[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 79395-79400]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22699]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3984; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-033-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening
of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposal to supersede Airworthiness
Directive (AD) 2008-13-12 R1, for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-
100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. AD 2008-13-12
R1 requires various repetitive inspections for cracking of the upper-
frame-to-side-frame splice of the fuselage, and other specified and
corrective actions if necessary; and also provides for an optional
preventive modification, which would terminate the repetitive
inspections. This action revises the notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) by adding post-repair/post-modification inspections. We are
proposing this SNPRM to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the
upper-frame-to-side-frame splice of the fuselage, which could result in
reduced structural integrity of the frame and adjacent lap joint,
causing increased loading in the fuselage skin, which will accelerate
skin crack growth and result in decompression of the airplane. Since
these actions impose an additional burden over that proposed in the
NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the
chance to comment on these proposed changes.

DATES: We must receive comments on this SNPRM by December 29, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this SNPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It
is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3984.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
3984; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
425-917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2015-3984;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-033-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2008-13-
12 R1, Amendment 39-15719 (73 FR 67383, November 14, 2008) (``AD 2008-
13-12 R1''). AD 2008-13-12 R1 applied to certain The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. AD
2008-13-12 R1 requires various repetitive inspections for cracking of
the upper-frame-to-side-frame splice of the fuselage, and other
specified and corrective actions if necessary. AD 2008-13-12 R1 also
provides for an optional preventive modification, which terminates the
repetitive inspections. AD 2008-13-12 R1 resulted from a report that
the upper frame of the fuselage was severed between stringers (S) S-13L
and S-14L at station (STA) 747, and the adjacent frame at STA 767 had a
1.3-inch-long crack at the same stringer location. The NPRM published
in the Federal Register on October 9, 2015 (80 FR 61133) (``The
NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of additional fatigue
cracking of the upper-frame-to-side-frame splice of the fuselage, and
one report of a severed frame. The NPRM proposed to add, for certain
airplanes, an inspection to determine if the existing frame repair
meets all specified requirements, and for certain other airplanes, a
new modification of the upper-frame-to-side-frame splice, which would
terminate the repetitive inspections. The NPRM also proposed to reduce
certain inspection thresholds and repetitive intervals.

Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that it is necessary
to require post-repair/post-modification inspections that were not
included in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015. The service information describes procedures
for various repetitive inspections for cracking of the upper-frame-to-
side-frame splice of the fuselage, a preventive modification to prevent
WFD, an inspection to determine if the existing frame repair meets all
specified requirements, and corrective actions. This service
information is reasonably available because the interested parties

have access to it through their normal course of business or by the
means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the NPRM. The
following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment. One commenter supported the actions specified
in the NPRM.

Request To Require Post-Repair/Post-Modification Inspections

    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (j) of the proposed AD (in
the NPRM) to require the post-repair/post-modification inspections that
are not required in that paragraph. Boeing stated that the WFD
evaluation of the frame repair/modification specified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015,
indicated the need for reduced repetitive inspection intervals from
those provided in Boeing Damage Tolerance Inspection Data Service
Bulletin 737-00-1006, dated March 12, 2010. Boeing added that since the
inspections specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-00-1006, dated
March 12, 2010, are not to be used for the post-repair/post-
modification inspections required by 14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or
129.109(c)(2), they should be required by paragraph (j) of the proposed
AD.
    We agree with the commenter for the reasons provided. We have
changed paragraph (j) of this SNPRM to require that post-repair/post-
modification inspections be done in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015.

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the Supplemental
Type Certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the actions specified
in the NPRM.
    We agree with the commenter. We have changed paragraph (c) of this
proposed AD to state that installation of STC ST01219SE does not affect
the ability to accomplish the actions required by this final rule.
Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a
``change in product'' alternative methods of compliance (AMOC) approval
request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR
39.17.

Request To Clarify That the NPRM Addresses WFD

    Boeing asked that we update the language in ``Actions Since AD
2008-13-12 R1, Amendment 39-15719 (73 FR 67383, November 14, 2008) Was
Issued'' section of the NPRM to clarify that this action is intended to
address WFD by supporting the airplane's limit of validity (LOV).
Boeing noted that a recently issued WFD-related AD action used
different language regarding WFD. Boeing stated that Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, was
released in support of the requirements of 14 CFR 26.21(b) and (c) and
provides additional service action required to support LOV.
    We agree to provide clarification. The NPRM addressed WFD in
several locations in the preamble. To clarify, this action is intended
to address WFD by supporting the airplane's LOV, as stated by Boeing.
However, we have not updated the language in that section of the NPRM
because that section of the NPRM is not carried over to this SNPRM.
Therefore, no change to this SNPRM is necessary in this regard.

Request To Clarify Certain Procedures in the Related Service
Information Section

    Boeing asked that we change the ``Related Service Information under
1 CFR part 51'' section in the NPRM to clarify the description of the
modification procedures in the service information. Boeing asked that
the proposed language ``. . . a new preventive modification, which
would eliminate the need for the repetitive inspections'' be changed to
``. . . a preventive modification to prevent the WFD.'' Boeing stated
that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated
January 30, 2015, retains all inspections specified in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, dated January 19, 2006, and mandates the
previously optional preventive modification to mitigate the WFD
concern.
    We agree with the commenter for the reasons provided. We have
clarified the ``Related Service Information under 1 CFR part 51''
section of this SNPRM accordingly.

Request To Clarify Reason for Supersedure

    Boeing asked that we clarify in the SUMMARY section of the NPRM the
events that prompted the proposed supersedure of AD 2008-13-12 R1.
Boeing stated that instead of two reports of severed frames, as
specified in the NPRM, there was just one report of a severed frame.
    We agree to provide clarification. We agree that the commenter's
statement is accurate. However, we have removed details relating to the
NPRM from the SUMMARY section of this SNPRM; therefore, no change is
necessary to this SNPRM in this regard.

Request To Clarify Provisions Related to Repetitive Actions

    Boeing asked that we clarify paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of the proposed
AD (in the NPRM) to state that the actions are to be repeated until the
preventive modification in paragraph (k) or the terminating action in
paragraph (l) of the proposed AD has been accomplished. Boeing added
that this change is consistent with the provisions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, and
the requirements of AD 2008-13-12 R1.
    We agree with the commenter for the reasons provided. We have
clarified paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this proposed AD accordingly.

Request To Clarify Inspection Locations

    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (g)(2)(i) of the proposed AD
(in the NPRM) to clarify that the inspections are for ``existing frame
repairs,'' instead of ``frames.'' Boeing requested that we change
``frame'' to ``frame repairs,'' and ``tied frames'' to ``existing frame
repairs.''
    We agree with the commenter. We have revised paragraph (g)(2)(i) of
this proposed AD accordingly.

Request To Revise Inspection Type

    Boeing asked that we revise paragraphs (k) and (l) of the proposed
AD (in the NPRM) by changing ``detailed and HFEC inspections'' to just
``HFEC inspections.'' Boeing stated that detailed inspections are not
specified during accomplishment of the preventive modification in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January
30, 2015.
    We agree with the commenter for the reason provided. We have
removed ``detailed'' inspections from paragraphs (k) and (l) of this
proposed AD.

Request To Change Certain Language in Paragraph (l)(2) of the Proposed
AD

    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (l)(2) of the proposed AD (in
the NPRM), which stated that the repair would terminate the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. Boeing requested
that the proposed AD instead state that the repair would terminate not
only the repetitive inspections, but also the preventive modification
required by

paragraph (k) of the proposed AD. Boeing added that Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015,
provides a terminating action provision for the repetitive inspections
and the preventive modification under the repair. Boeing stated that
accomplishment of the repair removes the WFD, and therefore the
preventive modification is not required for repaired frames.
    We agree with the commenter for the reasons provided. We have
clarified the language in paragraph (l)(2) of this proposed AD
accordingly.

Request To Move Terminating Action in Paragraph (l)(3) of the Proposed
AD to the Credit Paragraph

    Boeing asked that we move the terminating action specified in
paragraph (l)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) into the credit for
previous actions specified in paragraph (m) of the proposed AD (in the
NPRM) for clarification. Boeing stated that accomplishment of the
repair or preventive modification, as specified in Boeing Message M-
7200-02-1294, dated August 20, 2002, is a ``previous action'' similar
to accomplishment of the repair or preventive modification specified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, dated January 19, 2006.
Boeing added that paragraph (l)(3) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)
stated that the repair or preventive modification done before the
effective date of the AD terminates the repetitive inspection
requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM).
Boeing also asked that we revise the proposed AD (in the NPRM) to state
that accomplishment of the repair or preventive modification in
accordance with Boeing Message M-7200-02-1294, dated August 20, 2002,
if performed before the effective date of the AD, would also terminate
the preventive modification required by paragraph (k) of the proposed
AD (in the NPRM).
    We agree to revise paragraph (l)(3) of this proposed AD to state
that a repair or preventive modification done in accordance with Boeing
Message M-7200-02-1294, dated August 20, 2002, is acceptable for
terminating both the inspections and the preventive modification
requirements in paragraphs (g)(1) and (k) of this proposed AD
respectively. We have changed paragraph (l)(3) of this proposed AD
accordingly.
    We do not agree to move paragraph (l)(3) of the proposed AD (in the
NPRM) into the credit for previous actions specified in paragraph (m)
of this proposed AD. Paragraph (m) of this proposed AD is intended to
give credit for actions accomplished using previous revisions of
service information for accomplishing corresponding actions prior to
the effective date of the AD; it does not terminate any actions and
does not address future actions.

Request To Provide Credit for Certain Repairs

    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (m) of the proposed AD (in
the NPRM) to provide credit for repairs that were accomplished before
the effective date of the AD, in accordance with Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, dated January 19, 2006. Boeing stated that the
repair procedures are the same as those in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015 (as specified
in paragraph (l)(2) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)).
    We agree with the commenter for the reason provided. We have added
a new paragraph (m)(3) to this proposed AD to give credit for repairs
specified in paragraph (l)(2) of the this proposed AD that are
accomplished before the effective date of this proposed AD.

Request To Remove Repairs as Terminating Action Under Certain
Conditions

    Boeing asked that we change paragraph (l)(4) of the proposed AD (in
the NPRM) to remove repairs as acceptable terminating action. Boeing
stated that paragraph (l)(4) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) would
provide a terminating action provision for the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (g)(2) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) if a
repair or preventive modification is accomplished that is different
from the one provided in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261,
Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, provided it has been approved by
the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office. Boeing added
that there have been repairs performed in the past that involve
trimming the production upper frame web near S-11 and replacing it with
an identical replacement frame web without additional reinforcement
similar to the preventive modification or repair. Boeing noted that the
repair is structurally acceptable; however, it does not sufficiently
reinforce the frame to provide terminating action for the inspections,
and would require further service actions, including inspections and a
preventive modification. Boeing added that the additional inspection
requirements should be specified in the AMOC approval, and noted that a
preventive modification would not necessarily be required since prior
approvals would not have taken the WFD requirements into account.
    We agree with the commenter for the reasons provided. All
previously installed repairs or modifications installed in accordance
with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, dated January 19, 2006,
must be reevaluated or replaced to ensure that all WFD requirements are
met. Therefore, we have removed paragraph (l)(4) of the proposed AD (in
the NPRM) from this proposed AD.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this SNPRM because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a
result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on
this SNPRM.

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Difference Between this AD and the Service Information.'' Refer to
this service information for information on the procedures and
compliance times.

Difference Between This SNPRM and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated
January 30, 2015, specifies to contact the manufacturer for certain
repair instructions, but this proposed AD would require repair methods,
modification deviations, and alteration deviations in one of the
following ways:
     In accordance with a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 391 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Parts
          Action                 Labor cost           cost        Cost per product       Cost on U.S.  operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained inspections from  Between 18 and 38 work-        $0  Between $1,530 and        Between $598,230 and
 AD 2008-13-12 R1.          hours x $85 per hour,              $3,230 per inspection     $1,262,930, per
                            depending on airplane              cycle.                    inspection cycle.
                            configuration =
                            between $1,530 and
                            $3,230 per inspection
                            cycle.
New proposed inspections.  213 work[dash]hours x          $0  $18,105 per inspection    $7,079,055, per
                            $85 per hour, $18,105              cycle.                    inspection cycle.
                            per inspection cycle.
New proposed modification  256 work-hours x $85     ([sup1])  $21,760.................  $8,508,160
                            per hour = $21,760.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We currently have no specific cost estimates associated with the parts necessary for the proposed
  modification.

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2008-13-12 R1, Amendment 39-15719 (73 FR 67383, November 14, 2008), and
adding the following new AD.

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2015-3984; Directorate Identifier
2015-NM-033-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 29, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2008-13-12 R1, Amendment 39-15719 (73 FR
67383, November 14, 2008) (``AD 2008-13-12 R1'').

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/BE866B732F6CF31086257B9700692796?OpenDocument&Highlight=st01219se)
does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by
this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is
installed, a ''change in product'' alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of additional fatigue cracking
of the upper-frame-to-side-frame splice of the fuselage, and one
report of a severed frame due to susceptibility to widespread
fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
fatigue cracking of the upper-frame-to-side-frame splice of the
fuselage, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
frame and adjacent lap joint, causing increased loading in the
fuselage skin, which will accelerate skin crack growth and result in
decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions for Certain Airplanes

    (1) For Groups 1 through 3, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 5
airplanes; Group 7, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 5 airplanes; Groups
4 through 6, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 6 airplanes; and Groups 8
through 11, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 6 airplanes; as identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated
January 30, 2015: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)
and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD, and all applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015,
except as required by paragraph (i)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight.
    (i) At the applicable time specified in Tables 1, 2, 3, 5, 6,
and 8 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, except as
required by paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD: Do medium
frequency eddy current inspections for cracking of the upper-frame-
to-side-frame splice of the fuselage.
    (ii) Repeat the inspections specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of
this AD at the applicable time specified in Tables 1, 2, 3, 5, 6,
and 8 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January
30, 2015, until the preventive modification required by paragraph
(k) of this AD, or a terminating action specified in paragraph (l)
of this AD, has been accomplished. The inspections are terminated
for the repaired or modified areas only.
    (2) For Groups 4 through 6, Configurations 2 and 5 airplanes;
and Groups 8 through 11, Configurations 2 and 5 airplanes; as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015: Do the actions specified in paragraphs
(g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD, and all applicable corrective
actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January
30, 2015, except as required by paragraph (i)(3) of this AD. Do all
applicable corrective actions before further flight.
    (i) At the applicable time specified in Tables 4 and 7 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, except as required
by paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection
to determine if the existing frame repair meets all requirements
specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015, and for any frame repair that does meet all
requirements, do detailed and high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspections for cracking of the existing frame repairs.
    (ii) Repeat the inspections for cracking specified in paragraph
(g)(2)(i) of this AD at the applicable time specified in Tables 4
and 7 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015.

(h) Post-Repair and Post-Modification Actions for Certain Airplanes

    For Group 1, Configurations 2 and 6 airplanes; Group 2,
Configurations 2 and 6 airplanes; Group 3, Configurations 2 and 6
airplanes; and Group 7, Configurations 2 and 6 airplanes; as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015: Within 120 days after the effective date of
this AD, do post-repair and post-modification actions using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(n) of this AD.

(i) Exceptions to Service Bulletin Specifications

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015, specifies a compliance time ``after the
Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
    (2) Where the ``Condition'' column of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261,
Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, specifies a condition based on
whether an airplane has or has not been inspected, this AD bases the
condition on whether an airplane has or has not been inspected as of
the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions: Before further flight, repair using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this
AD.

(j) Post-Repair/Post-Modification Inspections

    For Groups 4 through 6, Configurations 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and
10 airplanes; and Groups 8 through 11, Configurations 1, 3, 4, 6, 7,
8, 9, and 10 airplanes; as identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015: Except as
provided by paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD, at the
applicable time specified in Tables 12 through 17 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261,
Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015; do the post-repair/post-
modification inspections, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision
1, dated January 30, 2015, except as required by paragraph (i)(3) of
this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight.

(k) Preventive Modification for Certain Airplanes

    For Groups 4 through 6, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 6 airplanes;
and Groups 8 through 11, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 6 airplanes; as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015: Except as provided by paragraphs (i)(1) and
(i)(2) of this AD, at the applicable time specified in Tables 3, 5,
6, and 8 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, do the
preventive modification, including HFEC inspections for cracking and
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, except as required by
paragraph (i)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions
before further flight. Accomplishing the modification required by
this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD for the modified area only.

(l) Terminating Action

    (1) For Groups 4 through 6, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 6
airplanes; and Groups 8 through 11, Configurations 1, 3, 4, and 6
airplanes; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015: Accomplishing the
preventive modification, including HFEC inspections for cracking and
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30, 2015, except as required by
paragraph (i)(3) of this AD, terminates the inspections required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD for the modified area only.
    (2) For Groups 4 through 6, Configurations 3 and 6 airplanes;
and Groups 8 through 11, Configurations 3 and 6 airplanes; as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1,
dated January 30, 2015: Accomplishing the repair, including HFEC
inspections for cracking and applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, Revision 1, dated January 30,
2015, except as required by paragraph (i)(3) of this AD, terminates
the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD,
and the preventive modification required by paragraph (k) of this
AD, for the repaired area only.
    (3) Accomplishment of the repair or the preventive modification
specified in Boeing Message M-7200-02-1294, dated August 20, 2002,
before the effective date of this AD terminates the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD and the
preventive modification required by paragraph (k) of this AD for the
repaired or modified area only.

(m) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the inspections required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those inspections were performed
before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, dated January 19, 2006, which was incorporated
by reference in AD 2008-13-12, Amendment 39-15575 (73 FR 38905, July
8, 2008) (``AD 2008-13-12'').
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the modification
specified in paragraphs (k) and (l)(1) of this AD, if performed
before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-53A1261, dated January 19, 2006.
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for repairs specified in
paragraphs (l)(2) of this AD, if performed before the effective date
of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1261, dated
January 19, 2006.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (o)(1) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved for AD 2008-13-12, and AD 2008-13-12 R1; are
approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g)
of this AD.

(o) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 12, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22699 Filed 11-10-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 220 (Thursday, November 16, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78744-78745]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25344]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2638-001.
    Applicants: NRG Business Marketing LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Response to Request for Additional
Information to be effective 8/16/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 pm ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2639-002.
    Applicants: NRG Business Marketing LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Response to Request for Additional
Information to be effective 8/16/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5153.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2641-001.
    Applicants: NRG Power Marketing LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Response to Request for Additional
Information to be effective 8/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5159.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2642-001.
    Applicants: NRG Power Marketing LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Response to Request for Additional
Information to be effective 8/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5161.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2842-001.
    Applicants: Sunnyside Cogeneration Associates.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to MBR Application to be
effective 9/15/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5138.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2885-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment of NSA, SA No. 7076; Queue
No. AD1-031 in Docket ER23-2885-000 to be effective 11/20/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-330-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Answer of Solar Energy Industries Association And
Interwest Power Alliance Opposing Arizona Public Service Company's
Expedited Action, et al.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5190.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-340-000; ER24-341-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Answer of Midcontinent Independent System Operator,
Inc. Opposing Motions of DTE Electric Company for Extension of Time to
Comment.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5188.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-367-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2023-
11-09_SA 4182 METC-Consumers Energy E&P (J2815) to be effective 11/2/
2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.

    Accession Number: 20231109-5017.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-368-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 4179 Osborne Grid, LLC GIA
to be effective 11/2/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5025.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-369-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 4180 NextEra Energy
Resources Surplus Interconnection GIA to be effective 1/8/2024.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5029.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-370-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2024 TACBAA Update to be
effective 1/1/2024.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5041.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-371-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: City of Victorville Amended
IFA WDT298 SA. 231 to be effective 1/9/2024.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5056.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-372-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2023-11-09_SA 4187 Duke
Energy IN-Galea Springs GIA (J1388) to be effective 1/9/2024.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-373-000.
    Applicants: Yellow Pine Solar Interconnect, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Yellow Pine Solar
Interconnect, LLC Shared Facilities Agreement to be effective 11/10/
2023.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-374-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Financial Transmission
Rights Bilateral Agreement Reform to be effective 1/9/2024.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5122.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER24-375-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, SA No. 7130;
Queue No. AF1-014 to be effective 1/9/2024.
    Filed Date: 11/9/23.
    Accession Number: 20231109-5157.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/23.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:

    Docket Numbers: PH24-4-000.
    Applicants: CMS Energy Corporation.
    Description: CMS Energy Corporation submits FERC 65-B Notice of
Exemption Notification.
    Filed Date: 11/7/23.
    Accession Number: 20231107-5166.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/23.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: November 9, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-25344 Filed 11-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 205)]
[Notices]
[Page 62255]
[DOCID:fr24oc06-42]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER06-1375-000; ER06-1376-000]

 Lumberton Power, Inc.; Elizabethtown Power, LLC; Notice of
Issuance of Order

October 17, 2006.
    Lumberton Power, LLC (Lumberton) and Elizabethtown Power, LLC
(Elizabethtown) filed applications for market-based rate authority,
with accompanying tariffs. The proposed rate tariffs provide for the
sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates.
Lumberton and Elizabethtown also requested waivers of various
Commission regulations. In particular, Lumberton and Elizabethtown
requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR part
34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability
by Lumberton and Elizabethtown.
    On October 16, 2006, the Commission granted the request for blanket
approval under part 34, subject to the following:
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket approval
of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by Lumberton and
Elizabethtown should file a motion to intervene or protest with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
(2004).

Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protests is November 15, 2006

    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Lumberton and Elizabethtown are authorized to issue securities and
assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or
otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that
such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the
corporate purposes of Lumberton and Elizabethtown, compatible with the
public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such
purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approval of Lumberton's and Elizabethtown's issuances of
securities or assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Commission's Order are available
from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-17786 Filed 10-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83917-83920]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28033]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79326; File No. SR-Phlx-2016-113]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Limit
Order Protection

November 16, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 15, 2016, NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Limit Order Protection or
``LOP'' for members accessing PSX and adding rule text related to a
collar applicable to Primary Pegging and Market Pegging Orders.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange recently adopted a new mechanism to protect against
erroneous Limit Orders which are entered into PSX at Rule 3307(f).\3\
This mechanism addresses risks to market participants of human error in
entering Limit Orders at unintended prices. Specifically, LOP prevents
certain Limit Orders from executing or being placed on the Order Book
at prices outside pre-set standard limits. The System rejects those
Limit Orders, rather than executing them automatically. LOP rejects
Limit Orders back to the member when the order exceeds certain defined
logic. Specifically, LOP prevents certain Limit Orders at prices
outside of pre-set standard limits (``LOP Limit'') from being accepted
by the System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78246 [sic] (August
24, 2016), 81 FR 59672 (August 30, 2016) (SR-Phlx-2016-58).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Modifications of Orders
    In its adoptive filing, the Exchange noted that LOP shall apply to
all Quotes and Orders, including any modified Orders.\4\ At this time,
the Exchange proposes to remove ``including any modified Orders'' from
the rule text at rule 3307(f)(i). The Exchange proposes to amend this
language because it is misleading and may cause confusion. The Exchange
proposes to state that LOP shall apply to all Quotes and Orders,
including Quotes and Orders that have been modified, where the
modification results in a new timestamp and priority.\5\ Any Order that
is modified within the System, but does not lose priority, for example
an Order that was decremented, will not be subject to LOP after it was
modified because the system does not cancel decremented orders from the
Order Book. If an Order is cancelled either by the member or by the
system and a new Order entered into the System, the new Order would be
subject to LOP. For example, if the price of an Order is modified, the
system will cancel the Order and the modified Order would receive a new
timestamp and priority and this Order would be subject to LOP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ If an Order is modified, LOP will review the order anew and,
if LOP is triggered, such modification will not take effect and the
original order will be rejected.
    \5\ See Rule 4756 (Entry and Display of Quotes and Orders) at
(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exceptions to LOP
    The Exchange also noted in its adoptive filing that LOP would not
apply to Market Orders, Market Maker Peg Orders \6\ or Intermarket
Sweep Orders (ISO).\7\ The Exchange proposes to modify this language to
specifically state that LOP would not apply to Orders with Market and
Primary Pegging.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A ``Market Maker Peg Order'' is an Order Type designed to
allow a Market Maker to maintain a continuous two-sided quotation at
a displayed price that is compliant with the quotation requirements
for Market Makers set forth in Rule 3213(a)(2). The displayed price
of the Market Maker Peg Order is set with reference to a ``Reference
Price'' in order to keep the displayed price of the Market Maker Peg
Order within a bounded price range. A Market Maker Peg Order may be
entered through RASH or FIX only. A Market Maker Peg Order must be
entered with a limit price beyond which the Order may not be priced.
The Reference Price for a Market Maker Peg Order to buy (sell) is
the then-current National Best Bid (National Best Offer) (including
PSX), or if no such National Best Bid or National Best Offer, the
most recent reported last-sale eligible trade from the responsible
single plan processor for that day, or if none, the previous closing
price of the security as adjusted to reflect any corporate actions
(e.g., dividends or stock splits) in the security. See PSX Rule
3301A(b)(5)(A).
    \7\ An Intermarket Sweep or ISO Order, which is an Order that is
immediately executable within PSX against Orders against which they
are marketable, is not subject to LOP. See PSX Rule 3401(g).
    \8\ Orders with Market and Primary Pegging available through
RASH and FIX only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are three types of Pegging Orders: Primary Pegging, Market
Pegging and Midpoint Pegging. Pegging is an Order Attribute that allows
an Order to have its price automatically set with reference to the
NBBO; provided, however, that if PSX is the sole market center at the
Best Bid or Best Offer (as applicable), then the price of any Displayed
Order with Primary Pegging (as defined below) will be set with
reference to the highest bid or lowest offer disseminated by a market
center other than PSX. An Order with a Pegging Order Attribute may be
referred to as a ``Pegged Order.''\9\ For purposes of this Rule 3301B,
the price to which an Order is pegged will be referred to as the Inside
Quotation, the Inside Bid, or the Inside Offer, as appropriate. There
are three varieties of Pegging:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ PSX Rule 3301B(d).

     Primary Pegging means Pegging with reference to the
Inside Quotation on the same side of the market. For example, if the
Inside Bid was $11, an Order to buy with Primary Pegging would be
priced at $11.
     Market Pegging means Pegging with reference to the
Inside Quotation on the opposite side of the market. For example, if
the Inside Offer was $11.06, an Order to buy with Market Pegging
would be priced at $11.06.
     Midpoint Pegging means Pegging with reference to the
midpoint between the Inside Bid and the Inside Offer (the
``Midpoint''). Thus, if the Inside Bid was $11 and the Inside Offer
was $11.06, an Order with Midpoint Pegging would be priced at
$11.03.

An Order with Midpoint Pegging is not displayed. An Order with
Midpoint Pegging may be executed in sub-pennies if necessary to
obtain a midpoint price.

    Midpoint Pegging will be the only Pegging Order subject to LOP,
provided it has a limit price. An Order with Pegging may specify a
limit price beyond which the Order may not be executed; provided,
however, that if an Order has been assigned a Pegging Order Attribute
and a Discretion Order \10\ Attribute, the Order may execute at any
price within the discretionary price range, even if beyond the limit
price specified with respect to the Pegging Order Attribute. A Midpoint
Pegging Order may have a discretion attribute. A Midpoint Pegging Order
with a discretion price would not be subject to LOP. The Exchange notes
that a Midpoint Pegging Order, similar to a Primary or Market Pegging
Order, as explained below, may result is [sic] an aggressive or passive
price. As a result, the LOP may remove orders that were intended to be
more aggressive or passive due to the discretionary attribute. For this
reason, the Exchange will not subject a Midpoint Pegging Order with a
discretion price to LOP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Discretion is an Order Attribute under which an Order has a
non-displayed discretionary price range within which the entering
Participant is willing to trade; such an Order may be referred to as
a ``Discretionary Order.'' See PSX Rule 3301B(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, an Order with Primary Pegging or Market Pegging may
specify an Offset Amount,\11\ such that the price of the Order will
vary from the Inside Quotation by the selected Offset Amount. The
Offset Amount may be either aggressive or passive. Thus, for example,
if a Participant entered an Order to buy with Primary Pegging and a
passive Offset Amount of $0.05 and the Inside Bid was $11, the Order
would be priced at $10.95. If the Participant selected an aggressive
Offset Amount of $0.02, however, the Order would be priced at $11.02.
An Order with Primary Pegging and an Offset Amount will not be
Displayed, unless the Order is Attributable. The Exchange notes that
both Market and Primary Pegging may impact the market by effecting the
bid or offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ An offset is not supported for a Midpoint Pegging Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is not applying LOP to orders with Market or Primary
Pegging because it may result in removing orders that were intended to
be more aggressive or to set the bid or offer on the market due to the
order attributes noted above. These Pegging Orders are also subject to
a collar, which is explained in this rule change.
    In contrast, an Order with Midpoint Pegging will only be at the
midpoint and not have the same impact as the other two types of orders
and therefore subjecting such an order to LOP does not impact the
potential of the order since by definition it is set to the midpoint.
An Order with Midpoint Pegging will not be displayed and is not subject
to a collar.
    An Order with Market Pegging and no Offset behaves as a ``market
order'' with respect to any liquidity on the PSX Book at the Inside
Quotation on the opposite side of the market because it is immediately
executable at that price. If, at the time of entry, there is no price
to which a Pegged Order can be pegged, the Order will be rejected;
provided, however, that a Displayed Order that has Market Pegging, or
an Order with a Non-Display Attribute that has Primary Pegging or
Market Pegging, will be accepted at its limit price. In the case of an
Order with Midpoint Pegging, if the Inside Bid and Inside Offer are
locked, the Order will be priced at the locking price, if the Inside
Bid and Inside Offer are crossed, the Order will nevertheless be priced
at the midpoint between the Inside Bid and Inside Offer, and if there
is no Inside Bid and/or Inside Offer, the Order will be rejected.
However, even if the Inside Bid and Inside Offer are locked or crossed,
an Order with Midpoint Pegging that locked or crossed an Order on the
PSX Book would execute (provided, however, that a Midpoint Peg Post-
Only Order would execute or post as described in Rule 3301B(d). It is
important to note that only to the extent that a Midpoint Pegging Order
has a limit price that the Order would be subject to LOP, unless the
Midpoint Pegging Order also has a discretion attribute. If no limit
price is specified, the Midpoint Pegging Order would not be subject to
LOP.
    LOP will be operational each trading day, except during trading
halts and pauses. Members will continue to be subject to certain
parameters when submitting Limit Orders into the Order Book. LOP will
not apply in the event that there is no established LOP Reference
Price.\12\ The LOP Reference Price shall be the current National Best
Bid or Best Offer (NBBO), the bid for sell orders and the offer for buy
orders.\13\ LOP is will be applicable on all protocols.\14\ The LOP
feature will be mandatory for all PSX members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For example, if there is a one-sided quote or if the NBB,
when used as the LOP Reference Price, is equal to or less than
$0.50.
    \13\ The Exchange will not accept incoming Limit Orders that
exceed the LOP Reference Threshold. Limit Orders will not be
accepted if the price of the Limit Order is greater than the LOP
Reference Threshold for a buy Limit Order. Limit Orders will not be
accepted if the price of the Limit Order is less than the LOP
Reference Threshold for a sell Limit Order. The LOP Reference
Threshold for buy orders will be the LOP Reference Price (offer)
plus the applicable percentage specified in the LOP Limit. The LOP
Reference Threshold for sell orders will be the LOP Reference Price
(bid) minus the applicable percentage specified in the LOP Limit.
The LOP Limit will be the greater of 10% of the LOP Reference Price
or $0.50 for all securities across all trading sessions. The LOP
Reference Price will be the current National Best Bid or Best Offer
(NBBO), the bid for sell orders and the offer for buy orders.
    \14\ PSX maintains several communications protocols for members
to use in entering Orders and sending other messages to PSX, such
as: OUCH, RASH, FLITE, and FIX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation of LOP
    The Exchange indicated in its adoptive rule change that it would
implement this rule within ninety (90) days of the approval of the
proposed rule change.\15\ At this time, the Exchange proposes to delay
this implementation an additional sixty (60) days from the original
timeframe in order to implement the LOP with the changes proposed
herein. The Exchange will issue an Equities Trader Alert in advance to
inform market participants of such implementation date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See note 3 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pegging Order Collar
    In 2009, the Exchange adopted a collar for certain Unpriced
Orders.\16\ At that time, the Exchange defined an Unpriced Order as any
order type permitted by the System to buy or sell shares of a security
at the national best bid (best offer) (``NBBO'') at the time when the
order reaches the System. Any portion of an Unpriced Order that would
execute on PSX at a price more than $0.25 or 5 percent worse than the
NBBO at the time when the order reaches the System, whichever is
greater, will be cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63051 (October 6,
2010), 75 FR 63240 (October 14, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-135). An
``Unpriced Order'' was defined in this rule change as any order type
permitted by the System to buy or sell shares of a security at the
national best bid (best offer) (``NBBO'') at the time when the order
reaches the System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule related to the collar was inadvertently removed from the
Exchange's rules.\17\ At this time, the Exchange proposes to amend the
PSX rules to add the collar into the rules once again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Commission [sic] Release No.
75293 (June 24, 2015), 80 FR 37327 (June 30, 2015) (SR-Phlx-2015-
29).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the collar is to protect market participants by
reducing the risk that Primary and Market Pegging Orders will execute
at prices that are significantly worse than the national

best bid and offer (``NBBO'') at the time the Exchange receives the
order. The Exchange believes that most market participants expect that
their order will be executed at its full size at a price reasonably
related to the prevailing market. However, market participants may not
be aware that there is insufficient liquidity at or near the NBBO to
fill the entire order, particularly for more thinly-traded securities.
    The Exchange proposes to memorialize this collar, which currently
exists in its trading and routing systems functionality, and define it
specifically as applicable to Primary and Market Pegging Orders. The
Exchange seeks to memorialize the rule within Rule 3301B, entitled
``Order Attributes.'' The new rule text would state, ``Primary Pegging
Orders and Market Pegging Orders are subject to a collar. Any portion
of a Primary Pegging Order or Market Pegging Order that would execute,
either on the Exchange or when routed to another market center, at a
price of more than $0.25 or 5 percent worse than the NBBO at the time
when the order reaches the System, whichever is greater, will be
cancelled.''
    The following example illustrates how the collar works. A market
participant submits a routable order to buy 500 shares. The NBBO is
$6.00 bid by $6.05 offer, with 100 shares available on each side. Both
sides of the NBBO are set by another market center (``Away Market''),
but PSX has 100 shares available at the $6.05 to sell at the offer
price and also has reserve orders to sell 100 shares at $6.32 and 400
shares at $6.40. No other market center is publishing offers to sell
the security in between $6.05 and $6.40.
    In this example, the order would be executed in the following
manner:
     100 shares would be executed by PSX at the $6.05;
     400 shares would be routed to the Away Market as an
immediate or cancel order with a price of $6.05;
     100 shares executed by the Away Market;\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ This assumes that the Away Market's offer was still
available and that the Away Market had no additional non-displayed
orders at this price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     300 shares returned to PSX;
     100 shares executed by PSX at $6.32 (more than $0.25 but
less than 5 percent worse than the NBBO); and 200 shares, representing
the remainder of the order, would be cancelled because the remaining
liquidity available at $6.40 is more than 5 percent worse than the
NBBO.
Implementation of Pegging Order Collar
    The Exchange intends to implement the Pegging Order Collar as soon
as practicable pursuant to this proposal. The Exchange requests a
waiver of the operative delay to implement the Pegging Order Collar.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\19\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by mitigating risks to market participants of human error in
entering Limit Orders at clearly unintended prices. The proposal will
allow for protections for Limit Orders which should encourage price
continuity and, in turn, protect investors and the public interest by
reducing executions occurring at dislocated prices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to amend the language concerning the
modification of Orders is consistent with the Act because only new
Orders would be subject to LOP. The proposed new language specifies
that Orders that are modified for size and remain in the Order Book
with the same priority, because only size was modified to reduce the
size, will not be subject to LOP. Other modifications to Orders that
amend the timestamp or priority will subject the modified orders to LOP
because these Orders will be submitted into the System as new Orders.
The LOP functionality protects market participants by reducing the risk
that Midpoint Pegging Orders will execute at prices that are
significantly worse than the national best bid and offer (``NBBO'') at
the time the Exchange receives the order.
    The LOP feature assists with the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets by mitigating the risks associated with errors resulting in
executions at prices that are away from the Best Bid or Offer and
potentially erroneous. Further it protects investors from potentially
receiving executions away from the prevailing prices at any given time.
The Exchange adopted LOP to avoid a series of improperly priced
aggressive orders transacting in the Order Book.
    The Exchange believes that excluding Primary Pegging and Market
Pegging Orders is consistent with the Act because including such orders
may result in removing orders that were intended to be more aggressive
or to set the bid or offer on the market due to the order attributes
noted in the Purpose section of this rule change. Market and Primary
Pegging Orders are also currently subject to a collar. Market and
Primary Pegging Orders that would execute, either on the Exchange or
when routed to another market center, at a price of more than $0.25 or
5 percent worse than the NBBO at the time when the order reaches the
System, whichever is greater, will be cancelled.\21\ Further, the
Market Pegging Order has its own process for rejecting those orders
where no price exists to which a Pegged Order can be pegged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The Exchange inadvertently removed the rule from the Phlx
Rulebook. The Exchange proposes to adopt the rule herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This feature should create a level of protection that prevents the
Limit Orders from entering the Order Book outside of an acceptable
range for the Limit Order to execute. The LOP should reduce the
negative impacts of sudden, unanticipated volatility, and serve to
preserve an orderly market in a transparent and uniform manner,
increase overall market confidence, and promote fair and orderly
markets and the protection of investors.
Pegging Order Collar
    The Exchange believes that the collar proposal is consistent with
the Act because it is designed to promote just and equitable principles
of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general to
protect investors and the public interest, by avoiding execution of
Primary and Market Pegging Orders (either on PSX or on other market
centers as a result of orders routed by PSX) at prices that are
significantly worse than the NBBO at the time the order is initially
received. The NBBO provides reasonable guidance of the current value of
a given security and therefore market participants should have
confidence that their Market and Primary Pegging Orders will not be
executed at a significantly worse price than the NBBO.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The LOP feature should provide
market participants with additional price

protection from anomalous executions. This feature is not optional and
is applicable to all members submitting Limit Orders. Thus, the
Exchange does not believe the proposal creates any significant impact
on competition. In addition, the proposed collar in Rule 3301B would be
applicable to all Market and Primary Pegging Orders entered into the
PSX System. Similarly, all Midpoint Pegging Order will be subject to
LOP, unless they have a discretion attribute.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \23\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \24\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. When the
Exchange first proposed the LOP, the Exchange represented that it would
implement the LOP within 90 days of obtaining Commission approval
(i.e., by November 22, 2016).\25\ The Exchange now proposes to extend
the LOP implementation date by 60 days in order to include the
modifications in this proposed rule change with the implementation of
the LOP. Waiver of the 30-day operative delay would allow the Exchange
to immediately extend the LOP implementation date. The waiver would
also permit the Exchange to immediately clarify the application of the
LOP to modified orders. Moreover, the waiver would allow the Exchange
to immediately exclude from the LOP Market Pegging Orders, Primary
Pegging Orders, and Midpoint Pegging Orders that have a discretion
price. As noted above, the Exchange proposes to exclude these Orders
because these Orders may be intended to be aggressive or to set the bid
or offer on the market. Moreover, as noted above, Market and Primary
Pegging Orders are currently subject to collars. Lastly, the waiver
would allow the Exchange's rules to immediately and accurately reflect
the current collars for Market and Primary Pegging Orders, which were
removed inadvertently. Accordingly, the Commission finds that waiving
the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and designates the proposal operative
upon filing.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 78245 (July 7,
2016), 81 FR 45337 (July 13, 2016) (noticing SR-Phlx-2016-58) and
78667 (August 24, 2016), 81 FR 59672 (August 30, 2016) (approving
SR-Phlx-2016-58).
    \26\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 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 to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2016-113 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2016-113. 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-Phlx-2016-113 and should be
submitted on or before December 13, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-28033 Filed 11-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 73858]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29315]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER03-1025-000]

FPL Energy Wyoming, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of FPL Energy Wyoming, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
Part 34, of issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the Applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of issuances of securities and assumptions of liability is
December 13, 2013.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 3, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-29315 Filed 12-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P