[Federal Register: June 10, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 112)]
[Notices]
[Page 32782-32784]
[DOCID:fr10jn08-99]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Approvals and
Disapprovals

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Monthly Notice of PFC Approvals and Disapprovals. In April
2008, there were seven applications approved. Additionally, nine
approved amendments to previously approved applications are listed.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly notice, as appropriate, of PFC
approvals and disapprovals under the provisions of the Aviation Safety
and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. 101-508) and Part 158 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). This notice is
published pursuant to paragraph d of 158.29.

PFC Applications Approved

    Public Agency: Jackson Hole Airport Board, Jackson, Wyoming.
    Application Number: 08-1 1-C-00-JAC.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved In this Decision: $2,463,191.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: May 1, 2009.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: February 1, 2012.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC's: None.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:
Security improvements.
Acquire and install non-approach control tower equipment.
Noise monitoring system improvements.
Acquire snow removal equipment.
Acquire aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicle.
PFC administration.
    Decision Date: April 8, 2008.

    For Further Information Contact: Chris Schaffer, Denver Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Public Agency: City of El Paso, Texas.
    Application Number: 08-04-C-00-ELP.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $3.00.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision: $10,098,221.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1, 2008.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: July 1, 2010.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC's:
Part 135 air taxi/commercial operators filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information submitted in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at El Paso International Airport.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:
Extend runway 8R/26L.
Pavement management update.
Modify terminal building baggage makeup.
Reconstruct portions of taxiways H, J, and K.
Administration costs.
    Decision Date: April 10, 2008.
    For Further Information Contact: Guillermo Villalobos, Texas
Airports Development Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Public Agency: Port of Port Angeles, Port Angeles, Washington.
    Application Number: 08-07-C-00-CLM.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $3.00.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved In This Decision: $191,838.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: March 1, 2009.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: March 1, 2013.
    Class Of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFC's: None.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use:
New terminal entrance road.
Safety area property purchase.
Safety area development.
Taxilane development, phase II.
Terminal apron reconstruction.
Runway lighting rehabilitation.
Obstruction identification and removal.
Taxilane development, phase III.

    Decision Date: April 14, 2008.
    For Further Information Contact: Trang Tran, Seattle Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Public Agency: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority,
Washington, District of Columbia.
    Application Number: 07-08-C-00-DCA.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved In This Decision: $124,914,400.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: November 1, 2011.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: March 1, 2015.
    Class Of Air Carriers Not Required To Collect PFC's:
All air taxi/commercial operator-nonscheduled/on-demand air carriers
filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information submitted in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA).
    Brief Description of Project Partially Approved for Collection at
DCA and Use at Washington Dulles International Airport: International
arrivals building expansion.
    Determination: The FAA was unable to determine the eligibility of
work associated with the cost estimate line item ``building shell
exterior closure.'' Therefore, the public agency may not use PFC
revenue to pay the costs associated with this line item.
    Decision Date: April 16, 2008.
    For Further Information Contact: Luis Loarte, Washington Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: City of Rock Springs/County of Sweetwater, Rock
Springs, Wyoming.
    Application Number: 08-03-C-00-RKS.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved In this Decision: $250,000.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: October 1, 2010.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: September 1, 2012.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC's: None.
    Brief Description of Project Approved for Collection and Use:
Terminal building improvements.
    Decision Date: April 18, 2008.
    For Further Information Contact: Chris Schaffer, Denver Airports
District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: City of Long Beach, California.
    Application Number: 08-04-I-00-LGB.
    Application Type: Impose a PFC.
    PFC Level: $4.50.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved In this Decision: $69,137,000.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: November 1, 2015.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: September 1, 2025.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC's: Non-scheduled/
on-demand air carriers filing FAA Form 1800-31.
    Determination: Approved. Based on information submitted in the
public agency's application, the FAA has determined that the proposed
class accounts for less than 1 percent of the total annual enplanements
at Long Beach/Daugherty Field Airport.
    Brief Description of Project Approved for Collection: Terminal area
improvements.
    Decision Date: April 22, 2008.
    For Further Information Contact: Darlene Williams, Los Angeles
Airports District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Agency: Hualapai Tribe, Peach Springs, Arizona.
    Application Number: 08-02-C-00-1G4.
    Application Type: Impose and use a PFC.
    PFC Level: $3.00.
    Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision: $9,614,736.
    Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1, 2008.
    Estimated Charge Expiration Date: January 1, 2024.
    Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Collect PFC's: None.
    Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection And Use:

Design and construct runway 17/35 (phase II).
Design and construct parallel and associated connector taxiways (phase
II).
Design and construct access road (phase II).
Design and construct aircraft parking apron including heliports (phase
II).
Design and construct parking lots for new terminal facilities.
Aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicle and suits.
Airport layout plan.
Environmental assessment study.
Install airport perimeter fencing.
Acquire snow removal equipment.
Construct equipment storage building.
Design and construct utilities for new airport facilities.
Design and construct new terminal building.

    Decision Date: April 23, 2008.
    For Further Information Contact: Darlene Williams, Los Angeles
Airports District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

                                           Amendments to PFC Approvals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Original         Amended
                                     Amendment       Original         Amended        estimated       estimated
   Amendment No.  city, state     approved  date   approved  net   approved  net   charge  exp.    charge  exp.
                                                   PFC  revenue    PFC  revenue        date            date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
02-06-C-01-RNO, Reno, NV........        03/31/08     $10,000,000     $10,069,667        11/01/03        11/01/03
*06-06-C-LBB, Lubbock, TX.......        04/01/08       9,731,125      14,974,139        09/01/13        06/01/13
03-09-C-02-CMX, Hancock, MI.....        04/16/08         104,266         116,682        09/01/06        11/01/06
96-03-C-03-MEI, Meridian, MS....        04/17/08         250,620          66,896        06/01/00        06/01/00
05-07-C-01-MEl, Meridian, MS....        04/17/08         489,473         673,197        04/01/08        10/01/10
05-08-C-01-MEI, Meridian, MS....        04/17/08         150,000         163,380        04/01/09        10/01/11
04-03-C-01-SHR, Sheridan, WY....        04/18/08         247,309         247,183        12/01/11        08/01/08
01-05-C-02-VLD, Valdosta, GA....        04/22/08         260,826         259,079        11/01/03        11/01/03
03-03-C-01-SGU, St. George, UT..        04/25/08       1,062,000       3,515,402        10/01/11        01/01/16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note: The amendment denoted by an asterisk (*) includes a change
to the PFC level charged from $3.00 per enplaned passenger to $4.50
per enplaned passenger. For Lubbock, TX, this change is effective on
June 1, 2008.

    Issued in Washington, DC on June 2, 2008.
Joe Hebert,
Manager, Financial Analysis and Passenger Facility Charge Branch.
 [FR Doc. E8-12775 Filed 6-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 174 (Thursday, September 8, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62162-62163]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21547]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0769]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0028

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0028,
Course Approval and Records for Merchant Mariner Training Schools;
without change. Our ICR describe the information we seek to collect
from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is
inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before November 7,
2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2016-0769] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
COMMANDANT (CG-612), ATTN: PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT MANAGER, U.S. COAST
GUARD, 2703 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR AVE SE., STOP 7710, WASHINGTON, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise the ICR or decide not to seek an extension
of approval for the Collection. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2016-0769], and
must be received by November 7, 2016.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for

alternate instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all
public comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions.
Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email
alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Course Approval and Records for Merchant Mariner Training
Schools.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0028.
    Summary: The information is needed to ensure that merchant marine
training schools meet minimal statutory requirements. The information
is used to approve the curriculum, facility and faculty for these
schools.
    Need: Section 7315 of 46 U.S.C. authorizes an applicant for a
license or document to substitute the completion of an approved course
for a portion of the required sea service. Section 10.402 of 46 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) contains the Coast Guard regulations for
course approval.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Merchant marine training schools.
    Frequency: Five years for reporting; one year for recordkeeping.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from
128,139 hours to 139,807 hours a year primarily due to an increase in
the number of responses.

    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

Marilyn Scott-Perez,
U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Deputy Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-21547 Filed 9-7-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 36 (Thursday, February 25, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11404-11407]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03658]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0503; Product Identifier 2018-SW-006-AD; Amendment
39-21386; AD 2021-02-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Leonardo S.p.a. Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Leonardo S.p.a. (Leonardo) Model AW189 helicopters. This AD
requires various repetitive inspections of the

main rotor (MR) damper. This AD was prompted by reports of in-service
MR damper failures and the development of an improved MR damper. This
condition, if not corrected, could lead to loss of the lead-lag damping
function of the MR blade, possibly resulting in damage to adjacent
critical rotor components and subsequent loss control of the
helicopter. The actions of this AD are intended to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 1, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain documents listed in this AD as of April 1, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule
contact Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters, Emanuele Bufano, Head of
Airworthiness, Viale G.Agusta 520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va)
Italy; telephone +39-0331-225074; fax +39-0331-229046; or at https://www.leonardocompany.com/en/home. You may view the referenced service
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is
also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0503.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0503; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this AD, the European Aviation Safety Agency (now European Union
Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD, any service information that is
incorporated by reference, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Fuller, AD Program Manager,
Operational Safety Branch, Airworthiness Products Section, General
Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX
76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Leonardo Model AW189
helicopters with MR damper part number (P/N) 4F6220V00251 installed.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 20, 2020 (85 FR
30664). The NPRM proposed to require reducing the installation torque
of the nuts on the bolts attaching the MR damper to the MR hub. The
NPRM also proposed to require, at specified intervals, replacing the
affected MR damper; dye penetrant or eddy current inspecting the rod
end and body end of each MR damper for a crack, visually inspecting the
rod end and body end of each MR damper for a crack, and replacing any
cracked MR damper. For certain helicopters, the NPRM also proposed to
require inspecting each rod end and body end bearing for rotation, and
replacing the rod end or MR damper as applicable if there is any
rotation; inspecting the lag damper broached ring nut for damage,
correct engagement, and alignment and removing the rod end and broached
ring nut from service if any of those conditions exist. For all
helicopters, the NPRM proposed to require, at specified intervals,
inspecting the bearing friction torque of each MR damper body end and
rod end, and replacing the MR damper if the torque value exceeds 30.0
Nm (265.5 lb in); inspecting the MR damper anti-rotation block for wear
and replacing the anti-rotation block if there is wear beyond
acceptable limits; and replacing each special washer P/N 3G6220A05051
with special washer P/N 3G6220A05052. For certain MR dampers, the NPRM
proposed to require inspecting the broached ring for damage and
alignment, removing the broached ring from service if there is damage,
and replacing the broached ring if the rod end and broached ring cannot
be aligned. Finally, the NPRM proposed to require inspecting certain
serial-numbered MR dampers for correct torque of the broached ring
prior to installation on any helicopter. The proposed requirements were
intended to detect a crack in an MR damper, which if not detected and
corrected, could lead to loss of the lead-lag damping function of the
MR blade, resulting in damage of the MR damper, detachment of the MR
damper in-flight, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
    The NRPM was prompted by EASA AD No. 2016-0145R1, dated January 17,
2018 (EASA AD 2016-0145R1), issued by EASA, which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, to correct an unsafe
condition for Leonardo Model AW189 helicopters with MR damper P/N
4F6220V00251 installed. EASA advises that a MR damper failed, which
resulted in complete seizure of the body end lug and an in-flight
disconnection of the damper. EASA states that a combination of factors
may have contributed to the MR damper disconnection, and that this
condition could result in loss of the lead-lag damping function of the
MR blade, damage to adjacent critical rotor components, and subsequent
reduced control of the helicopter. The contributing factors include
cracks, slippage marks, damaged broach ring teeth, and loss of torque.
    According to EASA, the AW189 MR damper is a similar design to the
MR dampers installed on Model AW139 helicopters, where multiple MR
damper failures have been reported involving the body end lug, the eye
end lug, and the rod end. To correct this condition, EASA issued a
series of superseded and revised ADs to require repetitive inspections
of certain MR dampers, and similar corrective actions as those for
Model AW139 helicopters. EASA AD 2016-0145R1 requires various one-time
and repetitive inspections of the MR damper, a torque check of the body
end, and replacing any MR damper with a crack or that fails the torque
check. EASA AD 2016-0145R1 also allows installation of a new MR damper,
P/N 8G6220V00151, as an optional terminating action for the repetitive
inspections.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule, but the FAA did not receive any comments on
the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA of the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA is issuing this AD after
evaluating all of the information provided by EASA and determining the
unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
helicopters of the same type design and that air safety and the public
interest require adopting these AD requirements as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD requires contacting the manufacturer under certain
conditions, while this AD does not.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Finmeccanica Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-080,
Revision A, dated July 15, 2016, which contains procedures for visual
and dye penetrant inspections of the MR damper for cracks and for
verifying the torque of the damper body ends.
    The FAA also reviewed Leonardo Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin
No. 189-102, Revision A, dated December 21, 2017, which contains
procedures for installing an MR damper with reduced torque values and
specifies replacing MR damper P/N 4F6220V00251 with new MR damper P/N
8G6220V00151.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Finmeccanica Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-069, dated
February 12, 2016, which contains procedures for installing a special
washer on the MR damper rod end, modifying the installation torque of
the MR damper, and inspecting the rod end bearings.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 3 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. The FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85
per work-hour.
    Adjusting the tightening torque takes about 10 work-hours, for an
estimated cost of $850 per helicopter and $2,550 for the U.S. fleet.
    Replacing an MR damper takes about 2 work-hours, and parts cost
about $18,000, for an estimated cost of $18,170 per MR damper.
    Performing a dye penetrant or eddy current inspection of the MR
damper takes about 8 work-hours, for an estimated cost of $680 per
helicopter and $2,040 for the U.S fleet.
    Visually inspecting the rod ends and body ends takes about 0.5
hour, for an estimated cost of $43 per helicopter and $129 for the U.S.
fleet, per inspection cycle.
    Inspecting the rod ends and body ends for bearing rotation takes
about 0.5 hour, for an estimated cost of $43 per helicopter and $129
for the U.S. fleet, per inspection cycle.
    Inspecting the broached ring nut takes about 0.5 hour, for an
estimated cost of $43 per helicopter and $129 for the U.S. fleet, per
inspection cycle.
    Inspecting for bearing friction takes about 2 hours, for an
estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and $510 for the U.S fleet, per
inspection cycle.
    Inspecting the broached ring teeth for proper alignment and
applying torque takes about 8 work-hours, for an estimated cost of $680
per helicopter and $2,040 for the U.S fleet.
    Replacing a rod end takes about 3 work-hours and parts cost about
$500, for an estimated cost of $755 per rod end.
    Replacing a broached ring takes about 3 work-hours and parts cost
about $100, for an estimated cost of $355 per broached ring.
    Replacing a broached ring nut takes about 3 work-hours and parts
cost about $125, for an estimated cost of $380 per broached ring nut.
    Replacing an anti-rotation block takes about 3 work-hours and parts
cost about $50, for an estimated cost of $305 per anti-rotation block.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-02-03 Leonardo S.p.a: Amendment 39-21386; Docket No. FAA-2020-
0503; Product Identifier 2018-SW-006-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to Leonardo S.p.a.
Model AW189 helicopters, certificated in any category, with a main
rotor (MR) damper part number (P/N) 4F6220V00251 installed.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in an MR damper,
which if not detected and corrected, could lead to loss of the lead-
lag damping function of the MR blade, resulting in damage of the MR
damper, detachment of the MR damper in-flight, and subsequent loss
of control of the helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective April 1, 2021.

(d) 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.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS), reduce the torque of
the nut on the bolt attaching each MR damper to the MR hub by
following paragraphs 4 through 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions,
Part I, of Leonardo Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. 189-102,
Revision A, dated December 21, 2017 (ASB 189-102).
    (2) Within 30 hours TIS or before the MR damper body end (body
end) accumulates 500 hours TIS, whichever occurs later, and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS, replace the MR
damper.
    (3) Within 30 hours TIS, before the MR damper accumulates 300
hours TIS, or within 300 hours TIS since the last overhaul,
whichever occurs later, dye penetrant inspect using a 5X power
magnifying glass or eddy current inspect each MR damper rod end (rod

end) and body end for a crack in the areas depicted in Figure 2 of
Finmeccanica Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-080, Revision A, dated July
15, 2016 (BT 189-080).
    (i) If there is a crack on the body end, before further flight,
replace the MR damper.
    (ii) If there is a crack on the rod end, before further flight,
replace the rod end and, within 300 hours TIS, dye penetrant or eddy
current inspect the rod end for a crack as described in paragraph
(e)(3) of this AD.
    (iii) If there are no cracks, before further flight, mark the
rod end and body end with a dot of black polyurethane paint as shown
in Figure 13 of BT 189-080.
    (iv) Thereafter, before the first flight of each day, using a
mirror and a magnifying glass visually inspect each rod end and body
end for a crack in the areas shown in Figure 14 of BT 189-080. If
there is a crack in the rod end, before further flight, replace the
rod end. If there is a crack on the body end, before further flight,
replace the MR damper.
    (4) Within the compliance times listed in paragraphs (e)(4)(i)
and (ii) of this AD, inspect each rod end bearing and body end for
bearing rotation in the damper seat. An example of rotation
(misaligned slippage marks) is shown in Figure 4 of BT 189-080. If
there is any bearing rotation in the rod end, before further flight,
replace the rod end. If there is any bearing rotation in the body
end, before further flight, replace the MR damper.
    (i) For MR dampers that have accumulated less than 300 hours TIS
since new or since the last overhaul, within 30 hours TIS and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10 hours TIS.
    (ii) For MR dampers that have accumulated 300 or more hours TIS
since new or since the last overhaul, within 5 hours TIS and
thereafter before the first flight of each day.
    (5) For helicopters with an MR damper with a serial number (S/N)
MCR0001 through MCR0154 and MCR0174 through MCR0195, within 30 hours
TIS and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 20 hours TIS until the
MR damper has accumulated 600 hours TIS, visually inspect each MR
damper broached ring nut for broken teeth, proper engagement, and
alignment as depicted in Figure 5 and shown in Figures 6, 7, and 8
of BT 189-080. If there is a broken tooth, improper engagement, or
misalignment of the broached ring nut, before further flight, remove
from service the rod end and broached ring nut.
    (6) Within 50 hours TIS and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 100 hours TIS:
    (i) Rotate the body end around the damper axis to put it near
the middle position and determine the bearing friction torque value
of the body end, using as a reference Figure 11 of BT 189-080.

    Note 1 to Paragraph (e)(6)(i):  Applying too much force while
rotating the body end around the damper axis may cause damage.

    (A) If the torque value of the body end is more than 30.0 Nm
(265.5 in lb), before further flight, replace the MR damper.
    (B) If the torque value of the body end is 30.0 Nm (265.5 in lb)
or less, determine the bearing friction torque value of each rod
end, using as a reference Figure 11 of BT 189-080. If the torque
value of the rod end is more than 30.0 Nm (265.5 in lb), before
further flight, replace the rod end.
    (ii) Inspect each MR damper anti-rotation block for wear by
following paragraphs 4.3 through 4.3.6 of the Compliance
Instructions, Part VI, of BT 189-080. If there is wear, before
further flight, replace the MR damper anti-rotation block.
    (7) Within 50 hours TIS:
    (i) On each MR damper, replace special washer P/N 3G6220A05051
with special washer P/N 3G6220A05052.
    (ii) For helicopters with an MR damper with a S/N MCR0001
through MCR0041, MCR0043, MCR0045 through MCR0151, MCR0153 through
MCR0157, MCR0159 through MCR 0179, and MCR0185 through MCR0370; and
for MR dampers with a rod end P/N M006-01H004-045 or P/N M006-
01H004-053 installed, do the following:
    (A) Inspect each broached ring for wear, bent teeth, missing
teeth, and stripped threads. Pay particular attention to the four
pins that engage the piston grooves. If there is any wear or damage
to the broached ring, before further flight, remove from service the
broached ring. An example of an acceptable broached ring is shown in
Figure 4, Annex A, of BT 189-080.
    (B) Align each rod end and broached ring by applying a torque of
60 Nm (531 in lb) to 80 Nm (708 in lb). If the rod end and broached
ring cannot be aligned, before further flight, replace the broached
ring.
    (8) Except for MR dampers with a S/N MCR0042, MCR0044, MCR0152,
MCR0158, and MCR0180 through MCR0184, do not install an MR damper P/
N 4F6220V00251 on any helicopter unless the MR damper has passed the
requirements in paragraph (e)(7)(ii) of this AD.

(f) Credit For Previous Actions

    (1) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the Compliance Instructions, Part II, of
Finmeccanica Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-069, dated February 12, 2016
(BT 189-069), are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding actions in paragraph (e)(7)(i) of this AD.
    (2) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the Compliance Instructions, Part III, of BT 189-
069, are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
actions in paragraph (e)(7)(ii) of this AD.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, may approve
AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Fuller, AD Program
Manager, Operational Safety Branch, Airworthiness Products Section,
General Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort
Worth, TX 76177; telephone<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, the FAA suggests
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.

(h) Additional Information

    (1) Finmeccanica Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-069, dated February
12, 2016, which is not incorporated by reference, contains
additional information about the subject of this AD. For service
information identified in this AD, contact Leonardo S.p.A.
Helicopters, Emanuele Bufano, Head of Airworthiness, Viale G.Agusta
520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy; telephone +39-0331-
225074; fax +39-0331-229046; or at https://www.leonardocompany.com/en/home. You may view the referenced service information at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (now European Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) No.
2016-0145R1, dated January 17, 2018. You may view the EASA AD on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2020-0503.

(i) Subject

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

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Finmeccanica Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-080, Revision A,
dated July 15, 2016.
    (ii) Leonardo Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. 189-102,
Revision A, dated December 21, 2017.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Leonardo S.p.a. Helicopters, Emanuele Bufano, Head of Airworthiness,
Viale G. Agusta 520, 21017 C. Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy;
telephone +39-0331-225074; fax +39-0331-229046; or at https://www.leonardocompany.com/en/home.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on January 6, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-03658 Filed 2-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 168-170]
[FR Doc No: E9-31161]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61235; File No. SR-NYSE-2009-126]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending NYSE Rules 116 and 123C To Allow More Than One Closing Print
To Be Reported to the Consolidated Tape for Closing Transactions That
Exceed 99,999,999 Shares

December 23, 2009.
    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 December 16, 2009, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') 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
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 amending [sic] the provisions of NYSE
Rules 116 (``Stop'' Constitutes Guarantee) and 123C (Market On The
Close Policy And Expiration Procedures) to allow on a temporary basis
more than one closing print to be reported to the Consolidated Tape for
closing transactions that exceed 99,999,999 shares. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Through this filing the Exchange seeks to amend the provisions of
NYSE Rules 116.40 (``Stop'' Constitutes Guarantee) and 123C (Market On
The Close Policy And Expiration Procedures) to allow more than one
closing print to be reported to the Consolidated Tape for closing
transactions that exceed 99,999,999 shares.
    Currently, pursuant to NYSE Rules 116.40(c) and 123C(3), the
closing transaction is reported to the Consolidated Tape last sale
reporting system as a single transaction via a single print. As a
result of a temporary size limitation in a new market data distribution
system, Exchange systems currently cannot support prints greater than
99,999,999 shares.\3\ Therefore, executions of greater than 99,999,999
shares must be sent to the Consolidated Tape in more than one print.
The multiple prints together will reflect the cumulative volume of the
single closing transaction. Because this is inconsistent with the
provisions of NYSE Rules 116.40(c) and 123C(3), the Exchange proposes
to amend the provisions of those rules to provide that any closing
transaction exceeding 99,999,999 shares will be reported to the
Consolidated Tape last sale reporting system in more than one print.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange anticipates that the temporary size limitation
in the new market data distribution system will be corrected by no
later than the end of February 2010.
    \4\ On December 4, 2009, the closing transaction in Bank of
America's security exceeded 99,999,999 shares. On that date the
Exchange filed for a temporary exemption to the provisions of NYSE
Rules 116 and 123C. See Securities and Exchange Act Release No.
61125 (December 7, 2009), 74 FR 66182 (December 14, 2009) (SR-NYSE-
2009-122).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that reporting multiple prints will not have
a detrimental effect on investors because the prints will each be
marked as the closing print. Moreover, the Exchange intends to provide
notice to its customers through its Trader Alert System when a closing
transaction exceeds 99,999,999 shares and requires more than one print.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal 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)(5) of the Act,\6\
in particular, in that it is 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. The Exchange
believes the proposed rule change will facilitate the timely and
efficient reporting of the closing transaction on the Exchange and thus
ultimately serve to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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.

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 Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
Because the 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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \9\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \11\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\12\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing, so that the new
procedures will be operative in the event that a closing transaction
whose volume exceeds 99,999,999 shares occurs in the near future. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this
proposal, the Commission has 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 may summarily abrogate 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.

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-NYSE-2009-126 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-NYSE-2009-126. 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,\14\ 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 Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549-1090, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m.
and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing will also 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-NYSE-2009-126 and should be
submitted on or before January 25, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-31161 Filed 12-31-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 187 (Thursday, September 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59391-59394]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23425]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70467; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2013-119]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Modify the Existing Fees To Receive CME Group Multi-Cast Market Data
Feeds via Wireless Connectivity

September 20, 2013.
    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 September 12, 2013, 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 proposes to modify the existing fees clients in NASDAQ's
Carteret data center to receive CME Group multi-cast market data feeds
via wireless connectivity. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at http://www.nasdaq.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, NASDAQ included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Background. In July of 2013, NASDAQ began utilize wireless
technology to make available to its co-located clients third-party data
from the CME Group, and to assess fees for the delivery of that third
party market data to market center clients via a wireless network.\3\
Clients who choose this optional service use their existing NASDAQ
cross connect handoffs (1G, 10G, or 40G) to receive the multicast
market data for CME Group, and NASDAQ act as re-distributor of the
third party market data feeds, capturing the data at CME Group's data
centers and transporting the data to NASDAQ's Carteret data center. CME
Group data is also available via fiber optic network, and therefore the
wireless connectivity is simply another of many alternative methods of
acquiring the CME data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69844; 78 F.R. 39383
(July 1, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-084).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In July, NASDAQ began assessing clients a $5,000 installation fee
(a non-recurring charge) and a monthly recurring charge (MRC) of
$23,500 for connectivity. Clients place orders for the wireless
connectivity to CME data via NASDAQ's CoLo Console.\4\ Subscribers to
CME Group's data via a wireless network are currently required to
subscribe for a minimum of one year, which is standard practice for co-
location offerings. As an incentive to clients, NASDAQ agreed to waive
the first month's MRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The ``CoLo Console'' is a web-based ordering tool NASDAQ
offers to enable members to place co-location orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since July, the wireless network delivering CME data has performed
well. NASDAQ OMX performed substantial network testing prior to
offering the service for a fee to members. The wireless network will
continue to be closely monitored and the client informed of any issues.
As wireless networks may be affected by severe weather events, clients
must have redundant methods to receive this market data and must attest
to having alternate methods or establishing an alternate method in the
near future when they order this service from the Exchange.
    Current Proposal. NASDAQ is proposing three minor modifications to
the CME data fees. First, in addition to offering a single MRC fee of
$23,000 for receiving all available CME data, NASDAQ will offer three
subsets of data for subscribers seeking only a portion of the total
available. Specifically, NASDAQ will offer Equities Futures Only data
for an MRC of $10,000, Fixed Income Futures Only for an MRC of $10,000,
and Metals Futures Only for an MRC of $3,500. Clients choosing to
receive all CME data will continue to pay an MRC of $23,500 as they do
today; clients choosing to receive less data will pay lower fees. The
single $5,000 installation fee will continue to apply regardless of the
amount of data clients elect to receive.
    Second, NASDAQ will eliminate the requirement that subscribers
commit to a minimum 12-month subscription. Since July, NASDAQ has
determined that clients prefer longer-term arrangements and, therefore,
that a regulatory requirement is unnecessary. Just as NASDAQ and its
vendor invest heavily to offer CME data, NASDAQ's clients make
substantial investments to obtain the CME data and they require long-
term usage to help recover that investment. NASDAQ will also release
from the 12-month minimum all current clients that adopted the product
beginning in July subject to that requirement. This will allow all
users to receive the CME data on the same terms.
    Third, NASDAQ will eliminate the 30-day waiver period for MRC fees
for CME data. The waiver period is unnecessary because the 12-month
minimum subscription no longer applies. Clients are now able to connect
for a short period of time, test the product, and then disconnect
without penalty at any time if the product does not prove valuable to
them.
    Representations. The CME data feed delivery option will continue to
be available to all clients of the data center, and is in response to
industry demand, as well as to changes in the technology for
distributing market data. Clients opting not to pay for the wireless
connectivity will still be able to receive market data via fiber optics
and standard telecommunications connections, as they do currently, and
under the same fees. Receipt of trade data via wireless technology is
completely optional. In addition, clients can choose to receive market
data via other third-party vendors (Extranets or Telecommunication
vendors) via fiber optic networks or wireless networks.
    The proposed fees are based on the cost to NASDAQ and the vendor of
installing and maintaining the wireless

connectivity and on the value provided to the customer, which receives
low latency delivery of data feeds. The costs associated with the
wireless connectivity system are incrementally higher than fiber
optics-based solutions due to the expense of the wireless equipment,
cost of installation and testing and ongoing maintenance of the
network. The fees also allow NASDAQ to make a profit, and reflect the
premium received by the clients in terms of lower latency over the
fiber optics option. Clients can choose to build and maintain their own
wireless networks or choose their own third party network vendors but
the upfront and ongoing costs will be much more substantial than this
Exchange wireless offering.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \5\ in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4), (b)(5) and
(b)(8) 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 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.
NASDAQ's proposal to offer wireless connectivity supports important
policy objectives of the Act, including the broadest, fairest possible
dissemination of market data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5) and (8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees for wireless
connectivity to NASDAQ are consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act
for multiple reasons. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which exchanges offer co-location services as a means to
facilitate the trading activities of those members who believe that co-
location enhances the efficiency of their trading. Accordingly, fees
charged for co-location services are constrained by the active
competition for the order flow of such members. If a particular
exchange charges excessive fees for co-location services, affected
members will opt to terminate their co-location arrangements with that
exchange, and adopt a possible range of alternative strategies,
including co-locating with a different exchange, placing their servers
in a physically proximate location outside the exchange's data center,
or pursuing trading strategies not dependent upon co-location.
Accordingly, the exchange charging excessive fees would stand to lose
not only co-location revenues but also revenues associated with the
execution of orders routed to it by affected members. Although
currently no other exchange offers wireless connectivity, there are no
constraints on their ability to do so, and it is probable that other
exchanges will make a similar offering in the near future. The Exchange
believes that this competitive dynamic imposes powerful restraints on
the ability of any exchange to charge unreasonable fees for co-location
services, including fees for wireless connectivity.
    A co-location customer may obtain a similar service by contracting
with a wireless service provider to install the required dishes on
towers near the data centers and paying the service provider to
maintain the service. However, the cost involved in establishing
service in this manner is substantial and could result in uneven access
to wireless connectivity. The Exchange's proposed fees will allow these
clients to utilize wireless connectivity and obtain the lower latency
transmission of data from third parties and NASDAQ that is available to
others, at a reasonable cost.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The wireless network offered by the Exchange via the
provider, although constrained by bandwidth with respect to the
number of feeds it can carry, can be made available to an unlimited
number of customers. The factors that differentiate this proposal
from the Exchange's offerings of and initial fees for low latency
network telecommunication connections approved by the Commission in
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66013 (December 20, 2011) 76 FR
80992 (December 27, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-146) are a function of
technology and program concept, but neither approach implicates a
burden on competition, for similar reasons: Each offers, at a
competitive price, a service that customers may obtain by dealing
directly with the provider rather than the Exchange; and each is
expected to result in a reduction in fees charged to market
participants, the very essence of competition. Pursuant to the SEC's
prior approval, the Exchange offers customers the opportunity to
obtain low latency telecommunications connectivity by establishing a
low-latency minimum standard and negotiating with multiple
telecommunication providers to obtain discounted rates. It then
passes these wholesale rates along to participating customers, with
a markup to compensate for the Exchange's role in negotiating and
establishing the arrangement, and integrating and maintaining each
new connection. Co-located customers are free to choose the provider
they wish to use from those participating in the program; or they
may choose not to avail themselves of the service and obtain
comparable services directly from the provider. The Exchange does
not discriminate among telecommunications providers in its program,
so long as they meet the required latency, destination, and fee
standards. Wireless technology, in contrast, does not require
separate avenues of connectivity for each customer, and thus the
Exchange is not obtaining a wholesale price by negotiating with
service providers. Rather, it is selecting, on a competitive basis,
the service provider(s) to install and maintain the system, and
charging customers for access to that particular system, offering
lower prices because it is spreading the substantial cost among
multiple clients. The program, far from burdening competition among
connectivity service providers, promotes it. A wireless provider
that can offer to the Exchange--or to a competitor exchange--a lower
price for installation and maintenance will no doubt get the
exchanges' business, with the end result that prices for the end
users will go down.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the Exchange believes the proposed fees for wireless
connectivity to NASDAQ are reasonable because they are based on the
Exchange's and vendor's costs to cover hardware, installation, testing
and connection, as well expenses involved in maintaining and managing
the enhanced connection. The proposed fees allow the Exchange to recoup
these costs and make a profit, while providing customers the ability to
reduce latency in the transmission of data from third parties and
NASDAQ, and reducing the cost to them that would be involved if they
build or buy their own wireless networks. The Exchange believes that
the proposed fees are reasonable in that they reflect the costs of the
connection and the benefit of the lower latency to clients.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed wireless connectivity
fees are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that the fees
are equitably allocated and non-discriminatory. All Exchange members
that voluntarily select this service option will be charged the same
amount for the same services. As is true of all co-location services,
all co-located clients have the option to select this voluntary
connectivity option, and there is no differentiation among customers
with regard to the fees charged for the service. Further, the latency
reduction offered will be the same for all co-located clients,
irrespective of the locations of their cabinets within the data center.
The same cannot be said of the alternative where entities with
substantial resources invest in private services and thereby obtain
lower latency transmission, while those without resources are unable to
invest in the necessary infrastructure.
    The Exchange's proposal is also consistent with the requirement of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act that Exchange rules 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 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.
    The proposal is consistent with these requirements insomuch as it
makes available to market participants, at a reasonable fee and on a
non-discriminatory basis, access to low latency means of receiving
market data feeds. Some market participants have already adopted
wireless technology, using towers near the data centers, and others
have approached the Exchange seeking to rent roof rights to mount their
towers. Rather than lease out roof space to the highest bidders, a
process that would stratify and limit access to the low latency
delivery, this approach allows unlimited numbers of users to utilize
the this Exchange service which utilizes vendors who rely on nearby
towers to house the wireless equipment to receive the market data. It
will allow the same low latency delivery to those unable to invest in
the more expensive option of building or acquiring their own wireless
network, as it does for those whose pockets are deeper.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ NASDAQ also believes that it is reasonable and non-
discriminatory to waive the 12-month minimum subscription
requirement for both new and current subscribers. As stated above,
this will permit all users to obtain the data on equal terms
regardless of when they first purchased it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ performed substantial network testing prior to making the
service available to members, the wireless network is closely monitored
and maintained by the vendor, and the client will be informed of any
issues. Similar to receiving market data over fiber optic networks, the
wireless network can encounter delays or outages due to equipment
issues. As wireless networks may be affected by severe weather events,
clients will be expected to have redundant methods to receive this
market data and will be asked to attest to having alternate methods or
establishing an alternate method in the near future when they order
this service from the Exchange.
    Finally, for the reasons stated below in Section 4 of Form 19b-4,
the proposed fees for wireless connectivity are consistent with Section
6(b)(8) of the Act in that they do not impose a burden on competition
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. To the contrary,
this proposal will promote competition for distribution of market data
by offering an optional and innovative product enhancement. Wireless
technology has been in use for decades, is available from multiple
providers, and may be adopted by other exchanges that decide to offer
microwave connectivity for delivery of market data. As discussed above,
the Exchange believes that fees for co-location services, including
those proposed for microwave connectivity, are constrained by the
robust competition for order flow among exchanges and non-exchange
markets, because co-location exists to advance that competition.
Further, excessive fees for co-location services, including for
wireless technology, would serve to impair an exchange's ability to
compete for order flow rather than burdening competition.
    Furthermore, there are multiple effective competitive alternatives
to NASDAQ's wireless offering. NASDAQ has no arrangement with CME that
limits the ability of CME to transmit CME data via alternative wireless
providers. Additionally, NASDAQ does not limit the ability of
alternative wireless providers to re-transmit data received from CME
either outside of or within NASDAQ's co-location facility. A
competitive network provides the same or similar data, at the same or
similar speed, at the same or similar cost, and NASDAQ's proposal does
nothing to inhibit or constrain this. Currently, 17 market data vendors
have fiber optic cables connected to NASDAQ's telco room in Carteret,
and NASDAQ believes at least ten wireless networks exist or are under
construction within very close proximity to the Carteret facility.\9\
That number can, and likely will, grow, and nothing in the proposal
inhibits additional wireless vendors accessing or providing CME data.
Any or all of those vendors and networks is an effective competitor to
the NASDAQ wireless offering. A market data vendor could also induce
purchasers away from NASDAQ with an ever-so-slightly slower but still
valuable product at a lower price. This variety of price and speed
attributes is an effective constraint on NASDAQ's pricing power.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ This belief is based on a review conducted for NASDAQ of
publicly-available registration and spectrum reservation databases
at the Federal Communications Commission. While it is difficult to
state a definitive number of active vendors, NASDAQ can state
categorically that multiple vendors currently provide wireless
services such as NASDAQ is proposing to provide via this proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, fiber optic networks are themselves effective competitors
for wireless data. As stated above, 17 vendors currently offer
connectivity to the NASDAQ data center at various, competing prices.
Fiber optic networks are more resilient than wireless networks, which
can be more susceptible to severe weather affects; this mature market
for fiber optic networks will remain attractive to many clients who are
more risk averse. While some NASDAQ firms will opt for faster, costlier
wireless data, many others will conclude that the price and speed
attributes of fiber optic data provide a reasonable competitive
alternative to wireless data.
    Competition between the Exchange and competing trading venues will
be enhanced by allowing the Exchange to offer its market participants a
lower latency connectivity option. Competition among market
participants will also be supported by allowing small and large
participants the same price for this lower latency connectivity.
    The proposed rule change will likewise enhance competition among
service providers offering connections between market participants and
the data centers. The offering will expand the multiple means of
connectivity available, allowing customers to compare the benefits and
costs of lower latency transmission and related costs with reference to
numerous variables. The Exchange, and presumably its competitors,
selects service providers on a competitive basis in order to pass along
price advantages to its customers to win and maintain their business.
The offering is consistent with the Exchange's own economic incentives
to facilitate as many market participants as possible in connecting to
its market.

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) of the Act,\10\ and paragraph (f) \11\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-2013-119 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-NASDAQ-2013-119. 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 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; 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-2013-119 and should
be submitted on or before October 17, 2013.

    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. 2013-23425 Filed 9-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P