[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36810-36813]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13249]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-7003; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-015-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. Models PC-12, PC-12/45, PC-12/47, and PC-12/47E
airplanes that would supersede AD 2014-22-01. This proposed AD results
from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated
by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an
unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as a need to incorporate new revisions into the Limitations
section, Chapter 4, of the FAA-approved maintenance program (e.g.,
maintenance manual). We are issuing this proposed AD to require actions
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room

W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD., Customer Service Manager, CH-6371 STANS,
Switzerland; telephone: +41 (0) 41 619 33 33; fax: +41 (0) 41 619 73
11; Internet: http://www.pilatus-aircraft.com or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
7003; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-7003;
Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-015-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On October 20, 2014, we issued AD 2014-22-01, Amendment 39-18005
(79 FR 67343, November 13, 2014) (``AD 2014-22-01''). That AD required
actions intended to address an unsafe condition on all PILATUS AIRCRAFT
LTD. Models PC-12, PC-12/45, PC-12/47, and PC-12/47E airplanes and was
based on mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of another country.
    Since we issued AD 2014-22-01, PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. has issued
revisions to the Limitations section of the airplane maintenance manual
to include repetitive inspections of the main landing gear (MLG)
attachment bolts.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No. 2016-0083, dated April 28, 2016 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    The airworthiness limitations are currently defined and
published in the Pilatus PC-12 Aircraft Maintenance Manual(s) (AMM)
under Chapter 4, Structural, Component and Miscellaneous--
Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) documents. The limitations
contained in these documents have been identified as mandatory for
continued airworthiness.
    Failure to comply with these instructions could result in an
unsafe condition.
    EASA issued AD 2014-0170 requiring the actions as specified in
ALS, Chapter 4 of AMM report 02049 issue 28, for PC-12, PC-12/45 and
PC-12/47 aeroplanes, and Chapter 4 of AMM report 02300 issue 11, for
PC-12/47E aeroplanes.
    Since that AD was issued, Pilatus issued Chapter 4 of PC-12 AMM
report 02049 issue 31, and Chapter 4 of PC-12 AMM report 02300 issue
14 (hereafter collectively referred to as `the applicable ALS' in
this AD), to incorporate new six-year and ten-year inspection
intervals for several main landing gear (MLG) attachment bolts, and
an annual inspection interval for the MLG shock absorber attachment
bolts, which was previously included in the AMM Chapter 5 annual
inspection. After a further review of the in-service data, Pilatus
issued Service Letter (SL) 186, extending the special compliance
time applicable for the MLG bolts inspection.
    For the reasons described above, this AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2014-0170, which is superseded, and requires
the accomplishment of the new maintenance tasks, as described in the
applicable ALS.

    You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
7003.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. has issued Structural, Component and
Miscellaneous--Airworthiness Limitations, document 12-A-04-00-00-00A-
000A-A, dated September 28, 2015, and Structural and Component
Limitations--Airworthiness Limitations, document 12-B-04-00-00-00A-
000A-A, dated September 28, 2015. 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 of this NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 770 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it would take about 1.5 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $98,175, or
$127.50 per product. This breaks down as follows:
     Incorporating new revisions into the Limitations section,
Chapter 4, of the FAA-approved maintenance program (e.g., maintenance
manual): .5 work-hour for a fleet cost of $32,725, or $42.50 per
product.
     New inspections: MLG attachment bolts: 1 work-hour with no
parts cost for fleet cost of $65,450 or $85 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary corrective actions (on-
condition costs) that must be taken based on the proposed inspections,
would take about 1 work-hour and require parts costing approximately
$100 for a cost of $185 per product. We have no way of determining the
number of products that may need these necessary corrective actions.
This breaks down as follows:
    The only costs that would be imposed by this proposed AD over that
already

required by AD 2014-22-01 is insertion of the revised Limitation
section and the MLG attachment bolts inspection and replacement as
necessary.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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

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 removing Amendment 39-18005 (79 FR
67343, November 13, 2014), and adding the following new AD:

PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD.: Docket No. FAA-2016-7003; Directorate
Identifier 2016-CE-015-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 25, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2014-22-01, 39-18005 (79 FR 67343, November
13, 2014).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. Models PC-12, PC-12/45,
PC-12/47, and PC-12/47E airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers
(MSNs), certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 5: Time Limits.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as a need to
incorporate new revisions into the Limitations section, Chapter 4,
of the FAA-approved maintenance program (e.g., maintenance manual).
The limitations were revised to include repetitive inspections of
the main landing gear (MLG) attachment bolts. These actions are
required to ensure the continued operational safety of the affected
airplanes.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) through
(f)(6) of this AD:
    (1) Before further flight after July 13, 2016 (the effective
date of this AD), insert the following revisions into the
Limitations section of the FAA-approved maintenance program (e.g.,
maintenance manual):
    (i) STRUCTURAL, COMPONENT AND MISCELLANEOUS--AIRWORTHINESS
LIMITATIONS, Data module code 12-A-04-00-00-00A-000A-A, dated
September 28, 2015, of the Pilatus Model type--PC-12, PC-12/45, PC-
12/47, Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), Document No. 02049, 12-A-
AM-00-00-00-I, revision 31, dated November 10, 2015; and
    (ii) STRUCTURAL AND COMPONENT LIMITATIONS--AIRWORTHINESS
LIMITATIONS, Data module code 12-B-04-00-00-00A-000A-A, dated
September 28, 2015, of the Pilatus Model type--PC-12/47E MSN-1001-
UP, Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), Document No. 02300, 12-B-AM-
00-00-00-I, revision 14, dated November 6, 2015.
    (2) The limitations section revisions listed in paragraphs
(f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD do the following:
    (i) Establish inspections of the MLG attachment bolts,
    (ii) Specify replacement of components before or upon reaching
the applicable life limit, and
    (iii) Specify accomplishment of all applicable maintenance tasks
within certain thresholds and intervals.
    (3) Only authorized Pilatus Service Centers can do the
Supplemental Structural Inspection Document (SSID) as required by
the documents in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD
because deviations from the type design in critical locations could
make the airplane ineligible for this life extension.
    (4) If no compliance time is specified in the documents listed
in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD when doing any
corrective actions where discrepancies are found as required in
paragraph (f)(2)(iii) of this AD, do these corrective actions before
further flight after doing the applicable maintenance task.
    (5) During the accomplishment of the actions required in
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, if a
discrepancy is found that is not identified in the documents listed
in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD, before further
flight after finding the discrepancy, contact PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD.
at the address specified in paragraph (h) of this AD for a repair
scheme and incorporate that repair scheme.
    (6) Within the next 6 years time-in-service after July 13, 2016
(the effective date of this AD) or within the next 3 months TIS
after July 13, 2016 (the effective date of this AD), whichever
occurs later, inspect the MLG attachment bolts for cracks and
corrosion take all necessary corrective actions.

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (i) Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the
AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in
the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI,
your local FSDO.
    (ii) AMOCs approved for AD 2014-22-01, 39-18005 (79 FR 67343,
November 13, 2014) are not approved as AMOCs for this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority

(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

 (h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.
2016-0083, dated April 28, 2016, for related information. You may
examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-7003. For service
information related to this AD, contact PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD.,
Customer Service Manager, CH-6371 STANS, Switzerland; telephone: +41
(0) 41 619 33 33; fax: +41 (0) 41 619 73 11; Internet: http://
www.pilatus-aircraft.com or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
You may review copies of the referenced service information at the
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May 27, 2016.
Melvin Johnson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-13249 Filed 6-7-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 35211]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14886]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-3727-000]

El Segundo 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
El Segundo 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 28, 2011.
    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 should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 8, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-14886 Filed 6-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


and auditors.\213\ LCH SA states that such challenges would be further
exacerbated if the relief requested were to be granted only with
respect to LCH SA's 2014 financial statements, as auditing its 2015
financial statements in isolation would cause auditors to use unaudited
2014 figures in their auditing report for the 2015 financial
statements.\214\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \213\ Id. at 14.
    \214\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. LCH SA's Representations
    LCH SA argues that its requests for relief from Rules 17Ad-22(c)(2)
and 17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii) are necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, and consistent with the protection of investors in accordance
with Section 36 of the Act.\215\ LCH SA maintains that it cannot comply
with the requirement of Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2) \216\ that audited financial
statements be published within 60 days of its fiscal year-end because
UK Listing Rules forbid publication of LCH SA's annual

financial statements before those of its indirect parent, LSEG, over
which LCH SA has limited control. Moreover, LCH SA contends that not
only does it have limited control over when LSEG publishes its audited
annual financial statements, LSEG is not able to publish its annual
audited financial statements within the timeframe required under Rule
17Ad-22(c).\217\ Thus, absent exemptive relief, LCH SA could not comply
with this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \215\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(c)(2) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-
22(c)(2)(iii); 15 U.S.C. 78mm.
    \216\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(c)(2).
    \217\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii),\218\ LCH SA argues that
temporary exemptive relief is warranted as LCH SA has already committed
to comply with Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii) on a prospective basis and it
asserts that retroactive compliance with this provision raises
significant practical--and potentially legal--challenges stemming from
reanalyzing prior financial records and reopening the work of prior
auditors. Moreover, LCH SA maintains that a PCAOB-compliant audit for
2016 necessitates de facto compliance for 2015 to ensure that the 2016
audit begins with an accurate 2015 closing balance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \218\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Commission Findings
    The Commission concludes that LCH SA's requests for exemptions from
Rule 17Ad-22(c) and Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii) \219\ are necessary or
appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection
of investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \219\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(c)(2) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-
22(c)(2)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to LCH SA's request for an exemption from Rule 17Ad-
22(c)(2),\220\ the Commission recognizes the legal and practical
necessity that LSEG, as the ultimate parent company, publish its
financial statements prior to LCH SA, and the inability of LCH SA as a
subsidiary to change when LSEG can publish its financial statements.
Thus, LCH SA would not be able to comply with the requirements of Rule
17Ad-22(c)(2),\221\ and would not be able to register as a clearing
agency with the Commission, absent the requested exemptive relief. The
Commission believes that a delay of 31 days in the publication of the
LCH SA's annual audited financial statements, were LCH SA to post its
annual audited financial statements no later than the end of the first
quarter following its year-end, would not have a material or meaningful
impact on investor protection. Accordingly, the Commission finds it
necessary or appropriate, and consistent with the protection of
investors, to grant LCH SA exemptive relief from the requirement in
Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2) \222\ that a clearing agency post its annual audited
financial statements within sixty days following the end of its fiscal
year, so long as LCH SA publishes such audited financial statements
within one quarter of the end of its fiscal year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \220\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(c)(2).
    \221\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(c)(2).
    \222\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, with respect to LCH SA's request for relief from Rule
17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii),\223\ the Commission notes that the financial
statements for which LCH SA requests relief from the PCAOB audit
standards cover 2014 and 2015, years that do not overlap with any time
during which LCH SA would be registered with the Commission. During
2014, and 2015, LCH SA performed no clearing services for U.S. clearing
members. The Commission also notes that these financial statements were
audited, albeit under an alternative, internationally recognized
auditing standard. Moreover, from 2016 onwards, the timeframe that
would overlap with LCH SA's registration as a clearing agency, LCH SA's
financial statements would be audited in accordance with PCAOB
standards as required under Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii).\224\ Since LCH SA
does not anticipate onboarding U.S. Clearing Members to CDSClear until
2017, those members would have a reasonably clear view of LCH SA's
finances at the time they become members of LCH SA. Based on the above
and on LCH SA's representation that its annual audited financial
statements from fiscal year 2016 onward will be audited in accordance
with the requirements of 17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii),\225\ the Commission finds
that it is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and is
consistent with the protection of investors, to grant LCH SA's
requested relief from the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii) \226\
to have annual financial statements for the past two years posted on
its Web site that are audited in accordance with PCAOB standards, with
respect to LCH SA's 2014 and 2015 annual audited financial statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \223\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(c)(2)(iii).
    \224\ Id.
    \225\ Id.
    \226\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Exemptive Relief From Rule 17a-22

    LCH SA also has requested exemptive relief from Exchange Act Rule
17a-22,\227\ which provides, in relevant part, that within ten days
after making available certain materials such as manuals, notices,
circulars, and bulletins to its participants or other entities with
whom it has a significant relationship, such as transfer agents (``Rule
17a-22 Materials''), a registered clearing agency shall file three
copies of such materials with the Commission. LCH SA requests exemptive
relief from the requirement to file Rule 17a-22 materials where such
materials (i) primarily affect LCH SA's clearing operations with
respect to the Non-U.S. Business lines, and (ii) do not significantly
affect any CDSClear operations or any rights or obligations of LCH SA
with respect to its CDSClear services or persons using the CDSClear
services.\228\ Additionally, LCH SA requests relief from the
requirement of Rule 17a-22 to file physical copies of Rule 17a-22
Materials primarily concerning its CDSClear services.\229\ LCH SA
requests instead that it be permitted to provide the Commission with
electronic submissions for Rule 17a-22 Materials with respect to
CDSClear services.\230\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \227\ 17 CFR 240.17a-22.
    \228\ See Request for Exemptive Relief at 15-16.
    \229\ 17 CFR 240.17a-22.
    \230\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. LCH SA's Representations
    LCH SA states that its rationale for requesting exemptive relief
from Rule 17a-22 is essentially the same as the rationale used to
support its request for exemptive relief from Section 19(b) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, as described above.\231\
Specifically, LCH SA believes that filing physical copies of Rule 17a-
22 materials with the Commission would not advance the Commission's
regulatory interests as applied to any 17a-22 Materials related to its
Non-U.S. Business, and that in light of the separation between CDSClear
and its Non-U.S. Business such an exemption is consistent with the
protection of investors because it would not compromise the
Commission's oversight responsibility with respect to LCH SA as a
whole.\232\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \231\ See Request for Exemptive Relief at 15.
    \232\ See Request for Exemptive Relief at 8-13; see also supra
Section IV.B.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Commission Findings
    Consistent with the Commission's rationale above granting LCH SA's
request for relief from Section 19(b) of the Act and Rule 19b-4
thereunder with respect to LCH SA's Non-U.S. Business Rule
Changes,\233\ the Commission finds it is necessary or appropriate in
the public interest, and consistent with protection of investors, to
grant LCH

SA's request for relief from Rule 17a-22 \234\ with respect to filing
with the Commission Rule 17a-22 Materials pertaining to LCH SA's Non-
U.S. Business. The Commission also believes that granting LCH SA's
request for exemptive relief from filing physical copies of Rule 17a-22
Materials pertaining to the CDSClear business is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection
of investors. As a condition to such relief, LCH SA would file Rule
17a-22 Materials pertaining to the CDSClear business via email rather
than in hard copy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \233\ See supra Section IV.B.3.
    \234\ 17 CFR 240.17a-22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Allowing LCH SA to satisfy its applicable filing obligations under
Rule 17a-22 in this manner will expedite the filing process and allow
LCH SA to minimize costs arising from international mail delivery
service. The Commission also believes the exemptive relief should have
no impact on the Commission's ability to examine or otherwise supervise
CDSClear operations because LCH SA's obligation to file materials
relating to CDSClear operations or activities not falling within the
definition of Non-U.S. Business would still apply.

V. Conclusion

    For the reasons discussed above, the Commission finds that LCH SA
meets the requirements for registration as a clearing agency, including
those standards set forth under Section 17A of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder.
    Further, for the reasons discussed above, the Commission finds that
the exemptions provided in this Order are necessary or appropriate in
the public interest, and are consistent with the protection of
investors.
    It is hereby ordered that the application for registration as a
clearing agency filed by LCH SA (File No. 600-36) pursuant to Sections
17A(b) and 19(a)(1) of the Act be, and hereby is, APPROVED.
    It is further ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the Act, based on
the representations and facts presented in LCH SA's Request for
Exemptive Relief, that LCH SA is exempt from the requirements of
Sections 5 and 6 of the Act, and LCH SA's CDSClear clearing members
that are brokers or dealers are exempt from the requirements of Section
5, solely with respect to the ``forced trade'' mechanism used in
connection with the calculation of settlement prices for Single-Name
CDS, and until the earliest compliance date set forth in any final
rules regarding the registration of security-based swap execution
facilities, subject to the following conditions:
    (a) LCH SA shall report to the Commission the following information
with respect to its calculation of settlement prices for Single-Name
CDS within thirty (30) calendar days of the end of each calendar
quarter and electronically preserve such reports during a period of ten
(10) years:
    (1) The total volume of transactions executed during the quarter,
broken down by reference entity, presented in Euros, and converted into
US Dollars;
    (2) The total unit volume and/or notional amount executed during
the quarter, broken down by reference entity;
    (b) LCH SA shall establish and maintain adequate safeguards and
procedures to protect its BD-FCM Clearing Members' confidential trading
information, including:
    (1) limiting access to the confidential trading information of
members to LCH SA employees who operate the system or who are
responsible for its compliance with this exemptive relief and any other
applicable rules;
    (2) establishing and maintaining standards controlling LCH SA
employees that trade for their own account;
    (c) LCH SA shall establish and maintain adequate oversight
procedures to ensure that the safeguards and procedures established
pursuant to (b) are followed;
    (d) LCH SA shall directly or indirectly make available to the
public on terms that are fair and reasonable and not unreasonably
discriminatory:
    (1) All end-of-day settlement prices and any other prices with
respect to Single-Name CDS that it may establish to calculate mark-to-
market margin requirements for its clearing members; and
    (2) any other pricing or valuation information with respect to
Single-Name CDS as is published or distributed by LCH SA.
    (e) LCH SA shall implement policies and procedures designed to
ensure compliance with these terms and conditions, and to conduct
periodic internal reviews related to its compliance program.
    It is further ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the Act, that LCH
SA, based on the representations and facts presented in its Request for
Exemptive Relief, is exempt from the requirements of Section 19(b) of
the Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder to file proposed rule changes with
respect to its Non-U.S. Business, i.e. proposed rule changes that (i)
primarily affect LCH SA's clearing operations with respect to the Non-
U.S. Business and (ii) do not significantly affect any CDSClear
operations or any rights or obligations of LCH SA with respect to the
CDSClear services or persons using the CDSClear services, subject to
the following conditions:
    (a) LCH SA shall provide notice to Commission staff of its Non-U.S.
Business Rule Changes within three business days of their being duly
approved by the national competent authorities.
    It is further ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the Act, that LCH
SA, based on the representations and facts presented in its Request for
Exemptive Relief, is exempt from the requirement of Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2)
that a clearing agency, within 60 days after the end of its fiscal
year, must post its annual audited financial statements for the past
two years to its Web site, subject to the following condition:
    (a) LCH SA shall post its annual audited financial statements for
the past two years to its Web site no later than the end of the first
quarter following LCH SA's fiscal year-end.
    It is further ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the Act, that LCH
SA, based on the representations and facts presented in its Request for
Exemptive Relief, is exempt from the requirement of Rules 17Ad-
22(c)(2)(iii) that a clearing agency's annual audited financial
statements must be audited in accordance with the standards of the
PCAOB by a registered public accounting firm that is qualified and
independent in accordance with 17 CFR 201.1-01 with respect to its
annual audited financial statements for its fiscal years 2014 and 2015,
subject to the following conditions:
    (a) For the calendar years 2014 and 2015, LCH SA's annual audited
financial statements shall be prepared in accordance with IFRS and
audited in compliance with ISA rather than the PCAOB requirement set
out in Rule 17Ad-22(c), with the exception that the closing balance of
LCH SA's 2015 financial statements shall be audited in accordance with
PCAOB standards; and
    (b) For calendar year 2016 and onwards, LCH SA's annual financial
statements shall be prepared in accordance with IFRS and audited in
accordance with PCAOB standards and shall be signed by auditors that
meet the relevant PCAOB qualifications.
    It is further ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the Act, that LCH
SA, based on the representations and facts presented in its Request for
Exemptive Relief, is exempt from the requirements of Rule 17a-22 under
the Act, to file certain materials such as manuals,

notices, circulars, and bulletins, as more fully described in Rule 17a-
22, in connection with its Non-U.S. Business, that (i) primarily affect
LCH SA's clearing operations with respect to the Non-U.S. Business and
(ii) do not significantly affect any CDSClear operations or any rights
or obligations of LCH SA with respect to the CDSClear services or
persons using the CDSClear services.
    It is further ordered, pursuant to Section 36 of the Act, that LCH
SA, based on the representations and facts presented in its Request for
Exemptive Relief, is exempt from the requirements of Rule 17a-22 under
the Act, to file with the Commission three copies of materials such as
manuals, notices, circulars, and bulletins, as more fully described in
Rule 17a-22, within ten days of making such materials available to its
participants or other persons as more fully described in Rule 17a-22,
subject to the following conditions:
    (a) LCH SA shall file such materials in electronic format with the
Commission within ten (10) calendar days after issuing or making such
materials available to its participants or to other entities with whom
it has a significant relationship as applicable, except for materials
that (i) primarily affect LCH SA's clearing operations with respect to
the Non-U.S. Business and (ii) do not significantly affect any CDSClear
operations or any rights or obligations of LCH SA with respect to the
CDSClear services or persons using the CDSClear services, which
materials as ordered above shall be exempt from the filing requirements
of Rule 17a-22.
    This exemptive relief is subject to modification or revocation at
any time the Commission determines that such action is necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act. This
exemption is based on the facts presented and the representations made
in the Request for Exemptive Relief. Any different facts or
representations may require a different response.

    By the Commission.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-31940 Filed 1-4-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 208)]
[Notices]
[Page 63010-63011]
[DOCID:fr27oc06-54]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0201; FRL-8101-4]

Organic Arsenical Herbicides (MSMA, DSMA, CAMA, and Cacodylic
Acid), Reregistration Eligibility Decision; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY:  EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of August 9,
2006, concerning the availability of the reregistration eligibility
decision (RED) for the organic arsenical herbicides MSMA, DSMA, DAMA,
and cacodylic acid. EPA also issued a notice in the Federal Register of
October 4, 2006, announcing the extension of the original comment
period by 30 days. This document is extending the comment period until
December 13, 2006.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-
HQ-OPP-2006-0201 must be received on or before December 13, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES
in the Federal Register document of August 9, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lance Wormell, Special Review and
Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    The Agency included in the notice a list of those who may be
potentially affected by this action. If you have questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.

    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    To submit comments, or access the official public docket, please
follow the detailed instructions as provided in SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION of the August 9, 2006 Federal Register document. If you
have questions, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

II. What Action is EPA Taking?

    This document extends the public comment period established in the
Federal Register of October 4, 2006 (71 FR 58605) (FRL-8097-4). In that
document, EPA announced the extension of the comment period for the RED
document for the organic arsenical herbicides MSMA, DSMA, DAMA, and
cacodylic acid. EPA is hereby extending the comment period, which was
set to end on November 9, 2006, to December 13, 2006.

III. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

     Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA as amended directs that, after submission
of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, the Administrator
shall determine whether pesticides containing such active ingredient
are eligible for reregistration. Further provisions are made to allow a
public comment period. However, the Administrator may extend the
comment period, if additional time for comment is requested. In this
case, the Monomethyl Arsonic Acid (MAA) Research Task Force, the
Professional Landcare Network (PLANET) and several growers have
requested additional time to develop comments.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: October 19, 2006.
 Debra Edwards,
Director, Special Review and Reregistration, Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs
[FR Doc. E6-18035 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 164 (Friday, August 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52521-52522]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20595]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1248-000.
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.

    Description: FPAL Service Activity Report of Midwestern Gas
Transmission Company.
    Filed Date: 8/14/13.
    Accession Number: 20130814-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1249-000.
    Applicants: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation.
    Description: Cancellation of Rate Schedule X-51 to be effective 1/
15/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130815-5024.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/27/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1250-000.
    Applicants: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation.
    Description: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation submits its
annual Penalty Revenue Crediting Report to inform the Commission of
penalty revenues CGT will credit on invoices for August service for the
period of June 1, 2012--May 31, 2013.
    Filed Date: 8/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130815-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/27/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1251-000.
    Applicants: Direct Energy Business, LLC, Hess Corporation, Hess
Energy Marketing, LLC.
    Description: Application of Direct Energy Business, LLC et al. for
temporary waivers of capacity release regulations and related pipeline
tariff provisions.
    Filed Date: 8/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130815-5169.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/27/13

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

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP13-556-003.
    Applicants: Gulf Shore Energy Partners, LP.
    Description: Gulf Shore Energy Partners, LP--Compliance Filing
Required by Rehearing Order to be effective 8/15/2013.
    Filed Date: 8/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130815-5094.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/27/13.

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

    Dated: August 16, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-20595 Filed 8-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

<META name="generator" content="PDFCreactiveX HTML Export">
<META name="creation-date" content="24/05/2008 07:12:38 ">
<TITLE></TITLE>


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30594-30595]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11542]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77812; File No. SR-NYSE-2016-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Its Price List To Make a Clarifying Change Regarding the
Rebate Program Recently Implemented by the Exchange for the NYSE Bonds
System

May 11, 2016.
    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 May 3, 2016, 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 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 Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List to make a clarifying
change regarding the rebate program recently implemented by the
Exchange for the NYSE Bonds\SM\ system. 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List to make a clarifying
change regarding the rebate program recently implemented by the
Exchange for the NYSE Bonds system.\4\ The purpose of this proposed
rule change is to clarify the application of the rebate program only.
The Exchange is not proposing to change in any way the manner in which
the rebate program operates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77591 (April 12,
2016), 81 FR 22656 (April 18, 2016) (SR-NYSE-2016-26).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the Liquidity Provider Incentive Program, a voluntary
rebate program, the Exchange pays Users \5\ of NYSE Bonds a monthly
rebate provided Users who opt into the rebate program meet specified
quoting requirements. Under the program, the rebate payable is based on
the number of CUSIPs \6\ a User quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rule 86(b)(2)(M) defines a User as any Member or Member
Organization, Sponsored Participant, or Authorized Trader that is
authorized to access NYSE Bonds.
    \6\ CUSIP stands for Committee on Uniform Securities
Identification Procedures. A CUSIP number identifies most financial
instruments, including: stocks of all registered U.S. and Canadian
companies, commercial paper, and U.S. government and municipal
bonds. The CUSIP system--owned by the American Bankers Association
and managed by Standard & Poor's--facilitates the clearance and
settlement process of securities. See http://www.sec.gov/answers/cusip.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rebate amount is tiered based on the number of CUSIPs quoted by
a User, as follows:

                  Liquidity Provider Incentive Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Monthly
                      Number of CUSIPs                          rebate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
400-599....................................................      $10,000
600-799....................................................       20,000
800 or more................................................       30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To qualify for a rebate, a User is required to provide continuous
two-sided quotes for at least eighty percent (80%) of the time during
the Core Bond Trading Session for an entire calendar month.\7\ The
Exchange calculates each participating User's quoting performance
beginning each month on a daily basis, up to and including the last
trading day of a calendar month, to determine at the end of each month
each User's monthly average. Under the program, Users must provide a
two-sided quote for a minimum of hundred (100) bonds per side of the
market with an average spread of half-point ($0.50) or less in CUSIPs
whose average maturity is at least five (5) years as of the date the
User provides a quote. The Exchange proposes to make a clarifying
change to the rule text to note that in order for a CUSIP to qualify
for inclusion in the rebate calculation, a User must provide continuous
two-sided quotes in a CUSIP, whether it's for eighty percent (80%) or
fifty percent (50%) of the time, as applicable, for a minimum of
hundred (100) bonds per side of the market that has an average spread
of half-point ($0.50) or less and whose average maturity is at least
five (5) years as of the date the User provides the quote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For the first calendar month after a User opts in, the User
is required to provide continuous two-sided quotes for fifty percent
(50%) of the time during the Core Bond Trading Session.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ 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. The Exchange believes
that the clarifying change to the current rule text is reasonable as it
will clarify the application of the rebate program and will help to
avoid confusion for Users that opt into the rebate program. The
Exchange notes that the proposed change is not designed to amend any
rebate, nor alter the manner in which it calculates rebates under the
program. The Exchange believes the proposed amendment is intended to
make the Price List clearer and less confusing for investors and
eliminate potential investor confusion, thereby removing impediments to
and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, protecting investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5).

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

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\10\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The Exchange is proposing to make a clarifying
change to the Price List that would not have any impact on competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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

    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 \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's 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 pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Commission may
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 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
Exchange to clarify the application of its rebate program and therefore
reduce confusion in the application of the Exchange's Price List.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and
designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
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 summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2016-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2016-34. 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-NYSE-2016-34, and should be
submitted on or before June 7, 2016.

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

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-11542 Filed 5-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 177)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52285-52286]
[DOCID:fr13se07-4]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0451; FRL-8465-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Delaware; Control of VOC Emissions From Crude Oil Lightering Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Delaware. This SIP revision pertains to the
control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from crude oil
lightering operations. EPA is approving this SIP revision in accordance
with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on October 15,
2007.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0451. All documents in the docket are listed in
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the electronic

docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard

copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State
submittal are available at the Delaware Department of Natural Resources
& Environmental Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 1401, Dover,
Delaware 19903.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by e-
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 3, 2007 (72 FR 36402), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the State of Delaware. The NPR proposed approval
of Delaware's regulation for crude oil lightering operations
(Regulation No. 1124, Section 46). The formal SIP revision was
submitted by the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control (DNREC) on May 2, 2007. Requirements of
Delaware's regulation and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are
explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No public comments
were received on the NPR.

II. Final Action

    EPA is approving Regulation No. 1124, Section 46--Crude Oil
Lightering Operations, as a revision to the Delaware SIP. This SIP
revision was submitted on May 2, 2007.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not
have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does
not have substantial direct effects 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal
standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes
a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 13, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action, approving Delaware's regulation for crude
oil lightering operations, may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 30, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart I--Delaware

0
2. In Sec.  52.420, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the title for Regulation No. 24--Control of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions and adding Section 46 to read as follows:

Sec.  52.420  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                  EPA-Approved Regulations in the Delaware SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           State effective                          Additional
          State citation               Title/subject            date          EPA approval date     explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Regulation No. 1124--Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions (Formerly Regulation No. 24)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 46.......................  Crude Oil Lightering            05/11/07  09/13/07 [Insert
                                    Operations.                               page number where
                                                                              the document
                                                                              begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-17872 Filed 9-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 214 (Thursday, November 5, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68475-68477]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28011]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3805; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-28-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Turbomeca S.A. ARRIEL 2C, 2C1, 2C2, 2S1, and 2S2 turboshaft engines
with modification TU34 or TU34A installed. This proposed AD was
prompted by torque conformation box (TCB) failures. This proposed AD
would require inspecting the TCB for correct resistance values and
removing TCBs that fail inspection before further flight. We are
proposing this AD to prevent failure of the TCB which could lead to
loss of engine thrust control and damage to the aircraft.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 4, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 40 00; fax:
33 (0)5 59 74 45 15. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
3805; 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 mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No.

FAA-2015-3805; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-28-AD'' at the beginning
of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
AD 2015-0177, dated August 25, 2015 (referred to hereinafter as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    Several cases of torque conformation box (TCB) failures have
been reported on engines incorporating mod TU34 or mod TU34A.
Investigation concluded that these failures were caused by cracks on
soldered joints of TCB resistors.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to limited power
availability in a One Engine Inoperative (OEI) case, possibly
resulting in reduced control of the helicopter.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3805.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Turbomeca S.A. has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 292
72 2860, Version A, dated July 15, 2015. The MSB describes procedures
for checking TCB resistance values. 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 of this NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of France,
and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our
bilateral agreement with the European Community, EASA has notified us
of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information
referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design. This proposed AD would require inspecting the TCB for correct
resistance values and removing TCBs that fail inspection.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 300 engines installed on
helicopters of U.S. registry. We estimate that it would take about 1
hour to perform an inspection. We also estimate that 20% of these
engines would fail the inspection and require TCB removal, which would
take about 1 hour. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be $30,600.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (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.

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

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 (AD):

Turbomeca S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2015-3805; Directorate Identifier
2015-NE-28-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 4, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Turbomeca S.A. ARRIEL 2C, 2C1, 2C2, 2S1, and
2S2 turboshaft engines with modification TU34 or TU34A installed.

(d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by torque conformation box (TCB) failures.
We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the TCB, which could
lead to loss of engine thrust control and damage to the aircraft.

(e) Actions and Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
    (1) Within 600 engine flight hours (EFHs) or 6 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, check the
resistance values on the TCB. Use Accomplishment Instructions,
paragraph 2.3.2 of Turbomeca S.A. Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB)
292 72 2860, Version A, dated July 15, 2015, to do the inspection.
Repeat this inspection every 600 EFHs since last inspection.
    (2) Remove before further flight any TCB that fails the
inspection required by paragraph (e)(1) of this AD.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Use

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. You may
email your request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(g) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Brian Kierstead,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2015-0177,
dated August 25, 2015, for more information. You may examine the
MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2015-3805.
    (3) Turbomeca S.A. Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 292 72 2860,
Version A, dated July 15, 2015, can be obtained from Turbomeca S.A.,
using the contact information in paragraph (g)(4) of this proposed
AD.
    (4) For service information identified in this proposed AD,
contact Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74
40 00; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on October 28, 2015.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-28011 Filed 11-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 89 (Thursday, May 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26491-26493]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10543]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72087; File No. PCAOB-2013-03]

Public Company Accounting Oversight Board; Notice of Filing of
Amendment No. 1, and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed
Rules, Amendments To Conform the Board's Rules and Forms to the Dodd-
Frank Act and Make Certain Updates and Clarifications, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

May 2, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On December 23, 2013, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(the ``Board'' or the ``PCAOB'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 107(b) \1\ of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the ``Sarbanes-Oxley Act'') and Section
19(b) \2\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange
Act''), proposed amendments to conform the Board's rules and forms to
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the
``Dodd-Frank Act'') and make certain updates and clarifications
(collectively, the ``Proposed Rules''). The Proposed Rules were
published for comment in the Federal Register on February 3, 2014.\3\
At the time the notice was issued, the Commission designated a longer
period to act on the Proposed Rules, until May 5, 2014.\4\ The
Commission received one comment letter in response to the notice.\5\ On
March 13, 2014, the PCAOB filed Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rules
(``Amendment No. 1'').\6\ This order approves the Proposed Rules, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 7217(b).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \3\ See Release No. 34-71237 (January 6, 2014), 79 FR 6271
(February 3, 2014).
    \4\ Ibid.
    \5\ See letter to the Commission from Suzanne H. Shatto, dated
March 6, 2014 (``Shatto Letter'').
    \6\ In Amendment No. 1, the PCAOB added amendments to Rule 3526,
Communication with Audit Committees Concerning Independence. These
amendments were discussed in the Proposed Rules, but the amendments
to Rule 3526 were inadvertently omitted from the Proposed Rules. The
Amendment also proposes a non-substantive modification to a cross-
reference in Item 3.2.e.1 of Form 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rules

    The Proposed Rules include specific references to audits and
auditors of brokers and dealers in the Board's rules and are necessary
to ensure that the

PCAOB can satisfy its explicit oversight authority granted under the
Dodd-Frank Act with respect to audits and auditors of brokers and
dealer that are registered with the Commission. The Proposed Rules also
conform the Board's rules to the Dodd-Frank amendments that: (1)
Clarified the definition of ``person associated with a public
accounting firm,'' \7\ (2) permitted the Board to share certain
information with foreign auditor oversight authorities,\8\ and (3)
clarified that the Board's sanctioning authority is not limited to
persons who are supervisory personnel at the time a failure to
supervise sanction is imposed.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Section 2(a)(9)(C) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
    \8\ See Section 105(b)(5)(C) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
    \9\ See Section 105(c)(6)(A) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Beyond these conforming amendments, the Proposed Rules include
three additional categories of amendments that tailor certain of the
Board's rules to the audits of brokers and dealers, call for relevant
broker and dealer audit client information on the Board's forms, and
amend a number of rules in light of the Board's experience
administering and enforcing these rules.
    First, the PCAOB is tailoring the Board's professional practice
standards to the audits of brokers and dealers. As amended, Rule 3521
(Contingent Fees), Rule 3522 (Tax Transactions) and Rule 3526
(Communication with Audit Committees Concerning Independence) apply to
the audits of brokers and dealers to the same extent that they
previously applied to the audits of issuers.
    Second, the Board is amending its registration, withdrawal, and
reporting forms (Forms 1, 1-WD, 2, 3, and 4), and the general
instructions to these forms, to call for relevant broker and dealer
audit client information. This information includes, among other
things, information identifying each audit report issued by registered
firms for broker and dealer audit clients during their annual reporting
periods.
    Finally, the Board is amending a number of rule provisions and form
items in light of administrative experience and to make a number of
updates to address events that have occurred since the last time the
rules were updated. These amendments, for example, address
circumstances where an issuer audit client encounters a change in its
principal auditor and the issuer does not comply with the Commission's
four business day reporting requirement concerning the change in
auditors pursuant to Item 4.01 of Form 8-K.
    In addition, Amendment No. 1 includes rule text for proposed
amendments to Rule 3526 that was inadvertently omitted from the PCAOB's
original rule filing and updates a cross-reference in Form 4 that would
have become outdated by this Order.
    The amendments to the PCAOB's rules, SEC Practice Section
membership requirements, and Ethics Code will take effect on June 1,
2014. The amendments to Forms 1, 1-WD, 3, and 4 will take effect July
1, 2014. The amendments to Form 2 will take effect April 1, 2015.

III. Comment Letters

    As noted above, the Commission received one comment letter
concerning the Proposed Amendments, which expressed support for the
Proposed Amendments.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Shatto Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. The PCAOB's Emerging Growth Company Request

    Section 103(a)(3)(C) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provides that any
additional rules adopted by the PCAOB subsequent to April 5, 2012 do
not apply to the audits of emerging growth companies (``EGCs''), unless
the Commission determines that the application of such additional
requirements is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, after
considering the protection of investors and whether the action will
promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation.\11\ Having
considered those factors, and as explained further below, the
Commission finds that applying the Proposed Rules to audits of EGCs is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Section 103(a)(3)(C) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as amended
by Section 104 of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (the
``JOBS Act''). The term ``emerging growth company'' is defined in
Section 3(a)(80) of the Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The PCAOB has proposed application of its Proposed Rules to audits
of all issuers, as applicable, including EGCs; and the PCAOB requested
that the Commission make the determination required by Section
103(a)(3)(C).\12\ To assist the Commission in making its determination,
the PCAOB prepared and submitted to the Commission its own EGC
analysis. The PCAOB's EGC analysis was included in the Commission's
public notice soliciting comment on the Proposed Rules. No comments
were received on the analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ To the extent that these proposed rules apply solely in
connection with the obligations of registered brokers and dealers or
the auditors of registered brokers and dealers pursuant to 17 CFR
240.17a-5, no separate determination is necessary under 15 U.S.C.
7213(a)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the analysis submitted, we believe the information in the
record is sufficient for the Commission to make the requested EGC
determination in relation to the Proposed Rules. The PCAOB's EGC
analysis discussed its approach to developing the Proposed Rules, as
well as the characteristics of EGCs and economic considerations. For
the Proposed Rules that are not simply conforming amendments, the PCAOB
stated that it has no reason to think the economic consequences for
EGCs would differ significantly from those for issuers who are not
EGCs, and that it estimated that the cost-related implications of these
amendments would not be significant. Finally, the Commission takes note
of the PCAOB's statements that the Proposed Rules that were made in
light of the PCAOB's administrative experience generally are expected
to reduce existing compliance burdens, facilitate more efficient use of
PCAOB resources, and maintain or improve meaningfulness of information
required to be reported by registered firms to the PCAOB.

V. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether Amendment No. 1
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/pcaob.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number PCAOB-2013-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. PCAOB-2013-03. 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/pcaob.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rules that are filed
with the Commission, and all

written communications relating to the proposed rules 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the PCAOB. All comments received will be posted
without charge; we do 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 No. PCAOB-
2013-03 and should be submitted on or before May 29, 2014.

VI. Conclusion

    The Commission has carefully reviewed and considered the Proposed
Rules, as modified by Amendment No. 1, and the information submitted
therewith by the PCAOB, including the PCAOB's EGC analysis. In
connection with the PCAOB's filing and the Commission's review,
    A. The Commission finds that the Proposed Rules, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, are consistent with the requirements of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act and the securities laws and are necessary or appropriate in
the public interest or for the protection of investors; and
    B. Separately, the Commission finds that the application of the
Proposed Rules, as modified by Amendment No. 1, to EGC audits as
applicable is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, after
considering the protection of investors and whether the action will
promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
    Additionally, the Commission finds good cause to approve the
filing, as modified by Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rules, prior to
the thirtieth day after the date of the publication of notice of the
filing thereof in the Federal Register. The content of Amendment No. 1,
which does not raise any novel issues, makes one technical amendment to
the proposed rule to correct an inadvertent omission and one technical
amendment to update a cross-reference in a Form that would become
outdated if the proposed rules in the original rule filing are approved
by the Commission. Accelerated approval would allow the PCAOB to update
its rules immediately, thus providing users with greater clarity and
certainty. Accordingly, the Commission finds that good cause exists to
approve the filing, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated
basis.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 107 of the Act and
Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, that the Proposed Rules (File No.
PCAOB-2013-03), as modified by amendment No. 1, be and hereby are
approved on an accelerated basis.

    By the Commission.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10543 Filed 5-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P