[Federal Register: June 1, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 105)]
[Notices]
[Page 31230-31232]
[DOCID:fr01jn06-113]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. PA-36; File No. S7-09-06]

Privacy Act of 1974: System of Records: Office of Inspector
General Investigative Files (SEC-43)

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice of an altered system of records.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of
1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the Securities and Exchange Commission
proposes to alter a Privacy Act system of records: ``Office of
Inspector General Investigative Files (SEC-43)'', originally published
at 55 FR 1744, January 18, 1990. Revisions to this system were last
published at 63 FR 11936, March 11, 1998.

DATES: The changes will become effective July 11, 2006 unless further
notice is given. The Commission will publish a new notice if the
effective date is delayed to review comments or if changes are made
based on comments received. To be assured of consideration, comments
should be received on or before July 3, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

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

File Number S7-09-06 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number S7-09-06. This file number
should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help us
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/other.shtml). Comments are

also available for public inspection and copying in the Commission's
Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. All
comments received will be posted without change; we do not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara A. Stance, Chief Privacy
Officer, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Operations Center,
6432 General Green Way, Mail Stop 0-7, Alexandria, VA 22312-2413, (202)
551-7209.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission proposes to alter a system of
records, ``Office of Inspector General Investigative Files (SEC-43).''
As described in the original notice, the system contains investigatory
material compiled for law enforcement purposes. This notice changes the
system location address and the address of the system manager;
clarifies the categories of individuals covered by the system; and
expands the categories of records in the system to include incoming
complaints and complaint logs, preliminary inquiry files and indexes,
and declarations from witnesses. This notice also eliminates or
consolidates some routine uses, and adds a routine use to disclose
information to the Integrity Committee of the President's Council on
Integrity and Efficiency and the Executive Council on Integrity and
Efficiency, another Federal Office of Inspector General, or other
Federal law enforcement office in connection with an investigation,
inquiry or review conducted pursuant to Executive Order 12993, or at
the request of the SEC Inspector General.
    The Commission has submitted a report of the altered system of
records to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, the House Committee on Government Reform, and the Office of
Management and Budget, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act
of 1974, as amended, and Appendix I to OMB Circular A-130, ``Federal
Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,'' as
amended on February 20, 1996 (61 FR 6435).
    Accordingly, the Commission is altering the system of records to
read as follows:
SEC-43

SYSTEM NAME:
    Office of Inspector General Investigative Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:
    Office of Inspector General, Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-2376.

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:
    This system of records contains records on individuals who are or
have been subjects of the Office of Inspector General's investigations
or inquiries relating to programs and operations of the Commission.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
    Incoming complaints and complaint logs; preliminary inquiry files
and indexes; all correspondence relevant to the investigation; all
internal staff memoranda; copies of all subpoenas issued during the
investigation; affidavits, declarations and statements from witnesses;
transcripts of testimony taken in the investigation and accompanying
exhibits; documents and records or copies obtained during the
investigation; working papers of the staff and other documents and
records relating to the investigation; opening reports, investigative
plans, progress reports, and closing reports; and investigative peer
review files.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:
    Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, Pub. L. 95-452, 5 U.S.C.
App.

PURPOSE(S):
    The purpose of this system of records is to enable the Commission's
Office of Inspector General to carry out its mandate under the
Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988. The system will consist of
files and records compiled by the Commission's Office of Inspector
General on Commission employees or other persons who have been part of
an investigation for fraud and abuse with respect to the Commission's
programs and operations.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES
OF USERS AND THE PURPOSE OF SUCH USES:
    Information in the system may be disclosed:
    (1) Where there is an indication of a violation or a potential
violation of law, whether civil, criminal or regulatory in nature,
whether arising by general statute or particular program statute, or by
regulation, rule or order issued pursuant thereto, to the appropriate
agency, whether Federal, foreign, state, or local, or to a securities
self-regulatory organization, charged with enforcing or implementing
the statute, or rule, regulation or order.
    (2) To Federal, foreign, state, or local authorities in order to
obtain information or records relevant to an Office of Inspector
General investigation or inquiry.
    (3) To Federal, foreign, state, or local governmental authorities
in response to their request in connection with the hiring or retention
of an employee, disciplinary or other administrative action concerning
an employee, the issuance of a security clearance, the reporting of an
investigation of an employee, the letting of a contract, or the
issuance of a license, grant or other benefit by the requesting agency,
to the extent that the information is relevant and necessary to the
requesting agency's decision in the matter.
    (4) To non-governmental parties where those parties may have
information the Office of Inspector General seeks to obtain in
connection with an investigation or inquiry.
    (5) To independent auditors or other private firms or individuals
with which the Office of Inspector General has contracted to carry out
an independent audit, or to provide support for audits, reviews,
investigations or other inquiries. These contractors will be required
to maintain Privacy Act safeguards with respect to such records.
    (6) To respond to subpoenas in any litigation or other proceeding.

    (7) To the Department of Justice and/or the Office of General
Counsel of the Commission when the defendant in litigation is: (a) Any
component of the Commission or any employee of the Commission or any
employee of the Commission in his or her official capacity; (b) the
United States where the Commission determines that the claim, if
successful, is likely to directly affect the operations of the
Commission; or (c) any Commission employee in his or her individual
capacity where the Department of Justice and/or the Office of General
Counsel of the Commission agree to represent such employee.
    (8) To a Congressional office in response to an inquiry from the
Congressional office made at the request of an individual but only from
the record of that individual.
    (9) To inform complainants, victims, and witnesses of the results
of an investigation or inquiry.
    (10) To qualified individuals or organizations in connection with
the performance of a peer review or other study of the Office of
Inspector General's audit or investigative functions.
    (11) To a Federal agency responsible for considering debarment or
suspension action if the record would be relevant to such action.
    (12) To the Department of Justice for the purpose of obtaining its
advice on Freedom of Information Act matters.
    (13) To the Office of Management and Budget for the purpose of
obtaining its advice on Privacy Act matters.
    (14) To a public or professional licensing organization if the
record indicates, either by itself or in combination with other
information, a violation or potential violation of professional
standards, or reflects on the moral, educational, or professional
qualifications of an individual who is licensed or who is seeking to
become licensed.
    (15) To the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to comply with agency
reporting requirements established by OGE in 5 CFR part 2638, subpart
F.
    (16) To the news media and the public when there exists a
legitimate public interest (e.g., to provide information on events in
the criminal process, such as an indictment).
    (17) To the Integrity Committee of the President's Council on
Integrity and Efficiency and the Executive Council on Integrity and
Efficiency, another Federal Office of Inspector General, or other
Federal law enforcement office in connection with an investigation,
inquiry or review conducted pursuant to Executive Order 12993, or at
the request of the SEC Inspector General.

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING,
AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
STORAGE:
    The Office of Inspector General Investigative Files consists of
paper records maintained in folders, binders and logbooks; various
records in electronic form; and an automated data base. The folders,
binders and logbooks are stored in the Office of Inspector General's
file cabinets and offices. The automated data base and electronic
records are maintained on a file server and backup tapes in encrypted
form.

RETRIEVABILITY:
    The records are retrieved by the name of the subject of the
investigation or inquiry, or by a unique control number assigned to
each investigation or inquiry.

SAFEGUARDS:
    These records are available only to those persons whose official
duties require such access. The records are kept in limited access
areas during duty hours and in locked file rooms or locked offices at
all other times.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:
    The Investigative Files are kept in accordance with the Office of
Inspector General's record retention schedule.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:
    Inspector General, Office of Inspector General, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-2736.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES:
    All requests to determine whether this system of records contains a
record pertaining to the requesting individual may be directed to the
Privacy Act Officer, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
Operations Center, 6432 General Green Way, Mail Stop 0-7, Alexandria,
VA 22312-2413.

RECORD ACCESS AND CONTESTING PROCEDURES:
    Persons wishing to obtain information on the procedures for gaining
access to or contesting the contents of this record may contact the
Privacy Act Officer, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
Operations Center, 6432 General Green Way, Mail Stop 0-7, Alexandria,
VA 22312-2413.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
    Information in these records is supplied by: Individuals including,
where practicable, those to whom the information relates; witnesses,
corporations and other entities; records of individuals and of the
Commission; records of other entities; Federal, foreign, state or local
bodies and law enforcement agencies; documents and correspondence
relating to litigation; transcripts of testimony; and miscellaneous
other sources.

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:
    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), this system of records, to the
extent it pertains to the enforcement of criminal laws, is exempted
from all provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, except
subsections (b), (c)(1) and (2), (e)(4)(A) through (F), (e)(6), (7),
(9), (10), and (11), and (i).
    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), this system of records to the
extent it consists of investigatory material compiled for law
enforcement purposes, is exempted from the following provisions of the
Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H),
and (I), and (f) other than material within the scope of the exemption
at 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2).
    These exemptions are contained in 17 CFR 200.313.

    Dated: May 24, 2006.

    By the Commission.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-8472 Filed 5-31-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 131 (Monday, July 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40347-40348]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16630]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC12-9-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-552); Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energy.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is submitting the information
collection FERC Form 552 (Annual Report of Natural Gas Transactions) to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the information
collection requirements. Any interested person may file comments
directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments to the
Commission as explained below. The Commission issued a Notice in the
Federal Register (77 FR 19009, 3/29/2012) requesting public comments.
FERC received no comments on the FERC-552 and is making this notation
in its submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by August 8,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No.
1902-0242, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be
reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, identified by the Docket No. IC12-9-000, by
either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC Form 552, Annual Report of Natural Gas Transactions.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0242.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-552 information
collection requirements with no changes to the reporting requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission uses the information collected within the
FERC-552 to provide greater transparency concerning the use of indices
to price natural gas and how well index prices reflect market forces.
The collection also includes transactions that contribute to, or may
contribute to natural gas price indices. Many market participants rely
on indices as a way to reference market prices without taking on the
risks of active trading.
    FERC-552 had its genesis in the Energy Policy Act of 2005,\1\ which
added section 23 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Section 23 of the NGA,
among other things, directs the Commission ``to facilitate price
transparency in markets for the sale or transportation of physical
natural gas in interstate commerce, having due regard for the public
interest, the integrity of those markets, and the protection of
consumers.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 109-58.
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 717t-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondents: Wholesale natural gas market participants.
    Estimate of Annual Burden \3\: The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.

                                            FERC-552 (IC12-9-000): Annual Report of Natural Gas Transactions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                        Average burden
                                                                    Number of       responses per    Total number of      hours per      Estimated total
                                                                   respondents       respondent         responses         response        annual burden
                                                                             (A)               (B)   (A) x (B) = (C)               (D)         (C) x (D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wholesale natural market participants.........................               691                 1               691                10             6,910
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is $476,857
[6,910 hours / 2,080 \4\ hours/year = 3.32212 * $143,540/year \5\ =
$476,857].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 2080 hours = 40 hours/week * 52 weeks (1 year).
    \5\ Average annual salary per employee in 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimated annual cost of filing the FERC-552 per response is
$690

[$476,857 / 691 responses = $690/response].
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: June 28, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-16630 Filed 7-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 172 (Thursday, September 5, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54596-54598]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21587]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0751; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-051-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; AgustaWestland S.p.A. (Type Certificate
Formerly Held by Agusta S.p.A) (Agusta) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) for Agusta Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters. The existing AD
currently requires establishing a revised life limit for each tail
rotor blade (blade), updating the helicopter's historical records,
repetitively inspecting each blade for a crack, and replacing certain
blades. Since we issued that AD, the manufacturer has improved the
design of the blades using different materials and established life
limits for each newly-designed blade. This proposed AD would expand the
applicability to include the newly-designed blades and establish their
life limits. This proposed AD would also retain the requirement to
inspect each blade for a crack and, if there is a crack, replace each
blade with an airworthy blade. The proposed actions are intended to
detect a crack in a blade to prevent failure of a blade and subsequent
loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 4,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the foreign
authority's AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Operations Office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Agusta Westland, Customer Support & Services, Via Per Tornavento 15,
21019 Somma Lombardo (VA) Italy, ATTN: Giovanni Cecchelli; telephone
39-0331-711133; fax 39 0331 711180; or at http://www.agustawestland.com/technical-bullettins. You may review the
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

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

Comments Invited

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

Discussion

    On August 26, 2011, we issued Emergency AD (EAD) 2011-18-52 for the
Agusta Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters. We published EAD 2011-18-52
as a final rule; request for comments in the Federal Register (77 FR
23109, April 18, 2012). EAD 2011-18-52 requires revising the life
limits for each blade, part number (P/N) 3G6410A00131 and 4G6410A00131,
updating the helicopter's historical records, repetitively inspecting
each blade for a crack, and replacing certain blades. That action was
prompted by a fatal accident involving an Agusta Model AW139
helicopter, which may have been caused by cracks in a blade. The
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European Union, notified us of the unsafe
condition and issued EASA EAD No. 2011-0156-E, dated August 25, 2011,
to require repetitive inspections and reduce the life limit of the
blades. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in
failure of a blade and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued EAD No. 2011-18-52, the manufacturer first
developed two new blades with an improved

design and specified life limits and repetitive inspections for the
blades. EASA issued AD No. 2012-0030, dated February 17, 2012, which
superseded EASA EAD No. 2011-0156E, to add the new blades to the
required actions. The manufacturer then developed two new blades with
improved materials and specified new life limits and inspections for
the blades. EASA then issued EASA AD No. 2012-0076, dated May 2, 2012,
revised by EASA AD No. 2012-0076R1, dated July 13, 2012, to require the
repetitive inspections and reduced life limits on the additional new
blades.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Italy and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Italy, EASA, its technical representative,
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in its AD. We are
proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant information
and determined that an unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop
on other helicopters of these same type designs.

Related Service Information

    Agusta issued Mandatory Bollettino Tecnicos (BTs) No. 139-265, No.
139-285, No. 139-286, all Revision A, and all dated July 12, 2012,
which specify a precautionary inspection for a crack, a life limit for
the affected blades, and a ``quarantine'' of blades that have exceeded
their life limit. The BTs also provide instructions for mixed usage of
the affected blades. The BTs specify sending the damaged or cracked
blade along with certain data to the manufacturer.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain the inspection requirements for
certain part-numbered blades and expand the applicability to include
the newly-designed blades and establish life limits for those blades.
The proposed AD would also require replacing any cracked blade or a
blade that has reached its life limit.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD to be an interim action. If a final
action is later identified, we might consider additional rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 93 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs
in order to comply with this AD. It would take 1 work hour to inspect
each blade for a crack at $85 per work hour or $7,905 for the fleet. If
required, it would take 8 work hours to replace a blade, and required
parts would cost $35,680, for total cost of $36,360.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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 39-17020 (77 FR
23109, April 18, 2012); Docket No. FAA-2012-0409; Directorate
Identifier 2011-SW-055-AD; and by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

Agustawestland S.p.A. (Type Certificate Formerly Held by Augsta
S.p.A) (Agusta): Docket No. FAA-2013-0751; Directorate Identifier
2012-SW-051-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters with tail
rotor blade (blade), part number (P/N) 3G6410A00131, 4G6410A00131,
3G6410A00132, 4G6410A00132, 3G6410A00133, or 4G6410A00133,
installed, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in a blade. This
condition could result in failure of a blade and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD No. 2011-18-52; Amendment 39-17020; Docket
No. FAA-2012-0409; Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-055-AD.

(d) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by November 4, 2013.

(e) Compliance

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

(f) Required Actions

    (1) Within 5 hours time-in-service (TIS), establish a life limit
for each blade as follows, revise the Airworthiness Limitations
section of the maintenance manual, and update the helicopter's
historical records. If a blade's total number of cycles is unknown,
determine the blade cycles by multiplying the blade's hours TIS by
4.
    (i) For blade, P/N 3G6410A00131 or P/N 4G6410A00131: establish a
life limit of 600 hours TIS or 1,500 cycles, whichever occurs first.
    (ii) For blade, P/N 3G6410A00132 or P/N 4G6410A00132: establish
a life limit of 1,200 hours TIS or 3,200 cycles, whichever comes
first.

    (iii) For blade, P/N 3G6410A00133 or P/N 4G6410A00133: establish
a life limit of 10,000 cycles or 3 years since opening the sealed
wrap, whichever comes first.
    (2) Within 5 hours TIS, replace each blade that has reached or
exceeded its life limit with an airworthy blade.
    (3) Within 25 hours TIS, and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 25 hours TIS, using a mirror, a 5x or higher power magnifying
glass, and a light source, or borescope, visually inspect each blade
for a crack or damage that exceeds the limits of the applicable
maintenance manual in the highlighted area depicted in Figure 1 of
Agusta Mandatory Bollettino Tecnicos No. 139-265, Revision A, dated
July 12, 2012; No. 139-285, Revision A, dated July 12, 2012; or No.
139-286, Revision A, dated July 12, 2012.
    (4) If there is a crack, or if there is damage that exceeds the
limits of the applicable maintenance manual, before further flight,
replace the blade with an airworthy blade.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone (817) 222-
5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD No. 2012-0076R1, dated July 13, 2012, which revises
EASA AD No. 2012-0076, dated May 2, 2012, which can be found in the
AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6410 Tail Rotor
Blades.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 21, 2013.
Kim Smith,
Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-21587 Filed 9-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 107 (Tuesday, June 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 33466]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13141]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed the Week Ending May 11,
2013

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of
Transportation under the Sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation
Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1382 and 1384) and procedures governing
proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21
days after the filing of the application.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2013-0098.
    Date Filed: May 8, 2013.
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association.
    Subject: PTC12 via 3 Memo 0001/22 April 2013.
    Intended Effective Date: 1 June 2013.

Barbara J. Hairston,
Acting Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2013-13141 Filed 6-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 75 (Thursday, April 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23278-23279]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09083]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4108-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2013-0001]

Maine; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Maine (FEMA-4108-DR), dated March 25, 2013,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: March 25, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated March 25, 2013, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Maine resulting from a severe winter storm, snowstorm, and
flooding during the period of February 8-9, 2013, is of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act,
42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such a major disaster exists in the State of Maine.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. You are
further authorized to provide snow assistance under the Public
Assistance program for a limited period of time during or proximate
to the incident period. Consistent with the requirement that Federal
assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the
Stafford Act for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be
limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, James N. Russo, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Maine have been designated as
adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Androscoggin, Cumberland, Knox, and York Counties for Public
Assistance.
    Androscoggin, Cumberland, and York Counties for snow assistance
under the Public Assistance program for any continuous 48-hour
period during or proximate to the incident period.
    Knox County for snow assistance under the Public Assistance
program for any continuous 72-hour period during or proximate to the
incident period.

    All counties within the State of Maine are eligible to apply for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2013-09083 Filed 4-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21639-21641]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08303]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77539; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2016-49]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change to Rule 6.64 With Respect to Opening Trading in
an Options Series

April 6, 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 March 23, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I 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 changes to Rule 6.64 (OX Opening Process)
with respect to opening trading in an options series. 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 is proposing changes to Rule 6.64 with respect to
opening trading in an option series as described below.
Opening Process
    Rule 6.64 describes the process pursuant to which OX (``OX
System'') \4\ opens an option series. Paragraphs (b) and (c) of Rule
6.64 provide that, after the primary market for the underlying security
disseminates the opening trade or opening quote, the OX System then
conducts an ``Auction Process'' to open a series whereby the OX System
determines a single price at which a series may be opened by looking
to: (i) The midpoint of the initial uncrossed NBBO disseminated by the
Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA''), if any, or (ii) the
midpoint of the best quotes or orders in the OX Book. If the bid-ask
differential for a series is not within an acceptable range, the OX
System will not conduct an Auction Process.\5\ For purposes of this
rule, the acceptable range means the bid-ask differential guidelines
specified in Rule 6.37(b)(1)(A)-(E).\6\ Assuming the bid-ask
differential is within the acceptable range, the OX System matches up
orders and quotes based on price-time priority \7\ and executes the
orders that are matched at the midpoint pricing.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``OX'' refers to the Exchange's electronic order
delivery, execution and reporting system for designated option
issues through which orders and quotes of Users are consolidated for
execution and/or display. See Rule 6.1A(a)(13) (defining ``OX'').
    \5\ The Auction bid-ask differentials are known in common
parlance as ``legal-width quotes.''
    \6\ Rule 6.37(b)(1). The bid-ask guidelines specified in Rule
6.37(b)(1)(A)-(E) that are required to open a series are narrower
than the $5 wide bid-ask differential for options traded on OX
during Core Trading Hours.
    \7\ Orders will have priority over Market Maker quotes at the
same price. See Rule 6.64(b)(B).
    \8\ See Rule 6.64(b)(B). The Exchange notes that the word Order
appears capitalized in this paragraph and, because it is not a
defined term, the Exchange proposes the non-substantive change of
eliminating the capitalization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any orders in the OX System that are not executed in the Auction
Process become eligible for the Core Trading Session immediately after
the conclusion of the Auction Process. If the OX System does not open a
series with an Auction Process, the OX System shall open the series for
trading after receiving notification of an initial NBBO disseminated by
OPRA for the series or on a Market Maker quote, provided that the bid-
ask differential does not exceed the bid-ask differential specified
under Rule 6.37A(b)(4).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Rule 6.37A(b)(4). See Rule 6.37(b)(5) [sic] provides
that options traded on OX during Core Trading Hours may be quoted
with a difference not to exceed $5 between the bid and offer
regardless of the price of the bid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Modifications to the Opening Process
    First, the Exchange proposes to change Rule 6.64(b) regarding how
the OX System determines when to start the Auction Process. Current
paragraph (b) of the Rule provides that ``[a]fter the primary market
for the underlying security disseminates the opening trade or the
opening quote, the related option series will be opened
automatically.'' However, because it is possible that either an opening
quote or opening trade alone may not accurately reflect the state of
the market, the Exchange proposes to specify that an option series will
be opened automatically, ``once the primary market for the underlying
security disseminates a quote and a trade that is at or within the
quote.'' \10\ The Exchange believes the proposed change makes clear
that the Exchange would only open a series automatically after it
receives a quote in the underlying security and a trade in that
security at or between the disseminated quote rather than simply upon
receipt of

either an ``opening trade or opening quote.'' The Exchange believes
that waiting to open trading in an option series until there has been
both a disseminated quote and trade in the underlying security would
help to augment the Auction Process by ensuring that an underlying
security has been opened pursuant to a robust price discovery process
before opening the overlying options for trading. The Exchange believes
that the proposed change would provide market participants with greater
certainty as to the true state of the market at the opening of the
trading day and should lead to more accurate prices on the
Exchange.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See proposed Rule 6.64 (b). The Exchange also proposes to
clarify that ``[a]t or after 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time,'' i.e., when
the market opens, the Exchange would initiate the Opening Process
for all series associated with the underlying security. See id.
    \11\ The Exchange notes that it would not open, for example if
the first disseminated quote in the underlying security is $50.50
bid, $50.75 ask, and the first trade in the underlying had been
executed for $50.00. The Exchange would, however open if the first
trade in the underlying was $50.50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.64(b)(E), which
currently provides, in relevant part, that ``[i]f the OX System does
not open a series with an Auction Process, the OX System shall open the
series for trading after receiving notification of an initial NBBO
disseminated by OPRA for the series or on a Market Maker quote.'' \12\
However, the Exchange has determined that it would no longer open on a
local Market Maker quote but would require that Market Maker quotes,
like the NBBO, come from OPRA. Thus, the Exchange proposes to open
after receiving an ``initial uncrossed NBBO from ORRA'' and to delete
rule text related to opening on a Market Maker quote.\13\ The Exchange
notes that OPRA disseminates to each exchange the NBBO as well as the
top of book for each exchange, such that the Exchange's market maker
quote would be disseminated back to the Exchange as the BBO--and could
be, but is not necessarily, the NBBO. Because OPRA disseminates this
information to all exchanges at the same time, the Exchange believes
the proposal to open only after receiving an uncrossed NBBO from OPRA
would eliminate any ambiguity as to the source of the information used
to open each series and should lead to more accurate prices on the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Rule 6.64(b)(E).
    \13\ See proposed Rule 6.64(b)(E) (providing that ``[i]f the OX
System does not open a series with an Auction Process, the OX System
shall open the series for trading after receiving notification of an
initial uncrossed NBBO disseminated by OPRA for the series, provided
that the bid-ask differential does not exceed the bid-ask
differential specified under Rule 6.37A(b)(4).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the proposed changes to Rule 6.64(b), the
Exchange likewise proposes to strike from Rule 6.64(c) reference to
``the midpoint of the best quote bids and quote offers in the OX Book''
as it relates to the Exchange determining the opening price for options
issues designated for trading on the OX System.\14\ The Exchange
believes this conforming change is necessary given that the Exchange
would no longer open solely on a Market Maker quote and therefore this
information would not form the basis of the opening price of a series.
As proposed, the opening price of a series would be the price ``at
which the greatest number of contracts will trade at or nearest to the
midpoint of the initial uncrossed NBBO disseminated by OPRA.'' \15\ The
Exchange believes this change adds transparency and internal
consistency to the rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Current Rule 6.64(c) provides, in relevant part, that the
opening price of a series will be the price ``at which the greatest
number of contracts will trade at or nearest to the midpoint of the
initial uncrossed NBBO disseminated by OPRA, if any, or the midpoint
of the best quote bids and quote offers in the OX Book.''
    \15\ See proposed Rule 6.64(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes new paragraph (F) to Rule 6.64(b) to
provide the Exchange with discretion to deviate from the standard
Opening Process where it is necessary in the interests of a fair and
orderly market.\16\ This proposed rule change is based on the rules of
other options exchanges.\17\ Similar to how other markets operate, the
Exchange believes it may be appropriate, in the interest of a fair and
orderly market, to open trading even if the conditions specified in
Rule 6.64 are not met. For example, if the primary market is unable to
open due to a systems or technical issue, but trading in the underlying
security is otherwise unaffected, the Exchange believes it would be
appropriate to open trading in any options series overlying such
securities. Further, proposed Rule 6.64(b)(F) would provide the
Exchange with discretion to manage the Opening Process in the event of
unanticipated circumstances occurring around 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time or
a halt being lifted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed Rule 6.64(b)(F) (providing that ``[t]he
Exchange may deviate from the standard manner of the Auction
Process, including adjusting the timing of the Auction Process in
any option class, when it believes it is necessary in the interests
of a fair and orderly market'').
    \17\ See e.g., BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'') Rule 21.7(c)
(Market Opening Procedures) (``The Exchange may deviate from the
standard manner of the Opening Process, including adjusting the
timing of the Opening Process in any option class, when it believes
it is necessary in the interests of a fair and orderly market'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) \18\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),
in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\19\ in
particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the proposed change to Rule 6.64(b) would clarify
that the Exchange would only open a series automatically after it
receives a quote in the underlying security and a trade in that
security at or between the disseminated quote--as opposed to
automatically opening on either an opening quote or an opening trade
alone per the current rule text, which may not always accurately
reflect the state of the market. The Exchange believes this added
transparency would promote just and equitable principles of trade and
remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open
market and a national market system to the benefit of market
participants. Further, the Exchange believes that waiting to open
trading in an option series until there has been both a disseminated
quote and trade in the underlying security would protect investors and
the public interest because it would help to augment the Auction
Process by ensuring that an underlying security has been opened
pursuant to a robust price discovery process before opening the
overlying options for trading. Moreover, this proposed change would
promote just and equitable principles of trade to the benefit of
investors and the public interest because it would provide market
participants with greater certainty as to the true state of the market
at the opening of the trading day and should lead to more accurate
prices on the Exchange.
    The Exchange also believes that specifying that, to open a series,
the Exchange would require an initial uncrossed NBBO disseminated by
OPRA would promote just and equitable principles of trade as the change
is designed to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange
notes that OPRA disseminates to each exchange the NBBO as well as the
top of book for each exchange, such that the Exchange's market maker
quote would be disseminated back to the Exchange as the BBO--and could
be, but is not necessarily, the NBBO. Because OPRA disseminates this
information to all

exchanges at the same time, the Exchange believes the proposal to open
only after receiving an uncrossed NBBO from OPRA would eliminate any
ambiguity as to the source of the information for each series and
should lead to more accurate prices on the Exchange.
    Similarly, the Exchange believes the conforming change to Rule
6.64(c), which strikes reference to quote bids and quote offers in the
OX Book for purposes of determining an opening price, likewise would
promote just and equitable principles of trade as it would add
transparency and internal consistency to Exchange rules, which would
make them easier for market participants to navigate.
    Finally, the Exchange believes the proposal to permit the Exchange
to open options trading when such opening is in the interests of a fair
and orderly market (even if the conditions set forth in the rule are
not met), is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest because the proposed changes would allow the Exchange to open
trading in options contracts in a fair and orderly manner.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes would
reduce potential delays in opening an option series that may prevent
the Exchange from displaying and/or routing orders on its Consolidated
Book and may also prevent the Exchange from disseminating a protected
quote that draws trading interest from other options markets. Thus, the
Exchange believes that the proposed changes would allow the Exchange to
open options series faster and more efficiently, thereby reducing any
delay in execution of orders on the Exchange that may be unnecessary
and harmful to market participants. The Exchange also notes that this
proposed rule change is based on the rules of other options
exchanges.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See supra n. 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not
designed to address any competitive issue but rather to add specificity
and transparency to Exchange rules, thereby reducing confusion and
making the Exchange's rules easier to understand and navigate. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would serve to promote
regulatory clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on the
marketplace and facilitating investor protection.

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

    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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2016-49 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2016-49. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2016-49 and should
be submitted on or before May 3, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-08303 Filed 4-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66988-66989]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1651]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS
report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings
and the contents of those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before December 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in
the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1651, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community

must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by
other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard
determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements
of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood
insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM and FIS
report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location and
the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables.
For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies
can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM
date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and
FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA
Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: September 12, 2016.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    I. Watershed-based studies:

                        Lower Suwannee Watershed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Dixie County, Florida and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Town of Cross City.....................  Town Hall, 99 Northeast 210th
                                          Avenue, Cross City, FL 32628.
Unincorporated Areas of Dixie County...  Dixie County Building and
                                          Zoning Department, 387
                                          Southeast 22nd Avenue, Cross
                                          City, FL 32628.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-23465 Filed 9-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P