. 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 on
official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies
of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-021, and should be submitted on or before
April 14, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06620 Filed 3-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 63 (Monday, April 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19660-19661]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7775]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC12-83-000.
    Applicants: Goshen Phase II LLC, Ridgeline Alternative Energy, LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act of Goshen Phase II and Ridgeline Alternative
Energy.
    Filed Date: 3/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120319-5240.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/9/12.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER12-41-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Filing of a Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 3/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120319-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/9/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-922-001.
    Applicants: Phillips 66 Company.
    Description: Revision to Baseline MBR Tariff to be effective 4/1/
2012.
    Filed Date: 3/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120319-5215.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1116-000.
    Applicants: Cleco Power LLC, Cleco Evangeline LLC.
    Description: Cleco Power LLC and Cleco Evangeline LLC submits the
joint application requesting authorization from the Commission of a
three-year power purchase agreement pursuant to Section 205 of the
Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 3/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120320-0001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/9/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1290-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Service Agreement 2850, to
be effective 2/17/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120319-5217.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/9/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1291-000.
    Applicants: Wellhead Power Delano, LLC.
    Description: Wellhead Power Delano, LLC Market-Based Rate Tariff to
be effective 5/10/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120319-5230.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/9/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1293-000.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Request for Limited Waiver of Portland General
Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 3/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120319-5236.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/9/12.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    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
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    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: March 20, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-7775 Filed 3-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 29, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 229)]
[Notices]
[Page 67615-67616]
[DOCID:fr29no07-42]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56824; File No. CBOE-2007-134]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Continuous Quoting Obligations of DPMs

November 20, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 9, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
substantially by CBOE. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend CBOE Rule 8.85 relating to the
continuous quoting obligations of Designated Primary Market-Makers
(``DPMs''). The text of the proposed rule change is available at CBOE,
the Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.cboe.com/legal.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    CBOE proposes to modify the continuous electronic quoting
obligation of DPMs in multiply-listed option classes, and make them
consistent with the continuous quoting obligation of e-DPMs \3\ and
Lead Market-Makers (``LMMs'') in Hybrid option classes.\4\ CBOE is not
proposing to change the continuous electronic quoting obligation of
DPMs in classes listed solely on CBOE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See CBOE Rule 8.93.
    \4\ See CBOE Rule 8.15A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, DPMs are required to provide continuous electronic
quotations in 100% of the series of each option class allocated to the
DPM. E-DPMs and LMMs, on the other hand, are required to provide
continuous electronic quotes in 90% of the series of each appointed
option class. CBOE believes that it would be appropriate and reasonable
to reduce the continuous electronic quoting obligation of DPMs in
multiply-listed option classes from 100% of the series to 90% of the
series. The participation entitlement for DPMs has been reduced over
the past several years, and presently the participation entitlement is
allocated between DPMs and e-DPMs under Rule 8.87. Specifically, if the
DPM and one or more e-DPMs are quoting at the best bid/offer on CBOE,
one-half of the entitlement is allocated to the DPM, and the other half
is divided equally among the e-DPMs quoting at the best bid/offer on
CBOE. In addition, in 2005 CBOE implemented a Preferred Market-Maker
Program which provides that in instances where a Preferred Market-Maker
receives a participation entitlement, then the DPM and e-DPM
participation entitlement shall not apply to any order.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See CBOE Rule 8.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE believes that reducing the continuous electronic quoting
obligations of DPMs in multiply-listed option classes may also mitigate
quotations. In the event that an order is received in a series of a
multiply-listed option class in which CBOE is not disseminating a
quotation, CBOE would process the order in accordance with the
provisions of Rule 6.14--the Hybrid Agency Liaison. As a result, CBOE
does not believe there would be any negative effect on the handling of
orders.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, serve to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received with respect
to the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which CBOE consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-CBOE-2007-134 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-134. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. 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-CBOE-2007-134 and should be
submitted on or before December 20, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-23168 Filed 11-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 20716]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8293]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket Number USCG-2012-0165]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Upper Mississippi River, Rock
Island, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Rock Island Railroad and Highway Drawbridge across the Upper
Mississippi River, mile 482.9, at Rock Island, Illinois. The deviation
is necessary to allow the Quad Cities Live Uncommon Walk to cross the
bridge. This deviation allows the bridge to be maintained in the
closed-to-navigation position for two hours.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on June
2, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0165 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0165 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Eric A. Washburn, Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers,
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Army Rock Island Arsenal requested
a temporary deviation for the Rock Island Railroad and Highway
Drawbridge, across the Upper Mississippi River, mile 482.9, at Rock
Island, Illinois to remain in the closed-to-navigation position for a
two-hour period from 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m., June 2, 2012, while a
walk is held between the cities of Davenport, IA and Rock Island, IL.
The Rock Island Railroad and Highway Drawbridge currently operates in
accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, which states the general requirement that
drawbridges shall open promptly and fully for the passage of vessels
when a request to open is given in accordance with the subpart.
    There are no alternate routes for vessels transiting this section
of the Upper Mississippi River.
    The Rock Island Railroad and Highway Drawbridge, in the closed-to-
navigation position, provides a vertical clearance of 23.8 feet above
normal pool. Navigation on the waterway consists primarily of
commercial tows and recreational watercraft. This temporary deviation
has been coordinated with waterway users. No objections were received.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: March 12, 2012.
Eric A. Washburn,
Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers.
[FR Doc. 2012-8293 Filed 4-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12252-12254]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04683]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71615; File No. SR-CME-2014-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Allow the LSOC With Excess Model for CFTC-Regulated Swaps

February 26, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'' or ``Exchange Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on February 12, 2014, Chicago Mercantile Exchange
Inc. (``CME'' or the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change described
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared primarily
by CME. CME filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act,\3\ and Rule 4(f)(4)(ii).\4\ thereunder so that the proposal was
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-44(f)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CME is filing a proposed rule change that is limited to its
business as a derivatives clearing organization. More specifically, the
proposed rule change would make amendments to its rules that would
offer FCMs and their cleared swaps customers the option to transmit
collateral specifically attributed to a cleared swap customer under an
``LSOC with excess'' model.

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

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

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

    CME is registered as a derivatives clearing organization with the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission and currently offers clearing
services for many different futures and swaps products. With this
filing, CME proposes to add new rules to permit futures commission
merchants (``FCMs'') to transmit collateral of cleared swaps customers
to CME that is in excess of the CME requirement for such customers. The
changes by their terms relate only to swaps and do not affect security-
based swaps and therefore will be effective on filing.
    On November 14, 2012, CME implemented the Legally Segregated
Operationally Commingled (``LSOC'') regime for the protection of
Cleared Swap Customers in accordance with Part 22 of the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission's (``CFTC'') Regulations. At that time, LSOC
was implemented in a ``no excess'' mode, that is, any collateral value
deposited by an FCM with a derivatives clearing organization (``DCO'')
in excess of the aggregate client minimum performance bond margin
requirement, to the extent it is not been explicitly identified by the
FCM as being provided by the firm, would be treated as unallocated
cleared swap customer value without attribution to a specific cleared
swaps customer. In this ``no excess'' model, the LSOC value for each
cleared swaps customer is presumed to be its performance bond
requirement at the last settlement cycle and any collateral on deposit
at the DCO in excess of such requirement aggregate of the customer

initial margin requirements, is not used by the DCO for any purpose
after an FCM default.
    The proposed rule changes that are the subject of this filing offer
FCMs and their cleared swaps customers the option to transmit
collateral specifically attributed to a cleared swap customer under an
``LSOC with excess'' model. These changes are part of a coordinated
futures industry effort. CFTC Regulation 22.13(c) provides requirements
for FCMs to transmit such excess. Specifically, Regulation 22.13(c)
states that:

    (c) A futures commission merchant may transmit to a derivatives
clearing organization any collateral posted by a Cleared Swaps
Customer in excess of the amount required by the derivatives
clearing organization if:
    (1) the rules of the derivatives clearing organization expressly
permit the futures commission merchant to transmit collateral in
excess of the amount required by the derivatives clearing
organization; and (2) the derivatives clearing organization provides
a mechanism by which the futures commission merchant is able to, and
maintains rules pursuant to which the futures commission merchant is
required to, identify each Business Day, for each Cleared Swaps
Customer, the amount of collateral posted in excess of the amount
required by the derivatives clearing organization.

    Accordingly, CME is proposing CME Rules 821, 8G821, and 8H821 which
would expressly permit FCMs to transmit excess cleared swap customer
collateral to CME and would require that they identify each Business
Day, for each cleared swaps customer, the value of performance bond
posted in excess of the amount required for such cleared swaps
customer. Under the rules, FCMs will not be required to transmit excess
collateral to CME by adoption of this rule but will be given the option
to do so. Additionally, FCMs currently operating in the ``no excess''
mode will be allowed to continue in such mode. The proposed rules
changes do not apply to security-based swaps positions.
    The proposed changes that are described in this filing are limited
to CME's business as a derivatives clearing organization clearing
products under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (``CFTC'') and do not materially impact CME's
security-based swap clearing business in any way. CME notes that it has
already submitted the proposed rule change that is the subject of this
filing to the CFTC.
    CME believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act including Section 17A of the Exchange
Act.\5\ The proposed rule change permits futures commission merchants
(``FCMs'') to transmit collateral of cleared swaps customers to CME
that is in excess of the CME requirement for such customer and as such
are designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent applicable,
derivatives agreements, contracts, and transactions, to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or
control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the proposed changes are limited in their effect to
swaps products offered under CME's authority to act as a derivatives
clearing organization. Swaps are under the exclusive jurisdiction of
the CFTC. As such, the proposed CME changes are limited to CME's
activities as a derivatives clearing organization clearing swaps that
are not security-based swaps; CME notes that the policies of the CFTC
with respect to administering the Commodity Exchange Act are comparable
to a number of the policies underlying the Exchange Act, such as
promoting market transparency for over-the-counter derivatives markets,
promoting the prompt and accurate clearance of transactions and
protecting investors and the public interest.
    Because the proposed changes are limited in their effect to swaps
offered under CME's authority to act as a derivatives clearing
organization, the proposed changes are properly classified as effecting
a change in an existing service of CME that:
    (a) Primarily affects the clearing operations of CME with respect
to products that are not securities, including futures that are not
security futures, and swaps that are not security-based swaps or mixed
swaps; and
    (b) does not significantly affect any securities clearing
operations of CME or any rights or obligations of CME with respect to
securities clearing or persons using such securities-clearing service.
    As such, the proposed changes are therefore consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act \7\ and are properly
filed under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii) \9\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CME does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition. The rule changes simply
permit futures commission merchants (``FCMs'') to transmit collateral
of cleared swaps customers to CME that is in excess of the CME
requirement for such customer.

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

    CME has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments
regarding this proposed rule change. CME has not received any
unsolicited written comments from interested parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \10\ of the Act and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml), or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-CME-2014-04 on the subject line.

Paper Comments:

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CME-2014-04. 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 such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of CME and on CME's Web site at
http://www.cmegroup.com/market-regulation/rule-filings.html.
    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-CME-2014-04
and should be submitted on or before March 25, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-04683 Filed 3-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P