[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60663-60665]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23931]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93459; File No. SR-CBOE-2021-063]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Renew
Its Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program Until May 2, 2022

October 28, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on October 25, 2021, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to renew an existing pilot program until May 2, 2022. The text of the
proposed rule change is provided below.

additions are italicized; deletions are [bracketed])

* * * * *
    Rules of Cboe Exchange, Inc.
* * * * *

Rule 4.13. Series of Index Options

    (a)-(d) No change.
    (e) Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program.
    (1-(2) No change.
    (3) Duration of Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program. The
Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program shall be through [November 1,
2021] May 2, 2022.
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, 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
    On September 14, 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') approved a Cboe Options proposal to establish a pilot
program under which the Exchange is permitted to list P.M.-settled
options on broad-based indexes to expire on (a) any Friday of the
month, other than the third Friday-of-the-month, and (b) the last
trading day of the month.\5\ On January 14, 2016, the Commission
approved a Cboe Options proposal to expand the pilot program to allow
P.M.-settled options on broad-based indexes to expire on any Wednesday
of month, other than those that coincide with an EOM.\6\ On August 10,
2016, the Commission approved a Cboe Options proposal to expand the
pilot program to allow P.M.-settled options on broad-based indexes to
expire on any Monday of month, other than those that coincide with an
EOM.\7\ Under the terms of the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program
(``Program''), Weekly Expirations and EOMs are permitted on any broad-
based index that is eligible for regular options trading. Weekly
Expirations and EOMs are cash-settled and have European-style exercise.
The proposal became effective on a pilot basis for a period of fourteen
months that commenced on the next full month after approval was

received to establish the Program \8\ and was subsequently extended.\9\
Pursuant to Rule 4.13(e)(3), the Program is scheduled to expire on
November 1, 2021. The Exchange believes that the Program has been
successful and well received by its Trading Permit Holders and the
investing public during that the time that it has been in operation.
The Exchange hereby proposes to extend the Program until May 2, 2022.
This proposal does not request any other changes to the Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 62911 (September 14,
2010), 75 FR 57539 (September 21, 2010) (order approving SR-CBOE-
2009-075).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 76909 (January 14,
2016), 81 FR 3512 (January 21, 2016) (order approving SR-CBOE-2015-
106).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 78531 (August 10, 2016),
81 FR 54643 (August 16, 2016) (order approving SR-CBOE-2016-046).
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release 65741 (November 14,
2011), 76 FR 72016 (November 21, 2011) (immediately effective rule
change extending the Program through February 14, 2013). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release 68933 (February 14, 2013), 78 FR
12374 (February 22, 2013) (immediately effective rule change
extending the Program through April 14, 2014); 71836 (April 1,
2014), 79 FR 19139 (April 7, 2014) (immediately effective rule
change extending the Program through November 3, 2014); 73422
(October 24, 2014), 79 FR 64640 (October 30, 2014) (immediately
effective rule change extending the Program through May 3, 2016);
76909 (January 14, 2016), 81 FR 3512 (January 21, 2016) (extending
the Program through May 3, 2017); 80387 (April 6, 2017), 82 FR 17706
(April 12, 2017) (extending the Program through May 3, 2018); 83165
(May 3, 2018), 83 FR 21316 (May 9, 2018) (SR-CBOE-2018-038)
(extending the Program through November 5, 2018); 84534 (November 5,
2019), 83 FR 56119 (November 9, 2018) (SR-CBOE-2018-070) (extending
the Program through May 6, 2019); 85650 (April 15, 2019), 84 FR
16552 (April 19, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-022) (extending the Program
through November 4, 2019); 87462 (November 5, 2019), 84 FR 61108
(November 12, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-104) (extending the Program
through May 4, 2020); 88673 (April 16, 2020), 85 FR 22507 (April 22,
2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-035) (extending the Program through November 2,
2020); 90262 (October 23, 2020) 85 FR 68616 (October 29, 2020) (SR-
CBOE-2020-101); and 91697 (April 28, 2021), 86 FR 23775 (May 4,
2021) (SR-CBOE-2021-026) (extending the Program through November 1,
2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the order approving the establishment of the Program,
two months prior to the conclusion of the pilot period, Cboe Options is
required to submit an annual report to the Commission, which addresses
the following areas: Analysis of Volume & Open Interest, Monthly
Analysis of Weekly Expirations & EOM Trading Patterns and Provisional
Analysis of Index Price Volatility. The Exchange has submitted, under
separate cover, the annual report in connection with the present
proposed rule change. Additionally, the Exchange will provide the
Commission with any additional data or analyses the Commission requests
because it deems such data or analyses necessary to determine whether
the Program is consistent with the Exchange Act. The Exchange is in the
process of making public on its website all data and analyses
previously submitted to the Commission under the Program,\10\ and will
make public any data and analyses it makes to the Commission under the
Program in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Available at https://www.cboe.com/aboutcboe/legal-regulatory/national-market-system-plans/non-standard-expiration-data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If, in the future, the Exchange proposes an additional extension of
the Program, or should the Exchange propose to make the Program
permanent (which the Exchange currently intends to do), the Exchange
will submit an annual report (addressing the same areas referenced
above and consistent with the order approving the establishment of the
Program) to the Commission at least two months prior to the next bi-
annual expiration date of the Program.\11\ The Exchange will also make
this report public. Any positions established under the Program will
not be impacted by the expiration of the Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Exchange notes that from the Program's implementation
in 2010 through 2014, the Program ran on a 14-month basis, and, in
2014, the Program was extended to run on a bi-annual pilot basis.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71836 (April 1, 2014), 79 FR
19139 (April 7, 2014) (SR-CBOE-2014-027). The Program continues to
run on a bi-annual basis today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes there is sufficient investor interest and
demand in the Program to warrant its extension. The Exchange believes
that the Program has provided investors with additional means of
managing their risk exposures and carrying out their investment
objectives. Furthermore, the Exchange has not experienced any adverse
market effects with respect to the Program.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed extension of the Program
will not have an adverse impact on capacity.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\12\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \13\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
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 facilitation
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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \14\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes that the Program has been
successful to date and states that it has not encountered any problems
with the Program. The proposed rule change allows for an extension of
the Program for the benefit of market participants. Additionally, the
Exchange believes that there is demand for the expirations offered
under the Program and believes that that Weekly Expirations and EOMs
will continue to provide the investing public and other market
participants increased opportunities to better manage their risk
exposure.

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

    Cboe Options does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that, by extending the expiration of the Program, the proposed
rule change will allow for further analysis of the Program and a
determination of how the Program shall be structured in the future. In
doing so, the proposed rule change will also serve to promote
regulatory clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on the
marketplace and facilitating investor protection.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of 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.

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

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \17\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \18\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange states that
waiver of the 30-day operative delay will allow it to extend the
Program prior to its expiration on November 1, 2021, and maintain the
status quo, thereby reducing market disruption. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest as it will allow the
Program to continue uninterrupted, thereby avoiding investor confusion
that could result from a temporary interruption in the Program.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay
and designates the proposed rule change as operative upon filing.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \19\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 change 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2021-063 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-CBOE-2021-063. 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 SR-CBOE-2021-063 and should be submitted on
or before November 24, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-23931 Filed 11-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 204 (Monday, October 22, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64439-64441]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25899]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1127; Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-035-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (Bell)
Model Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Bell Model 430 helicopters, which would require replacing certain
components of the air data system. This proposed AD is prompted by the
discovery of incorrect indicated airspeed when the helicopter was
tested to the cold temperature limits (-40 degrees centigrade) required
for Category A operations. The proposed actions are intended to correct
the published Vne and to correct the indicated airspeed.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 21,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Examining The AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the
economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir,
Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax
(450) 433-0272, or http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review
the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark F. Wiley, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD No. CF-2005-30, dated
August 3, 2005, to correct an unsafe condition for the Bell Model 430
helicopters. Discrepancies in the processing and display of air data
were revealed when testing at low temperatures to minus 40 degrees
Centigrade (-40 [deg]C). The TCCA advises that modification to the
instrumentation is required to reflect the Vne airspeed
values tested at temperatures to -40 [deg]C. The TCCA states ``This
modification affects the software in the Vne Overspeed
Warning computer (required for Category A operations) and in the AFCS
[Automatic Flight Control System] Air Data Computer.'' TCAA issued AD
CF-2005-30 to require the procedures in Bell Alert Service Bulletin
(ASB) No. 430-05-35, dated June 21, 2005, for replacing the affected
instruments. Bell also issued ASB No. 430-01-22, dated April 30, 2001
(ASB 430-01-22), which provided a temporary Rotorcraft Flight Manual
Supplement and placards with information on airspeed corrections. TCCA
did not issue an AD to mandate the provisions of ASB 430-01-22.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the TCCA and are approved
for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement
with Canada, TCCA has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the Canadian AD.
    We are proposing this AD because we have evaluated all relevant
information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is
likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of this same type
design.

Related Service Information

    Bell has issued ASB No. 430-05-35, dated June 21, 2005, which
specifies, for helicopters with an overspeed warning system, replacing
the overspeed warning computer, Vne converter, and pilot and
copilot airspeed indicator; leak testing the pilot pitot static system;
and operationally testing the overspeed warning system. For helicopters
with a single or dual Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS) with a
Flight Director, ASB No. 430-05-35 specifies replacing the AFCS air
data computer adapter module; leak testing the pilot pitot static
system; and power-up and self-testing the ALT/VSI. This ASB also
specifies removing the Vne-unreliable decals on the
instrument panel on both configurations of these helicopters. TCCA
classified ASB No. 430-05-35 as mandatory and issued AD CF-2005-30,
dated August 3, 2005, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these
helicopters.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require within 1 year, unless done
previously:
     For helicopters with Overspeed Warning System:
    [cir] Replacing the overspeed warning computer, the Vne
converter, and the pilot and copilot airspeed indicator;
    [cir] Removing decal, P/N 430-075-070-103, if installed, from below
the pilot and copilot airspeed indicators;
    [cir] Leak testing the pilot pitot static system; and
    [cir] Operationally testing the overspeed warning system.
     For helicopters with a Single or Dual AFCS with a Flight
Director:
    [cir] Replacing the AFCS air data computer adapter module;
    [cir] Removing decal, P/N 430-075-070-101, if installed, from above
the pilot and copilot electronic attitude direction indicators airspeed
indicators;
    [cir] Leak testing the pilot pitot static system; and
    [cir] Power-up testing the altimeter/vertical speed indicator (ALT/
VSI) and self-testing the ALT/VSI of the AFCS air data computer.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the TCCA AD

    We do not use the compliance date of July 31, 2007.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 52 helicopters of
U.S. registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs
in order to comply with this AD:
     $680 to replace the overspeed warning computer, pilot and
copilot airspeed indicators, Vne converter, and AFCS air
data computer adapter module for each helicopter, assuming 8 work hours
for each helicopter at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour, and

     $46,074 per helicopter for the required parts.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost impact of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $2,431,208 for the fleet.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. 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 an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
Airworthiness Directive (AD).

Bell Helicopter Textron Canada: Docket No. FAA-2012-1127;
Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-035-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model 430 helicopters: serial number (S/N)
49001 through 49103, with Overspeed Warning Kit, part number (P/N)
430-706-004-101 or P/N 430-706-004-103, installed; S/N 49001 through
49100, with Single Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS) with
Flight Director Kit, P/N 430-705-009-103, -105, -109, -111, -115, -
117, or P/N 430-705-011-109, -111, -121, or -123, installed; and S/N
49001 through 49100, with Dual AFCS with Flight Director Kit, P/N
430-705-011-103, -105, -115, -117, -125, -127, -129, -133, -135, or
-137, installed, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as inability of the
helicopters, based on testing, to operate at the published
Vne indicated airspeeds within the cold temperature
limits (-40 degrees centigrade) required for Category A operations.

(c) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(d) Required Actions

    Within 1 year:
    (1) For helicopters with an Overspeed Warning System, replace
the Overspeed Warning Computer, P/N 430-375-013-103, with the
Overspeed Warning Computer, P/N 430-375-013-105; the Vne
Converter, P/N ADI-21280-000, with the Vne Converter, P/N
ADI-21280-100; and the pilot and copilot Airspeed Indicator, P/N
222-375-027-117, with the pilot and copilot airspeed Indicator, P/N
222-375-027-119;
    (i) If installed, remove the decal, P/N 430-075-070-103, from
below the pilot and copilot airspeed indicators;
    (ii) Leak test the pilot pitot static system; and
    (iii) Operationally test the overspeed warning system.
    (2) For helicopters with a Single or Dual Automatic Flight
Control System (AFCS) with a Flight Director, replace the AFCS Air
Data Computer Adapter Module, P/N 065-05041-0021, with P/N 065-
05041-0031;
    (i) If installed, remove the decal, P/N 430-075-070-101, from
above the pilot and copilot electronic attitude direction indicators
airspeed indicators;
    (ii) Leak test the pilot pitot static system;
    (iii) Power-up test the altimeter/vertical speed indicator (ALT/
VSI) and self-test the ALT/VSI of the AFCS air data computer.

(e) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Standards Staff, FAA may approve
AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Mark F. Wiley, Aviation
Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy
Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817)
222-5134, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(f) Additional Information

    (1) Bell Helicopter Textron Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No.
430-05-35, dated June 21, 2005, and ASB No. 430-01-22, dated April
30, 2001, which are not incorporated by reference, contain
additional information about the subject of this AD. For service
information identified in this AD, contact Bell Helicopter Textron
Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review the service
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada
Civil Aviation AD No. CF 2005-30, dated August 3, 2005.

 (g) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System/Component Code: 3417 Air Data Computer.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 12, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-25899 Filed 10-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 240 (Monday, December 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74143-74144]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29241]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73793; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2014-137]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Amend the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule To Amend the Application of Routing Fees
Effective December 1, 2014

December 9, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on November 26, 2014, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule'') to amend the application of Routing Fees. The
Exchange proposes to implement the change on December 1, 2014. The text
of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nyse.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 self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule as it relates to
the application of Routing Fees. The purpose of the proposed change is
to account for recent changes introduced on other exchanges that impact
the fees charged when routing orders.
    The Exchange currently charges OTP Holders or OTP Firms
(collectively, ``OTPs'') a Routing Fee when it routes orders to other
exchanges for execution. The Routing Fee is comprised of an $0.11 per
contract fee, plus the applicable transaction fees assessed by the away
market for execution of the order (which the Exchange is able to
discern from the away market fee schedule). The Routing Fees are
applicable for both standard and mini options and are set forth
separately in the Fee Schedule.
    Recently, the BOX Options Exchange LLC (``BOX'') adopted per
contract pricing that varies based upon the counter party to the trade.
This pricing change makes it impossible to know in advance of the
execution what the charges will be for an order routed to BOX. For
example, a Professional Customer order routed to BOX in a non-Penny
option would be charged $0.35 per contract if it traded against another
Professional Customer or Broker/Dealer, but would be charged $0.94 per
contract if it traded against a Customer.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See BOX Fee Schedule, Section 1 (as of November 2014),
available here, http://boxexchange.com/assets/BOX_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to provide OTPs with certainty regarding the routing fees
for which they may be liable, the Exchange is proposing to amend the
Fee Schedule as it relates to the application of Routing Fees, as set
forth in the sections of the Fee Schedule relating to Trade-Related
Charges for Standard Options and Trade-Related Charges for Mini
Options. The proposed amendments would specify in both sections that if
the actual transaction fees assessed by the away exchange(s) cannot be
determined prior to the execution, the Exchange would charge the $0.11
per contract fee plus the highest per contract charge assessed by the
away exchange(s) for the relevant option class and type of market
participant (e.g., Customer, Firm, Broker/Dealer, Professional Customer
or Market Maker).
    The Exchange proposes to make other non-substantive changes to the
Fee Schedule. First, the Exchange proposes to replace the reference to
``away market,'' with a reference to ``away exchange,'' because the
Exchange only routes orders to registered exchanges. Second, the
Exchange proposes to replace the term ``charged'' with the term
``assessed,'' to make it parallel with the proposed changes to the
Routing Fees. Third, the Exchange proposes to add the following text as
a parenthetical: ``calculated on an order-by-order basis since
different away exchange charge different amounts.'' The Exchange notes
that this rule text is based on the fee schedule for NYSE Amex Options
LLC (``NYSE Amex Options'') and represents how the Exchange currently
calculates the Routing Fee. Fourth, the Exchange proposes to delete the
parenthetical text that provides ``applies to both Mini and standard
option contracts'' as this parenthetical is redundant because the
Routing Fee is set forth separately in the Fee Schedule in the specific
sections relating to fees for standard options and for Mini options.
Finally, to provide clarity regarding the applicability of Routing
Fees, the Exchange proposes to add the following text, which is based
on language from the NYSE Amex Options fee schedule: ``The Routing Fee
is in addition to NYSE Arca's customary execution fees applicable to
the order.''
    The Exchange notes that OTPs can avoid having their orders routed
to away markets by utilizing specific, non-routable order types if they
so choose.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\5\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4)
of the Act,\6\ in particular, because it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not
unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee change is reasonable
and equitable because charging market participants a set per contract
rate in those instances when an order is routed to an away exchange
provides market participants with certainty, which will enable them to
make informed decisions regarding whether to continue to designate such
orders as eligible for routing to away exchanges. The Exchange further
believes that the proposed fee change to charge the highest rate
charged by the away

exchange if the Exchange cannot discern the per contract charge in the
option class in question in advance of the execution is reasonable and
equitable because the Exchange cannot know in advance what the charge
would be on the away exchange. If the Exchange charged the lowest
feasible charge, the Exchange could end up bearing the costs of routing
an order to an away exchange. The Exchange notes that--just as they do
today--to avoid incurring any Routing Fee in preference of an execution
on the Exchange, OTPs are able to designate their orders as non-
routable.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive changes to
the Fee Schedule are reasonable and equitable because they provide
transparency in the Fee Schedule regarding how the Exchange calculates
transaction fees, including Routing Fees, and eliminate redundant rule
text.
    The Exchange further believes that this proposed change is not
unfairly discriminatory either as it applies equally to all OTPs that
send orders to the Exchange.
    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting, its fees and credits to remain
competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes the
proposed fee change is reasonably designed to be fair and equitable,
and therefore, will not unduly burden any particular group of market
participants trading on the Exchange vis-[agrave]-vis another group
(i.e., Market Markers versus non-Market Makers) as it applies equally
to all OTP Holders that send routable orders to the Exchange.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues. In
such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain competitive with other
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \7\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-
4 \8\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \9\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSEArca-2014-137 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-NYSEArca-2014-137. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2014-137, and
should be submitted on or before January 5, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-29241 Filed 12-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 103)]
[Notices]
[Page 30660-30661]
[DOCID:fr28my08-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0101]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Revision of a
Currently-Approved Information Collection: Licensing Applications for
Motor Carrier Operating Authority

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for information.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA
announces its plan to submit the Information Collection Request (ICR)
described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its
review and approval. The FMCSA seeks approval to revise an ICR
entitled, ``Licensing Applications for Motor Carrier Operating
Authority,'' that is used by for-hire motor carriers of regulated
commodities, motor passenger carriers, freight forwarders, property
brokers, and certain Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to register their
operations with the FMCSA. The agency invites public comment on the
ICR.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before July 28, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket Number FMCSA-2008-0101 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Group Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington DC, 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this Notice. Please note that DOT posts all comments received
without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The DMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgement that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or post
card or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
your comment on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477). This information is also
available at http://docketsinfo.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Denise Ryan, Transportation
Specialist, Office of Information Technology, Operations Division,
Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 6th Floor, West Building, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE.,
Washington DC 20590. Telephone Number<PHONE_NUMBER>; E-mail Address
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Office hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: The FMCSA is authorized to register for-hire motor
carriers of regulated commodities and motor passenger carriers under
the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 13902; freight forwarders under the
provisions of 49 U.S.C. 13903; property brokers under the provisions of
49 U.S.C. 13904; and certain Mexico-domiciled motor carriers under the
provisions of 49 U.S.C. 13902(c) and the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) motor carrier access provision. The forms used to
apply for registration authority with the FMCSA are: Form OP-1 for
motor property carriers and brokers; Form OP-1(P) for motor passenger
carriers; Form OP-1(FF) for freight forwarders; and Form OP-1(MX) for
certain Mexico-domiciled motor carriers. These forms request
information on the applicant's identity, location, familiarity with
safety requirements, and type of proposed operations. There are some
differences on the forms due to specific statutory standards for
registration of the different types of transportation entities.
    Title: Application for Certificate of Registration for Foreign
Motor Carriers and Foreign Motor Private Carriers.
    OMB Control Number: 2126-0016.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently-approved information
collection.
    Respondents: Motor carriers, motor passenger carriers, freight
forwarders, brokers, and certain Mexico-domiciled motor carriers.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 43,810.
    Estimated Time per Response: 4 hours to complete Form OP-1(MX); and
2 hours to complete Forms OP-1, OP-1(FF), OP-1(P).
    Expiration Date: August 31, 2008.
    Frequency of Response: Other (as needed).
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 71,218 hours [63 hours for Form OP-
1(MX) + 68,010 hours for Form OP-1 + 1,085 hours for Form OP-1(FF) +
2,060 hours for Form OP-1(P) = 71,218].
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the agency to perform its mission; (2) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for the FMCSA to enhance the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize or include your
comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued on: May 19, 2008.
Michael S. Griffith,
Acting Associate Administrator, Research and Information Technology.
[FR Doc. E8-11890 Filed 5-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 108 (Thursday, June 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34431-34432]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12056]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER20-1912-000]

Blooming Grove Wind Energy Center LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Blooming Grove Wind Energy Center LLC's application for market-based
rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is June 18, 2020.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an

eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling
link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the
Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free, (886) 208-
3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 29, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-12056 Filed 6-3-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64966-64969]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22730]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78855; File No. SR-NYSE-2016-31]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change Amending NYSE Rule 6A To
Exclude the Physical Area Within Fully Enclosed Telephone Booths
Located in 18 Broad Street From the Definition of Trading Floor

September 15, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On May 31, 2016, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend NYSE Rule 6A (``Trading Floor'') to
exclude a physical area within fully enclosed telephone booths located
in 18 Broad Street from the definition of Trading Floor. The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on June
17, 2016.\3\ On July 29, 2016, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\4\ the Commission designated a longer period within which to
either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule
change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the
proposed rule change.\5\ The Commission received no comments on the
proposed rule change. This order grants approval of the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78057 (June 13,
2016), 81 FR 39722 (``Notice'').
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78442 (July 29,
2016), 81 FR 51521 (August 4, 2016). The Commission designated
September 15, 2016 as the date by which it shall approve,
disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 6A (``Trading Floor'') to
exclude an area within fully enclosed telephone booths located in 18
Broad Street from the definition of ``Trading Floor.'' Under the
proposal, as discussed in more detail below, the area within the
enclosed telephone booths will remain within the Exchange's broader
definition of Floor under Rule 6.\6\ The Exchange also proposes to
revise the definition of ``Trading Floor'' to reflect the renaming of a
portion of its physical area and relocation of where NYSE Amex-listed
options are traded.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, infra, notes 16-17 and accompanying text.
    \7\ See proposed Rule 6A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently defines ``Trading Floor'' in Rule 6A to mean
the restricted-access physical areas designated by the Exchange for the
trading of securities, commonly known as the ``Main Room,'' the ``Blue
Room,'' and the ``Garage.'' \8\ Rule 6A then excludes from the
definition of ``Trading Floor'' those areas designated by the Exchange
where NYSE Amex-listed options are traded, commonly known as the
``Extended Blue Room,'' which, for the purposes of the Exchange's
Rules, are referred to as the ``NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See NYSE Rule 6A; see also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 59479 (Mar. 2, 2009), 74 FR 10325 (Mar. 10, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-
23).
    \9\ See NYSE Rule 6A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to exclude an additional area from the
definition of Trading Floor. Specifically, the proposal would exclude
from the defined Trading Floor the physical area within fully enclosed
telephone booths located in 18 Broad Street at the Southeast wall of
the Trading Floor.\10\ These telephone booths are located in a
vestibule area adjacent to the 18 Broad Street elevator banks that
provide access to the Trading Floor. The vestibule area is separated
from the equity trading areas of the Main Room by approximately forty
(40) feet and a partial physical barrier. The Exchange represents that,
while inside the telephone booths, there is no visual or auditory
access to activities conducted at the trading posts or by Floor
Brokers.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See proposed Rule 6A.
    \11\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39722-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently Exchange members and employees of member organizations
are allowed to use personal portable or wireless communication devices
outside the Trading Floor, provided that such use is consistent with
all other Exchange Rules and federal securities laws and rules
thereunder.\12\ By excluding the physical area within the fully
enclosed telephone booths described herein from the definition of
Trading Floor, the proposal would create an exception to restrictions
that would otherwise prohibit the use of personal cellular telephones
while in the telephone booths. In its filing, the Exchange states that
it designed the telephone booths for use by Designated Market Makers
(``DMMs'') and DMMs could use this space to communicate with issuers.
However, the telephone booths could be used by anyone with access to
the Trading Floor, including Floor Brokers.\13\ In the Exchange's view,
a DMM's use of a personal cellular telephone while within a telephone
booth to communicate with an issuer is no different than a DMM's use of
a personal cellular telephone to communicate with an issuer from a
DMM's office off the Exchange or while outside the restricted-access
areas of the Floor.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See NYSE Rule 36, Supplementary Material .23.
    \13\ Currently, Floor Brokers on the Trading Floor are only
allowed to use an approved telephone line or Exchange authorized and
provided portable phone. See NYSE Rule, Supplementary Material .20
and .21.
    \14\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39723.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange states in its filing that, while in a telephone booth,
a DMM would not have access to any time and place information that he
or she may have at a trading post. According to the Exchange, the
following aspects of the telephone booths would create privacy: (1) The
closest location of any Floor Broker operations, which also contains
privacy barriers, is approximately forty (40) feet from the proposed
location of the telephone booths; (2) there are high arching walls with
limited line and sight vision separating the telephone booths from any
trading posts on the Trading Floor; and (3) the telephone booths are
fully enclosed so any conversation that would occur would take place
behind closed doors. The Exchange states that it ``believes that the
combination of these visual and acoustical barriers would substantially

eliminate the risk that any conversations occurring inside the
telephone booth could be overheard [and] it substantially eliminates
the risk that an individual having a conversation while inside the
telephone booth would be able to hear or see anything at a trading post
where securities trade.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39723.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The term ``Trading Floor'' is distinct from the term ``Floor,''
which is defined as the trading Floor of the Exchange and the premises
immediately adjacent thereto, such as the various entrances and lobbies
of the 11 Wall Street, 18 New Street, 8 Broad Street, 12 Broad Street
and 18 Broad Street Buildings, and the telephone facilities available
in these locations.\16\ Because the area within the fully enclosed
telephone booths, while outside the ``Trading Floor,'' would still fall
within the broader definition of ``Floor'' under Exchange rules, the
Exchange would retain jurisdiction over its members while they are
within the telephone booths. The Exchange notes that it would therefore
retain jurisdiction within the telephone booths to regulate conduct
that is inconsistent with Exchange Rules and the federal securities
laws and rules thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See NYSE Rule 6.
    \17\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39723.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, current Exchange restrictions governing the
protection of material non-public information would continue to apply
to DMMs even when off the Trading Floor and thus would apply to their
communications within the telephone booths. NYSE Rule 98 (``Operation
of a DMM Unit'') provides that ``[w]hen a Floor-based employee of a DMM
unit moves to a location off of the Trading Floor of the Exchange or if
any person that provides risk management oversight or supervision of
the Floor-based operations of the DMM unit is aware of Floor-based non-
public order information,\18\ he or she shall not (1) make such
information available to customers, (2) make such information available
to individuals or systems responsible for making trading decisions in
DMM securities in away markets or related products, or (3) use any such
information in connection with making trading decisions in DMM
securities in away markets or related products.'' \19\ The Exchange, in
its filing, explains that the proposed rule change is not intended to
circumvent the restrictions prescribed in Rule 98 applicable to DMMs,
including those pertaining to the misuse of material non-public
information.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ NYSE Rule 98(b)(4) states that ``Floor-based non-public
order'' means ``any order, whether expressed electronically or
verbally, or any information regarding a reasonably imminent non-
public transaction or series of transactions entered or intended for
entry or execution on the Exchange and which is not publicly
available on a real-time basis via an Exchange-provided datafeed,
such as NYSE OpenBook[supreg] or otherwise not publicly available.''
    \19\ See NYSE Rule 98(c)(3)(C). Rule 98(c)(3)(C) does not
restrict communications between a DMM and the DMM's risk manager off
the Trading Floor, as may be necessary if a Floor Broker needs to
discuss the risk profile of a proposed transaction.
    \20\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39723.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Rule 36, Supplementary Material .30 (``DMM Unit Post Wires'')
permits DMMs to maintain telephone lines at their trading posts to
communicate with personnel at the off-Floor offices of the DMM, the
DMM's clearing firm, or with persons providing non-trading-related
services to the DMM, and wired or wireless devices that are registered
with the Exchange to communicate with the system employing the DMM's
algorithms and with individual algorithms.\21\ The Exchange further
states in its filing that it is not proposing any changes to Rule 36
and that DMMs would continue to be subject to Supplementary Material
.30 to Rule 36.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See NYSE Rule 36, Supplementary Material .30.
    \22\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39723.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange proposes amendments to reflect the
renaming and relocation of certain trading areas. The Exchange has
renamed the former ``Garage'' as the ``Buttonwood Room.'' \23\ The
Exchange also recently closed the ``Blue Room'' and the ``Extended Blue
Room'' and moved all member organizations, member organization
employees, and NYSE Amex Options trading activities that were
previously housed in these areas to the Buttonwood Room. Therefore the
proposal would delete references to the ``Blue Room'' and ``Extended
Blue Room'' and replace them with references to the ``Buttonwood
Room.'' \24\ The current rule excludes the NYSE Amex Options Trading
Floor from the definition of Trading Floor.\25\ The proposal would
exclude from the definition of Trading Floor the designated areas in
the Buttonwood Room where NYSE Amex-listed options are traded, which,
for the purposes of the Exchange's Rules, would continue to be referred
to as the ``NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor.'' \26\ The Exchange states
that this proposal does not alter the substance of the rule and
reflects only the location change for NYSE Amex Options.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39722.
    \24\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39722.
    \25\ See NYSE Rule 6A.
    \26\ See proposed Rule 6A. The Exchange states that, as when the
NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor was located in the Extended Blue
Room, the Exchange has erected physical barriers between the NYSE
Amex Options Trading Floor and any Exchange member organizations or
Exchange personnel that are also located in the Buttonwood Room. See
Notice, supra note 3, at 39722 n7.
    \27\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39722.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\28\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\29\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to exclude from the definition of ``Trading
Floor'' the physical area within fully enclosed telephone booths
located in 18 Broad Street.\30\ Through this definitional change, the
proposal would allow persons within the telephone booths to use
personal portable or wireless communications devices outside the
Trading Floor, provided such use is consistent with all other Exchange
Rules and federal securities laws and the rules thereunder.\31\ The
Exchange states that it designed the telephone booths for use by DMMs,
and DMMs could use a personal cellular telephone within this space to
communicate with issuers, but the telephone booths could also be used
by anyone with access to the Trading Floor.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See proposed Rule 6A.
    \31\ See NYSE Rule 36, Commentary .23.
    \32\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39723.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When approving the use of personal portable or wireless
communications devices outside of the Exchange's Trading Floor and
other restricted access areas, the Commission found there to be a
reasonable balance between the Exchange's interest in providing a
convenient and comfortable space for Exchange members and member firm
employees to use personal portable communications devices inside the
Exchange buildings and in minimizing

the risk of misuse of such devices.\33\ Based on representations made
by the Exchange, the Commission believes that this proposal provides a
similar balance between the Exchange's interest to provide a convenient
location for DMMs and others on the Trading Floor to place telephone
calls while minimizing the risk of any potential time and place
advantage that could come with using personal portable communication
devices in proximity to trading activity.\34\ While the telephone
booths fall within the physical turnstiles that generally control entry
onto the Trading Floor, they are separated from trading activity by
approximately forty (40) feet. According to the Exchange, the location
of the telephone booths, and the enclosed setting within such booths,
would provide sufficient visual and auditory barriers between the area
within the telephone booths and trading activity, so as to minimize the
possibility of any time and place advantage.\35\ The Exchange has also
indicated that the glass on the telephone booths has been frosted to
make it opaque, which should help further reduce any sight lines to
non-public Trading Floor information.\36\ Additionally, the Commission
believes that given the current speed of electronic trading, any Floor-
based non-public order information that the DMM, or other floor-based
personnel using the telephone booths, had prior to leaving his or her
trading post or booth area would likely be rendered stale by the time
he or she reached the telephone booths, thereby substantially reducing
the risk of any time and place advantage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60983 (November 10,
2009), 74 FR 59596, 59598 (November 18, 2009) (Order Approving SR-
NYSE-2009-84) (noting that personal portable communications devices
are not subject to the same surveillance as devices authorized and
issued by the Exchange).
    \34\ The Commission notes that ``[t]he term `facility' when used
with respect to an exchange includes its premises, tangible or
intangible property whether on the premises or not, any right to the
use of such premises or property or any service thereof for the
purpose of effecting or reporting a transaction on an exchange
(including, among other things, any systems of communication to or
from the exchange, by ticker or otherwise, maintained by or with the
consent of the exchange), and any right of the exchange to the use
of any property or service.'' 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(2).
    \35\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 39723. The Commission notes
the Exchange's representation that ``while inside the telephone
booths, there is not any visual or auditory access to activities
conducted at the trading posts or by Floor Brokers.'' See id.
    \36\ See note 32, supra, at 59597 n12, which noted when
approving the use of personal portable or wireless communication
devices outside the Exchange's Trading Floor that the majority of
the doors that require card swipe entry are opaque. The Commission
expects the Exchange to continue to ensure that the telephone booths
remain in an area inside the Trading Floor turnstiles that minimizes
any line of sight, including through the use of opaque glass on the
booths. The Exchange has represented that it continues to monitor
and surveil its Trading Floor for the misuse of material, non-public
information, including trading ahead of customer orders, and that
these surveillance procedures should be effective for monitoring for
the misuse of material non-public information with the addition of
telephone booths in close proximity to the Trading Floor within
which individuals may use personal cellular telephones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the Exchange will retain jurisdiction
over its members and member organizations, including DMM units and
their employees, for their conduct within the telephone booths because
this area is still within the broader definition of Floor under NYSE
Rule 6.\37\ With respect to DMMs in particular, NYSE Rule 98 contains
restrictions on a DMM's conduct while on and off the Trading Floor.
These restrictions include a general prohibition on the misuse of
Floor-based non-public order information.\38\ When a DMM moves to a
location off the Trading Floor, the DMM must not make Floor-based non-
public order information available to customers or to individuals or
systems responsible for making trading decisions in DMM securities in
away markets or related products, or use any such information in
connection with trading decisions in DMM securities in away markets or
related products.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See note 17 and accompanying text supra.
    \38\ See NYSE Rule 98(c)(3)(A).
    \39\ See NYSE Rule 98(c)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Commission has been concerned about whether there
could be a misuse of any information about customer orders or other
material information that is passed to a DMM or other floor personnel
through the use of personal cellular telephones within private
telephone booths in close proximity to the Trading Floor. For similar
reasons noted above that reduce the risk of misuse of Floor-based non-
public order information,\40\ such as the speed of electronic trading,
and the Exchange's representations concerning its surveillance of
transactions occurring on the Exchange Trading Floor, the Commission
believes the Exchange has addressed these concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See supra note 18, which noted that Floor-based non-public
order information includes information expressed verbally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has represented that information DMMs and other floor-
based personnel relay, receive, or discuss on personal cellular phones
within the telephone booths adjacent to the Trading Floor, will not, in
the Exchange's view diminish the ability of the Exchange to adequately
surveil its market for the misuse of Floor-based non-public order
information and other material non-public information.\41\ The
Commission, therefore, believes that based on the Exchange's
representations noted above, and in particular its representations that
it has the ability to effectively conduct surveillance for the misuse
of material non-public information despite permitting DMMs and others
to use personal cellular telephones within telephone booths placed
adjacent to the restricted Trading Floor, that the NYSE proposal is
consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ The Exchange has represented that in surveilling for
compliance with its rules, NYSE can require a member firm to produce
any additional information necessary regarding telephone booth use.
In addition, the Exchange has represented that members firms will
need to amend their policies and procedures concerning compliance
with NYSE Rule 98 to account for the introduction of these telephone
booths and will send an Information Memorandum to its members to
remind them of this obligation, as well as obligations to comply
with Rule 98 and, in particular, Rule 98(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes amendments to the definition of
``Trading Floor'' in NYSE Rule 6A to reflect the renaming and
relocation of certain trading areas.\42\ The Commission believes that
updating the names of the renamed or relocated trading areas in the
Exchange rules to reflect the current use of the Exchange Trading Floor
would eliminate any potential confusion among investors and other
market participants on the Exchange regarding the parameters of the
Trading Floor and thereby where certain conduct is, or is not,
permitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See proposed Rule 6A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the foregoing, the Commission therefore finds the proposal
to be consistent with the Act. The Commission believes that the
proposal to exclude the area within the telephone booths described
herein from the definition of Trading Floor, and thereby permit the use
of personal communication devices within this area, while not without
risk, is tempered by the existence of physical barriers that limit
visual and auditory access between the telephone booths and the
location of trading activities, the speed of electronic trading, and
the fact that the Exchange retains jurisdiction over its members while
they are in the telephone booths. The Commission expects that the
Exchange will monitor compliance with Exchange rules within the
telephone booths and on the Trading Floor and inform the Commission if
it encounters difficulties in enforcing its rules or otherwise finds
that the amendment to the definition of Trading Floor raises regulatory
concerns.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19b(2) of the Act,\43\
that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2016-31) be, and hereby is,
approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-22730 Filed 9-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P