[Federal Register: June 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 108)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31749-31752]
[DOCID:fr04jn08-1]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0089; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-117-AD;
Amendment 39-15546; AD 2008-12-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Transport Category Airplanes
Equipped With Auxiliary Fuel Tanks Installed in Accordance With Certain
Supplemental Type Certificates

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for various
transport category airplanes. This AD requires deactivation of Rogerson
Aircraft Corporation auxiliary fuel tanks. This AD results from fuel
system reviews conducted by the manufacturer, which identified
potential unsafe conditions for which the manufacturer has not provided
corrective actions. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with
flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and
consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective July 9, 2008.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Serj Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
various transport category airplanes. That NPRM was published in the
Federal Register on October 25, 2007 (72 FR 60600). That NPRM proposed
to require deactivation of Rogerson Aircraft Corporation auxiliary fuel
tanks.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Remove Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) From
Applicability

    Southeast Aero-Tek requests that we remove STC SA1054NW from the
applicability of the NPRM. The commenter states that this STC has been
purchased from Rogerson and assigned to the FAA's Atlanta Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO).
    We disagree with the request. STC SA1054NW is not compliant with
Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (``SFAR 88,'' Amendment 21-
78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83), included in a
regulation titled ``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review,
Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements''
(66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001).
    In a letter dated July 30, 2007, Rogerson states that ownership of
STC SA1054NW was transferred to Executive Jet Aircraft Co., Ltd. In
this case, although the Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) has
geographic responsibility, the Los Angeles ACO is the appropriate
office to review and approve alternative methods of compliance to the
requirements of this AD. This AD is intended to require deactivation of
all affected auxiliary fuel tanks for which Rogerson was the original
STC holder, regardless of current ownership of the associated STCs. We
have not changed the AD regarding this issue.

Request To Extend Compliance Time: Lack of Notification

    In a comment submitted December 5, 2007, Dallah Albaraka states
that it received no FAA notification of the NPRM and discovered its
existence only ``recently.'' The commenter questions whether the
outreach provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act were properly
exercised, given the significant economic impact, and a lack of other
comments posted from other affected operators, which the commenter
attributes to lack of notification. Dallah Albaraka adds that the
proposed December 2008 deadline is insufficient for an operator to
budget and acquire alternative methods to conduct air operations. For
Dallah Albaraka, the proposed deactivation will require divesting an
existing airplane and acquiring a new airplane with a range that meets
operational needs. Dallah Albaraka will not be able to do this by
December 2008.
    We infer that the commenter is requesting an extension of the
compliance time. We disagree that the compliance time should be
extended. The compliance time specified in this AD is necessary to
prevent the unsafe condition. The outreach provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to which the commenter refers apply only when a
rulemaking action will have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small businesses. Based on the estimated cost of
compliance with the actions directly required by this AD, we determined
that this rulemaking action will not have a significant economic
impact. However, the NPRM would not prohibit extended range operations
using auxiliary fuel tanks, if the tanks are compliant with SFAR 88
requirements. We have made every effort to communicate with industry
and operators about the requirements of complying with SFAR 88, through
FAA-sponsored seminars and regulatory amendments and provisions for
compliance. We do not individually notify persons of proposed

ADs that might affect them. Instead, government agencies publish
proposed rules in the Federal Register to notify the public and solicit
comments. As previously stated, this AD was first published as a
proposal in the Federal Register. Individuals should frequently monitor
the Federal Register's publications for proposed rules that may affect
them.
    In most ADs, we adopt a compliance time allowing a specified amount
of time after the AD's effective date. In this case, however, the FAA
has already issued regulations that require operators to revise their
maintenance/inspection programs to address fuel tank safety issues. The
compliance date for these regulations is December 16, 2008. To provide
for coordinated implementation of these regulations and this AD, we are
including this same compliance date in this AD. However, ADs apply to
only U.S. registered airplanes. If the commenter's affected airplanes
are not registered in the U.S., the commenter may wish to discuss the
requirements of this AD with the authority for the country of registry.
We have not changed the final rule regarding this issue.

Request To Extend Compliance Time: Lack of Manufacturer Support

    Marbyia Investments requests that we extend the deadline to comply
with the proposed actions. Based on Rogerson's lack of response to the
SFAR 88 requirements, Marbyia and the other operators of Rogerson
systems must make alternative arrangements to comply.
    We disagree with the request to extend the compliance time for the
reasons explained in our response to the previous comment. In addition,
this commenter did not request a specific compliance time or present
any data that would support use of a different method of compliance or
justify an extension of the compliance time. However, ADs apply to only
U.S. registered airplanes. It is our understanding that the commenter's
affected airplanes are not registered in the U.S. If this is the case,
the commenter may wish to discuss the requirements of this AD with the
authority for the country of registry. We have not changed the final
rule regarding this issue.

Requests To Revise Cost Estimate

    Dallah Albaraka states that we greatly underestimated the costs to
comply with the proposed actions. The commenter asserts that
deactivating the auxiliary tanks will have a significant detrimental
impact on the long-range capabilities of each airplane. The result will
be greater operational costs necessary for operators to find
alternative modes of travel, incur additional takeoffs and landings, or
acquire other airplanes with the necessary range. Marbyia Investments
adds that the consequences of the STC suspension will create large
financial and operational burdens, probably making the future use of
its aircraft untenable.
    Dallah Albaraka also asserts that, because of the payload detriment
of hundreds of pounds of empty tanks, no operator would deactivate the
tanks without removing them from the airplane. The commenter requests
that we revise the cost estimate to include costs to remove and dispose
of the tanks as potential hazardous materials. In addition, the
commenter requests that we include the cost of developing and obtaining
a ``separate design approval'' since this conditional burden would be
borne by the operators.
    Dallah Albaraka also states that deactivating the auxiliary tank
would significantly decrease the value of the airplane. Without the
long-range capability provided by the auxiliary tanks, Dallah Albaraka
states that its Model 727 airplane would be inoperable, and attempts to
market the airplane have been unsuccessful due to the potential effect
of the NPRM.
    Another commenter, Southeast Aero-Tek, notes that, because of the
construction of the ``box and bladder,'' accessing the bladders would
necessitate removing the boxes, and removing the bladders would involve
several major structural repairs and plumbing modifications.
    We infer that the commenters are requesting that we revise the cost
estimate in the NPRM to account for the additional costs referred to in
their comments. We disagree. The cost information in an AD generally
includes only the direct costs of the specific actions required by this
AD. We recognize that, in doing the actions required by an AD,
operators might incur incidental costs in addition to the direct costs.
Those incidental costs, which might vary significantly among operators,
are almost impossible to calculate. We have not changed the final rule
regarding this issue.

Request To Revise NPRM To Require Viable Modification

    Dallah Albaraka requests that we delay issuing the final rule until
Rogerson can supply service information. Since the NPRM specifies a
modification that would allow continued use of the tanks, the operator
is burdened with developing an STC as an alternative method of
compliance to the proposed deactivation. The commenter states that, if
this is the only viable option to operators that need the extended
range provided by the auxiliary tanks, we should coordinate development
of the STC with Rogerson, and revise the AD to require the STC
modification as the primary compliance method.
    We do not agree to delay the issuance of this AD. In many cases,
manufacturers do develop modifications to correct unsafe conditions. In
this case, Rogerson has chosen not to do so. Our obligation is to
ensure that airplanes with the subject auxiliary fuel tanks are safe to
operate. In the absence of a commitment by Rogerson to develop the
necessary modifications, we have no other course of action to ensure
the safe operation of the affected airplanes than to require the
deactivation of the tanks.

Request To Revise NPRM Based on Differential Use and Configuration

    Dallah Albaraka states that the NPRM does not consider the various
STC configurations for the auxiliary tank installation and the
corresponding levels of safety they provide. The commenter adds that
the NPRM does not consider operators' varying levels of utilization of
the affected airplanes.
    We infer that the commenter is requesting that we revise the NPRM
to provide unique requirements based on airplane configuration and
utilization rates. We disagree. Regardless of utilization, the fuel
tanks that are installed in accordance with the referenced STCs exhibit
unsafe conditions. These unsafe conditions must be corrected to provide
an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed the final rule in
this regard.

Request To Allow Alternative Methods

    Dallah Albaraka states that the NPRM does not provide for
inspections as a way to extend the compliance time. The commenter
states that periodic verification of the system condition and operation
would address all aspects identified as safety concerns in the proposed
AD. In addition, the commenter notes that the NPRM describes safety
concerns associated with ``dry running'' the fuel pumps. The commenter
asserts that these concerns were addressed for Boeing Model 727
airplanes by simple operational limitations (including placards and AFM
revisions), as specified in AD 2005-13-40, amendment 39-14177 (70 FR
37659, June 30, 2005). The commenter states that those limitations

ensure that the fuel pumps are not operated when the tanks are empty.
The commenter requests that we revise the AD to provide other ways to
comply with the NPRM other than by deactivating the auxiliary fuel
tanks.
    We disagree. AD 2005-13-40 addresses one unique unsafe condition
associated with the fuel pumps installed in a Boeing-designed auxiliary
fuel tank system. In the case of the STCs affected by this AD, there
are other potential unsafe conditions for which simple operational
limitations would not be effective. We have not changed the final rule
regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Compliance Method

    Southeast Aero-Tek disagrees with the Appendix A criteria provided
in the NPRM. Service bulletins containing similar criteria have been
rejected. According to the commenter, the only acceptable compliance
method should involve removing the system and restoring affected
airplanes to their original configuration--consistent with the service
bulletins.
    We partially agree. We have no record of the commenter's service
bulletins being rejected. But the NPRM does provide for the complete
removal of the system, when additional information is provided to and
approved by the FAA. The intent of the NPRM is to prevent usage of
Rogerson auxiliary tanks by their deactivation. Any approved service
bulletin for complete removal would meet the intent of this AD. We have
not changed the final rule regarding this issue.

Request for Consideration of Specific Proposal

    Southeast Aero-Tek states that the cylindrical tank system could
retain its bleed air system to purge the tanks with bleed air if the
vent valve were opened.
    We infer that the commenter is proposing a specific solution to one
issue related to tank deactivation. Such a proposal should instead be
submitted to the FAA as a request for approval of an alternative method
of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (h)
of this AD. However, the commenter should note that its request is not
consistent with the deactivation criteria stated in paragraph (3) of
Appendix A of this AD.

Information Collection Approval

    Paragraph (f) of this AD has been revised to note the Office of
Management and Budget's approval of the information collection
requirements in this AD.

Request To Correct Typographical Error

    Southeast Aero-Tek notes an incorrect title in Appendix A,
paragraph (4), of the NPRM, for AC 25-8. We have revised the final rule
accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We also determined that
these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 148 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
the 39 U.S.-registered airplanes to comply with this AD. Based on these
figures, the estimated costs for U.S. operators could be as high as
$252,720 to submit the report and prepare the deactivation procedures,
and $140,400 to deactivate the tank.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Average labor
             Action                  Work hours     rate per hour        Parts             Individual cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Report..........................                1              $80            None  $80, per airplane.
Preparation of tank deactivation               80               80            None  $6,400, per airplane.
 procedure.
Physical tank deactivation......               30               80          $1,200  $3,600, per airplane.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2008-12-03 Various Transport Category Airplanes: Amendment 39-15546.
Docket No. FAA-2007-0089; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-117-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 9, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to airplanes, certificated in any category
and equipped with auxiliary fuel tanks installed in accordance with
specified Supplemental Type Certificates (STCs), as identified in
Table 1 of this AD.

                      Table 1.--Affected Airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Airplanes                        Auxiliary tank STC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Model 707 airplanes.........  SA4053WE, SA1308NM
Boeing Model 727-100 series          SA2970WE, SA3674WE, SA3157WE,
 airplanes.                           SA3319WE, SA3559WE, SA2734WE,
                                      SA3920NM, SA3810WE, SA1979NM,
                                      SA1398NM, SA3483WE
Boeing Model 727-200 series          SA3065WE, SA1051NW
 airplanes.
Boeing Model 737-200 series          SA1082NW, SA2153WE, SA1054NW
 airplanes.
Boeing Model 737-400 and -500        SA3992NM, SA3980NM
 series airplanes.
Boeing Model 767-200 series          SA5544NM
 airplanes.
British Aerospace Model 1-11-400     SA1995WE, SA1626WE, SA3819WE,
 series airplanes.                    SA2971WE
McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-15 and  SA3558WE, SA2587WE, SA1050NW
 DC-9-15F airplanes.
McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-32F (C- SA3436NM, SA3495NM
 9B) airplanes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the
manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with
flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and
consequent loss of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Report

    (f) Within 45 days after the effective date of this AD, submit a
report to the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA. Information collection requirements in this AD are
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
and are assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. The report must
include the following information:
    (1) The airplane registration and auxiliary tank STC number
installed.
    (2) The usage frequency in terms of total number of flights per
year and total number of flights for which the auxiliary tank is
used.

Prevent Usage of Auxiliary Fuel Tanks

    (g) On or before December 16, 2008, deactivate the auxiliary
fuel tanks, in accordance with a deactivation procedure approved by
the Manager of the Los Angeles ACO. Any auxiliary tank component
that remains on the airplane must be secured and must have no effect
on the continued operational safety and airworthiness of the
airplane. Deactivation may not result in the need for additional
instructions for continued airworthiness.

    Note 1: Appendix A of this AD provides criteria that should be
included in the deactivation procedure. The proposed deactivation
procedures should be submitted to the Los Angeles ACO as soon as
possible to ensure timely review and approval.

    Note 2: For technical information, contact John Cox, Director of
Engineering, Rogerson Aircraft Corporation, 16940 Von Karman,
Irvine, California 92606; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) None.

Appendix A--Deactivation Criteria

    The auxiliary fuel tank deactivation procedure required by
paragraph (g) of this AD should address the following actions.
    (1) Permanently drain auxiliary fuel tanks, and clear them of
fuel vapors to eliminate the possibility of out-gassing of fuel
vapors from the emptied auxiliary tank.

    Note: If applicable, removing the bladder might help eliminate
out-gassing.

    (2) Disconnect all electrical connections from the fuel quantity
indication system (FQIS), fuel pumps if applicable, float switches,
and all other electrical connections required for auxiliary tank
operation, and stow them at the auxiliary tank interface.
    (3) Disconnect all pneumatic connections if applicable, cap them
at the pneumatic source, and secure them.
    (4) Disconnect all fuel feed and fuel vent plumbing interfaces
with airplane original equipment manufacturer (OEM) tanks, cap them
at the airplane tank side, and secure them in accordance with a
method approved by the FAA; one approved method is specified in AC
25-8 Fuel Tank Systems Installations. In order to eliminate the
possibility of structural deformation during cabin decompression,
leave open and secure the disconnected auxiliary fuel tank vent
lines.
    (5) Pull and collar all circuit breakers used to operate the
auxiliary tank.
    (6) Revise the weight and balance document, if required, and
obtain FAA approval.
    (7) Amend the applicable sections of the applicable airplane
flight manual (AFM) to indicate that the auxiliary fuel tank is
deactivated. Remove auxiliary fuel tank operating procedures to
ensure that only the OEM fuel system operational procedures are
contained in the AFM. Amend the Limitations Section of the AFM to
indicate that the AFM Supplement for the STC is not in effect. Place
a placard in the flight deck indicating that the auxiliary tank is
deactivated. The AFM revisions specified in this paragraph may be
accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM.
    (8) Amend the applicable sections of the applicable airplane
maintenance manual to remove auxiliary tank maintenance procedures.
    (9) After the auxiliary fuel tank is deactivated, accomplish
procedures such as leak checks and pressure checks deemed necessary
before returning the airplane to service. These procedures must
include verification that the airplane FQIS and fuel distribution
systems have not been adversely affected.
    (10) Include with the operator's proposed procedures any
relevant information or additional steps that are deemed necessary
by the operator to comply with the deactivation and return the
airplane to service.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 29, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-12413 Filed 6-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74681-74683]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26439]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96408; File No. SR-NYSE-2022-54]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Listed Company Manual Section 302.00

November 30, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 21, 2022, 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\ 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 Listed Company Manual Section 302.00
to exclude Exchange-Traded Fund Shares listed pursuant to Rule
5.2(j)(8) from the obligation to hold annual shareholders' meetings.
The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website 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 Listed Company Manual Section 302.00
to exclude Exchange-Traded Fund Shares listed pursuant to Rule
5.2(j)(8) from the obligation to hold annual shareholders' meetings.
Exchange-Traded Fund shares are Derivative Securities Products \3\
permitted to operate in reliance on Rule 6c-11 (``Rule 6c-11'') under
the Investment Company Act of 1940 (``1940 Act'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Derivative Securities Product'' is defined in
Rule 1.1(k) to mean a security that meets the definition of
``derivative securities product'' in Rule 19b4(e) under the Exchange
Act. 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e).
    \4\ See Release Nos. 33-10695; IC-33646; File No. S7-15-18
(Exchange-Traded Funds) (September 25, 2019), 84 FR 57162 (October
24, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Listed Company Manual Section 302.00 provides that companies
listing common stock or voting preferred stock and their equivalents
are required to hold an annual shareholders' meeting for the holders of
such securities during each fiscal year. Listed Company Manual Section
302.00 currently exempts, among other securities, Exchange-Traded Funds
(``ETFs'') listed under Rule 5.2-(j)(3) (Investment Company Units) or
Commentary .01 to Rule 8.600 (Managed Fund Shares) and other derivative
securities from the Exchange's annual shareholder meeting requirement.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 302.00 of the Listed Company
Manual to add Exchange-Traded Fund Shares listed pursuant to Rule
5.2(j)(8) to the list of securities for which the requirements of
Section 302.00 regarding annual shareholders' meetings do not apply.
The proposed change is based on, and would align Section 302.00 of the
Listed Company Manual with, NYSE Arca Rule 5.3-E(e), which

exempts Exchange-Traded Fund Shares listed under NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-
E(j)(8), from the shareholder/annual meeting requirements. NYSE Rule
5.2(j)(8) and NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(8) are substantially similar.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91029 (February 1,
2021), 86 FR 8420, 8424 (February 5, 2021) (SR-NYSE-2020-86) (Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt NYSE Rule 5.2(j)(8)
Governing the Listing and Trading of Exchange-Traded Fund Shares).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act,\6\ in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to amend Listed Company
Manual Section 302.00 to include Exchange-Traded Fund Shares listed
pursuant to Rule 5.2(j)(8) among the securities exempted from the
annual shareholders' meeting requirement is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices and to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because such securities, like ETFs and other
derivative securities currently exempted from the requirements of
Listed Company Manual Section 302.00, would remain subject to the same
requirements currently applicable to other 1940 Act-registered
investment company securities (e.g., Investment Company Units, Managed
Fund Shares, and Portfolio Depositary Receipts). As noted, the proposed
change is based on NYSE Arca Rule 5.3-E(e), which exempts Exchange-
Traded Fund Shares listed under the listing standards for such products
under NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(8) (Exchange-Traded Fund Shares), from
substantially similar requirements with respect to annual meetings. The
proposed change would thus make Listed Company Manual Section 302.00
consistent with NYSE Arca Rule 5.3-E(e), resulting in similar treatment
of ETFs permitted to operate in reliance on Rule 6c-11 under the 1940
Act across affiliated exchanges for purposes of the annual meeting
requirement.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\7\ 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 believes that the proposed rule
change would facilitate the listing and trading of Exchange-Traded Fund
Shares listed pursuant to Rule 5.2(j)(8) on the Exchange, thereby
enhancing competition among both market participants and listing
venues, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \12\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\13\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiver of the operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because it will allow the Exchange to promptly provide its listed ETFs
the same exemption from annual meeting requirements that currently
applies to ETFs listed on NYSE Arca. Accordingly, the Commission hereby
waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposal operative
upon filing.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \15\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2022-54 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2022-54. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the
hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons
submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2022-54 and should be
submitted on or before December 27, 2022.

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

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-26439 Filed 12-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P