[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40815-40817]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17451]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 65

[Docket ID FEMA-2011-0002]

Changes in Flood Elevation Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Modified Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) are
finalized for the communities listed below. These modified BFEs will be
used to calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and
their contents.

DATES: The effective dates for these modified BFEs are indicated on the
following table and revise the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in
effect for the listed communities prior to this date.

ADDRESSES: The modified BFEs for each community are available for
inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each
community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below of the modified BFEs
for each community listed. These modified BFEs have been published in
newspapers of local circulation and ninety (90) days have elapsed since
that publication. The Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administrator has resolved any appeals resulting from this
notification.
    The modified BFEs are not listed for each community in this notice.
However, this final rule includes the address of the Chief Executive
Officer of the community where the modified BFE determinations are
available for inspection.
    The modified BFEs are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood
Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance
with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.,
and with 44 CFR part 65.
    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is
shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
    The modified BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management
measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show
evidence of being already in effect in order to qualify or to remain
qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
    These modified BFEs, 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 modified BFEs 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 these
elevations are made final, and for the contents in those buildings. The
changes in BFEs are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    National Environmental Policy Act. This final rule is categorically
excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental
Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been
prepared.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood elevation determinations are
not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-
612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
    Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant
regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR
51735.
    Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This final rule involves no
policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism.
    Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This final rule meets
the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65

    Flood insurance, Floodplains, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Accordingly, 44 CFR part 65 is amended to read as follows:

PART 65--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 65 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,
1979 Comp., p. 376.

Sec.  65.4  [Amended]

0
2. The tables published under the authority of Sec.  65.4 are amended
as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Date and name of
         State and county           Location and case No.     newspaper where     Chief executive officer   Effective date of  modification   Community
                                                           notice was published         of community                                             No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama:
    Calhoun (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Oxford (10-04- October 22, 2010;     The Honorable Leon Smith,  February 28, 2011..............       010023
     1165).                          2692P).                October 29, 2010;     Mayor, City of Oxford,
                                                            The Anniston Star.    P.O. Box 3383, Oxford,
                                                                                AL 36203.
    Calhoun (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas   October 22, 2010;     Mr. James ``Pappy'' Dunn,  February 28, 2011..............       010013
     1165).                          of Calhoun County      October 29, 2010;     Commissioner, Calhoun
                                     (10-04-2692P).         The Anniston Star.    County, 1702 Noble
                                                                                Street, Suite 103,
                                                                                Anniston, AL 36201.
Arizona:
    Pinal (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Casa Grande    November 12, 2010;    The Honorable Robert M.    November 5, 2010...............       040080
     1172).                          (10-09-1532P).         November 19, 2010;    Jackson, Mayor, City of
                                                            The Casa Grande       Casa Grande, 510 East
                                                            Dispatch.             Florence Boulevard, Casa
                                                                                Grande, AZ 85122.
    Pinal (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Maricopa (10-  November 4, 2010;     The Honorable Anthony      March 11, 2011.................       040052
     1172).                          09-2020P).             November 11, 2010;    Smith, Mayor, City of
                                                            The Casa Grande       Maricopa, 45145 West
                                                            Dispatch.             Madison Avenue,
                                                                                Maricopa, AZ 85139.

    Pinal (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas   November 4, 2010;     Mr. Pete Rios, Chairman,   March 11, 2011.................       040077
     1172).                          of Pinal County (10-   November 11, 2010;    Pinal County Board of
                                     09-2020P).             The Casa Grande       Supervisors, P.O. Box,
                                                            Dispatch.             827 Florence, AZ 85132.
    Yavapai (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas   November 10, 2010;    Ms. Carol Springer,        March 17, 2011.................       040093
     1172).                          of Yavapai County      November 17, 2010;    Chair, Yavapai County
                                     (10-09-0470P).         The Daily Courier.    Board of Supervisors,
                                                                                1015 Fair Street
                                                                                Prescott, AZ 86305.
California: Contra Costa (FEMA      City of Oakley (10-09- December 8, 2010;     The Honorable Jim Frazier  December 24, 2010..............       060766
 Docket No.: B-1177).                3624P).                December 15, 2010;    Mayor, City of Oakley,
                                                            The Contra Costa      3231 Main Street Oakley,
                                                            Times.                CA 94561.
Colorado: Jefferson (FEMA Docket    City of Lakewood (11-  December 9, 2010;     The Honorable Bob Murphy,  December 6, 2010...............       085075
 No.: B-1177).                       08-0033P).             December 16, 2010;    Mayor, City of Lakewood,
                                                            The Golden            480 South Allison
                                                            Transcript.           Parkway, Lakewood, CO
                                                                                80226.
Florida:
    Clay (FEMA Docket No.: B-1177)  Unincorporated areas   December 17, 2010;    Mr. Travis Cummings,       December 9, 2010...............       120064
                                     of Clay County (10-    December 24, 2010;    Chairman, Clay County
                                     04-6297P).             The Florida Times-    Board of Commissioners,
                                                            Union.                P.O. Box 1366, Green
                                                                                Cove Springs, FL 32043.
    Duval (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Jacksonville   December 17, 2010;    The Honorable John         December 9, 2010...............       120077
     1177).                          (10-04-6297P).         December 24, 2010;    Peyton, Mayor, City of
                                                            The Florida Times-    Jacksonville, 117 West
                                                            Union.                Duval Street, Suite 400
                                                                                Jacksonville, FL 32202.
    Leon (FEMA Docket No.: B-1172)  Unincorporated areas   October 29, 2010;     Mr. John E. Dailey,        March 7, 2011..................       120143
                                     of Leon County (10-    November 5, 2010;     Chairman, Leon County
                                     04-8400P).             The Tallahassee       Board of Commissioners,
                                                            Democrat.             301 South Monroe Street,
                                                                                Tallahassee, FL 32301.
    Okaloosa (FEMA Docket No.: B-   Unincorporated areas   November 16, 2010;    Mr. James Campbell,        November 8, 2010...............       120173
     1172).                          of Okaloosa County     November 23, 2010;    Chairman, Okaloosa
                                     (10-04-8273P).         The Northwest         County Board of
                                                            Florida Daily News.   Commissioners, 1804
                                                                                Lewis Turner Boulevard,
                                                                                Suite 100, Fort Walton
                                                                                Beach, FL 32547.
Georgia:
    Barrow (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas   October 20, 2010;     Mr. Daniel Yearwood, Jr.,  February 24, 2011..............       130497
     1165).                          of Barrow County (10-  October 27, 2010;     Chairman, Barrow County
                                     04-4322P).             The Barrow County     Board of Commissioners,
                                                            News.                 233 East Broad Street,
                                                                                Winder, GA 30680.
    Bryan (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Richmond Hill  November 3, 2010;     The Honorable E. Harold,   March 10, 2011.................       130018
     1172).                          (10-04-6327P).         November 10, 2010;    Fowler Mayor, City of
                                                            The Bryan County      Richmond Hill, P.O. Box
                                                            News.                 250, Richmond Hill, GA
                                                                                31324.
    Tift (FEMA Docket No.: B-1172)  City of Tifton (09-04- November 19, 2010;    The Honorable J. G.        March 28, 2011.................       130171
                                     7386P).                November 26, 2010;    Cater, Jr., Mayor, City
                                                            The Tifton Gazette.   of Tifton, P.O. Box 229,
                                                                                Tifton, GA 31793.
    Tift (FEMA Docket No.: B-1172)  Unincorporated areas   November 19, 2010;    Mr. Grady Thompson,        March 28, 2011.................       130404
                                     of Tift County (09-    November 26, 2010;    Chairman, Tift County
                                     04-7386P).             The Tifton Gazette.   Commission, 225 North
                                                                                Tift Avenue, Tifton, GA
                                                                                31794.
Mississippi: DeSoto (FEMA Docket    City of Olive Branch   November 2, 2010;     The Honorable Sam Rikard,  March 9, 2011..................       280286
 No.: B-1172).                       (10-04-1806P).         November 9, 2010;     Mayor, City of Olive
                                                            The DeSoto Times-     Branch, 9200 Pigeon
                                                            Tribune.              Roost Road, Olive
                                                                                Branch, MS 38654.
North Carolina:
    Alamance (FEMA Docket No.: B-   Unincorporated areas   October 27, 2010;     Ms. Linda Massey, Chair,   March 3, 2011..................       370001
     1172).                          of Alamance County     November 3, 2010;     Alamance County Board of
                                     (10-04-6308P).         The Times-News.       Commissioners, 124 West
                                                                                Elm Street, Graham, NC
                                                                                27253.
    Mecklenburg (FEMA Docket No.:   City of Charlotte (10- October 29, 2010;     The Honorable Anthony      March 7, 2011..................       370159
     B-1172).                        04-7369P).             November 5, 2010;     Foxx, Mayor, City of
                                                            The Charlotte         Charlotte, 600 East 4th
                                                            Observer.             Street, 15th floor,
                                                                                Charlotte, NC 28202.
    Union (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas   October 29, 2010;     Mr. Jerry Simpson,         March 7, 2011..................       370234
     1172).                          of Union County (10-   November 5, 2010;     Chairman, Union County
                                     04-7369P).             The Enquirer-         Board of Commissioners,
                                                            Journal.              500 North Main Street,
                                                                                Monroe, NC 28112.
South Carolina: Dorchester (FEMA    Unincorporated areas   November 3, 2010;     Mr. Larry Hargett,         March 10, 2011.................       450068
 Docket No.: B-1177).                of Dorchester County   November 10, 2010;    Chairman, Dorchester
                                     (10-04-7426P).         The Post and          County Council, 201
                                                            Courier.              Johnson Street, St.
                                                                                George, SC 29477.
South Dakota:
    Lawrence (FEMA Docket No.: B-   City of Spearfish (10- November 10, 2010;    The Honorable Jerry        November 3, 2010...............       460046
     1172).                          08-0269P).             November 17, 2010;    Krambeck, Mayor, City of
                                                            The Black Hills       Spearfish, 625 North 5th
                                                            Pioneer.              Street Spearfish, SD
                                                                                57783.
    Minnehaha (FEMA Docket No.: B-  City of Brandon (10-   November 10, 2010;    The Honorable Larry        March 17, 2011.................       460296
     1172).                          08-0604P).             November 17, 2010;    Beesley, Mayor, City of
                                                            The Argus Leader.     Brandon, 304 Main
                                                                                Avenue, Brandon, SD
                                                                                57005.
    Minnehaha (FEMA Docket No.: B-  Unincorporated areas   November 10, 2010;    Mr. Ken McFarland          March 17, 2011.................       460057
     1172).                          of Minnehaha County    November 17, 2010;    Chairman, Minnehaha
                                     (10-08-0604P).         The Argus Leader.     County Board of
                                                                                Commissioners, 415 North
                                                                                Dakota Avenue, Sioux
                                                                                Falls, SD 57104.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Dated: June 15, 2011
Sandra K. Knight,
Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, Mitigation,
Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-17451 Filed 7-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register: January 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 14)]
[Notices]
[Page 3579-3582]
[DOCID:fr23ja06-104]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53112; File No. SR-CBOE-2004-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Establish
Rules for a Screen-Based Trading System for Non-option Securities

January 12, 2006.

    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 April 14, 2004, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been
substantially prepared by the Exchange. On January 11, 2006, CBOE
submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\3\ The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaced the original rule filing in its
entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE proposes to adopt rules governing the trading of non-option
securities on CBOEdirect, the Exchange's screen-based trading platform.
The proposed new system would be called the Stock Trading on CBOEdirect
System (``STOC System'' or ``System''). The text of the proposed rule
change is available at CBOE's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal/default.aspx
), at CBOE's principal office, 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, CBOE 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. CBOE 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
    As an Intermarket Trading System (``ITS'') participant, CBOE trades
a small number of non-option securities.\4\ These products are not
traded on CBOE's options trading platform. Instead, they trade on
CBOE's stand-alone stock platform in an open-outcry environment
pursuant to Chapter XXX (30) of CBOE's rules. In 2003, the Commission
approved Chapters XL (40) through XLVI (46) of CBOE's rules,\5\ which
established a purely screen-based trading platform for the trading of
options on CBOE.\6\ That screen-based platform is commonly referred to
as CBOEdirect, and components of that system have been successfully
used to create CBOE's Hybrid Trading System (currently in use for
options trading), to facilitate the trading of single-stock futures by
OneChicago, and to trade security futures products on the newly-created
CBOE Futures Exchange.\7\ CBOE now proposes to adopt a new set of rules
as Chapters L (50) through LV (55) of CBOE's rules to allow for the
trading of non-option securities in a purely screen-based environment.
CBOEdirect would be the foundation for this platform. CBOE intends that
all products currently traded under Chapter 30 would migrate to the new
platform and trade pursuant to Chapters 50-55. The proposed new
platform is called the Stock Trading on CBOEdirect System, or STOC
System. The STOC System would be substantially similar to CBOE's
screen-based platform for options in that it (1) would be entirely
screen-based; (2) would utilize a DPM/LMM-driven model with optional
supplemental liquidity provided by STOC Market-Makers; (3) would
utilize a configurable matching algorithm based on either price-time or
pro-rata priority with optional priority overlays; and (4) would
integrate all quotes and orders entered into the system into the STOC
book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Currently, CBOE trades four such products.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47628 (April 3,
2003), 68 FR 17697 (April 10, 2003) (approving SR-CBOE-00-55); see
also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45829 (April 25, 2002), 67
FR 31002 (May 8, 2002) (notice of filing of SR-CBOE-00-55).
    \6\ At this time, CBOE does not trade options pursuant to
Chapters 40-46.
    \7\ CBOE represents that these different uses of the CBOEdirect
platform have not had, and will not have, an adverse affect on
trading or the stability of the platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE believes the STOC System would greatly enhance the trading of
stock products on the Exchange. Unlike CBOE's current non-option
security trading system, the STOC System would be fully integrated with
ITS to facilitate the sending and receipt of ITS Commitments. It would
automatically execute marketable orders against CBOE's quote up to the
size of the quote (assuming such executions would not cause an
impermissible trade-through of another exchange's quote). STOC Market-
Maker quotes and all orders (customer or otherwise) would be integrated
into the STOC Book. Further, the audit trail process would be greatly
simplified for regulatory purposes.
    Almost all of the rules contained in proposed Chapters 50-55 are
substantially identical to previously approved rules contained in
Chapters 30 and 40-46 of CBOE's rules. Of course, not all the rules
from those chapters are proposed to be adopted for the STOC System
rules--only ones that would be appropriate for screen-based stock
trading. Any new rules or material modifications to the rules proposed
to be adopted from Chapters 30 and 40-46 are explained below.
Chapter 50
    This chapter provides an introduction to the STOC System by setting
forth definitions (including definitions of the various market
participant types), explaining the application of other CBOE rules,
setting forth the registration process for members,\8\ stating
communication access guidelines, and establishing a limitation on
liability with respect to certain reporting authorities. All of the
rules in this chapter come from Chapters 40 and 41 of CBOE's rules,
except for proposed CBOE Rule 50.7, Limitation on Reporting
Authorities' Liability, which is based on CBOE Rule 30.55.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ With respect to the registration process for members, any
Exchange member who chooses to participate on the STOC System must
apply with the Exchange to act as a STOC Market-Maker, STOC Broker,
or Proprietary Trader in accordance with proposed CBOE Rule 50.4.
Such applications must be submitted to the Exchange Membership
Committee for approval pursuant to CBOE Rule 3.9. CBOE Rule 3.9
provides that an applicant must submit an application in a form and
manner prescribed by the Exchange and describes the application
procedures and process for approval or disapproval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chapter 51
    This chapter contains rules concerning operational matters--for
example, business hours, units of trading, minimum increments for bids
and offers, and types or orders handled. Proposed CBOE Rules 51.1,
51.2, 51.4, 51.5, 51.7, and 51.8 through 51.11 are rules that can also
be found in Chapter

30. CBOE Rule 51.3 is based on current CBOE Rule 42.2.
Chapter 52
    This chapter contains proposed trading and order processing rules
for the STOC System. Proposed CBOE Rule 52.1 describes the System's
matching algorithm and governs priority on the System. It is similar to
CBOE Rule 43.1, which governs priority for options orders. As proposed,
the appropriate STOC Trading Committee would apply one of two priority
schemes, on a security-by-security basis. Trades would be allocated by
the System pursuant to either price-time priority or pro-rata priority.
Once one of those two priority schemes is in place, the appropriate
STOC Trading Committee could implement additional optional priority
overlays. Namely, an additional priority could be provided to public
customer orders, the market turner, or to the STOC DPM/LMM (CBOE's
specialist equivalent) \9\ as part of a participation entitlement.\10\
Thus, if pro-rata priority were in place for a particular security, and
the market turner, public customer, and trade participation right
overlays were in place (in that order of priority), incoming marketable
orders would be allocated by the System to all participants in pro-rata
fashion after the participant that first established that price (the
market turner), any public customers resting at the best price, and the
STOC DPM/LMM for the product (assuming its order and/or quote is at the
best price) have been satisfied (in that order). As part of the
participation right, the STOC DPM/LMM could never receive a quantity
larger than the size of its quote. The participation right percentage
would be established pursuant to proposed CBOE Rule 53.56 by the STOC
DPM Committee and could not exceed 40%. Any participant (including a
public customer) could be a market turner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Throughout the proposed rules, references to STOC DPMs are
also applicable to STOC LMMs (which are essentially rotating STOC
DPMs). A product cannot have both a STOC DPM and a STOC LMM
appointed to it. See proposed CBOE Rule 53.51 (defining STOC LMM).
    \10\ Proposed CBOE Rule 52.1(b)(3)(C) provides that the
participation entitlement may not be in effect unless the public
customer priority is in effect and ahead of the participation
entitlement in the priority sequence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.2 would govern the System's opening
procedures. The opening would occur in one of two ways, depending on
whether CBOE was the primary market for a security. If CBOE were the
primary market, the System would calculate a price point at which the
most pre-opening buy and sell orders could be matched (based on share
volume) and then execute those orders to establish an opening price and
open trading. If CBOE were not the primary market, the STOC DPM/LMM
would open the security at a single price that matches the primary
market or at a price that does not trade-through another exchange's
quotes. This would allow the STOC DPM to assess the quantity and
balance of pre-opening orders and to interact with the primary market
as necessary via ITS.
    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.4 would govern ``clearly erroneous''
transactions executed on the Exchange. The proposed rule sets forth the
procedure for requesting Exchange review, the review procedures, and
the steps taken in the event of system disruption or malfunction. The
Exchange notes that this proposed rule is based on PCX Equities
(``PCXE'') Rule 7.10, which governs clearly erroneous executions.
    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.6 would govern market order processing. It
provides that market orders would automatically execute against the
STOC Book (including against orders behind the best price at varying
price points) until the order is fully executed or until such execution
would result in an impermissible trade-through.\11\ To the extent a
market order is not automatically executed against the STOC book
because CBOE is not the NBBO, the System would ``flash'' the order at
the NBBO price to STOC Market-Makers on the System (to see if they
would match or improve the NBBO) for a period of time not to exceed
three seconds. After such time, if the order has not been traded, the
System will route it to the STOC DPM/LMM for manual handling (which
would allow the DPM/LMM to transmit an ITS commitment on behalf of the
order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In most cases any trade-through would be impermissible, but
the Commission has provided a temporary 3-tick exemption for certain
products. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46428 (August 28,
2002), 67 FR 56607 (September 4, 2002) (order implementing the
exemption as a pilot program); Securities Exchange Act Release No.
52382 (September 6, 2005), 70 FR 53695 (September 9, 2005) (order
extending pilot program through June 28, 2006). Any such exemption
would be factored into what can automatically execute on the STOC
System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.7, which would govern limit order processing,
provides that limit orders would be booked by the System and that they
would not automatically execute at prices inferior to the NBBO. When a
limit order is received that is marketable against the quote of another
exchange but not marketable on CBOE, the System would ``flash'' the
order at its limit price to STOC Traders on the System (to see if they
would match or improve the NBBO) for a period of time not to exceed
three seconds. After such time, if the limit order has not been traded,
the System would route it to the STOC DPM/LMM for manual handling
(which would allow the DPM/LMM to transmit an ITS Commitment on behalf
of the limit order).
    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.8 provides that market odd-lot orders would
be executed against STOC Market-Maker interest on the STOC Book
provided such interest equals the NBBO. If no STOC Market-Makers are
quoting at the NBBO, odd-lot orders would route to the STOC DPM/LMM for
execution. Limit odd lot orders would execute against the STOC DPM/LMM
if (i) the limit price is marketable against the STOC DPM/LMM quote, or
(ii) a trade occurs at the limit price on another exchange. Pre-opening
odd lot orders that are marketable against the opening price would
receive the opening price.
    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.10 would provide that the System would
automatically execute inbound ITS Commitments against the best prices
available in the STOC Book to the extent such commitments are
marketable. When an ITS Commitment is not marketable against the STOC
Book, the System would ``flash'' the commitment at its limit price to
STOC Traders on the System (to see if they would match or improve the
NBBO) for a period of time not to exceed 3 seconds. After such time,
any unexecuted portion would be cancelled by the System. Inbound market
ITS Commitments would be executed at the NBBO or cancelled.
    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.11(a) governs the facilitation of the non-
option security portion of option-related complex orders. This rule
defines a complex order as an order involving one or more option order
components and one or more non-option security order components. Such
facilitation transactions would be entered into the STOC System at a
price at or within the prevailing quotation for the non-option security
at the time the options portion of the complex orders are executed. The
non-option security portion of the order would have priority at that
price irrespective of pre-existing bids and offers and any priority
designations in place pursuant to proposed CBOE Rule 52.1, provided
that the option order component(s) bettered the corresponding bid
(offer) in the options market on which they were executed.
    Proposed CBOE Rule 52.11(b), regarding crossing transactions on the
STOC System, provides that a STOC Trader that wishes to cross two
original orders or to facilitate an original order

must first send a Request for Quote (RFQ) with size. Within 10-30
seconds, as determined by the appropriate STOC Trading Committee, from
the conclusion of the RFQ response period, the orders may, at the STOC
Trader's discretion, be crossed (i) between the bid-offer if the
transaction would be less than 25,000 shares; or (ii) at or between the
bid-offer if the transaction would be greater than 25,000 shares and in
which case the cross transaction will have priority. The cross
transaction information would be received and effected by the
Exchange's Help Desk.
    The remaining rules in proposed Chapter 52 are taken from existing
CBOE rules. CBOE Rule 52.3 (Unusual Market Conditions) is based on
existing CBOE Rule 30.5, and CBOE Rules 52.5 (Order Entry and
Maintenance), 52.13 (Firm Quotations), and 52.14 (Quote and Trading
Information) are based on rules contained in Chapter 30. CBOE Rule 52.9
(Processing of Requests for Quotes) is based on existing CBOE Rule
43.11.
Chapter 53
    The chapter relates to requirements and obligations of members,
both generally and by participant type (e.g., STOC DPM, STOC Broker,
etc.). Proposed Section A carries over Chapter 30 rules that currently
apply to all members trading non-option securities on CBOE. They relate
to matters such as trading in member accounts, members acting as
brokers, short sale requirements, and doing business with the public.
    Proposed Section B contains provisions that are applicable to all
STOC Market-Makers (including STOC DPMs/LMMs). These provisions are
based on similar provisions that apply to SBT Market-Makers trading
options under Chapters 40-46. Accordingly, the registration and
appointment process for STOC Market-Makers is identical to the process
in place for SBT Market-Makers. Further, STOC Market-Maker obligations,
as set forth in proposed CBOE Rule 53.23, are centered on RFQ response
requirements. STOC Market-Makers that are not providing a two-sided
quote at the time of an RFQ would have to respond to the RFQs with a
two-sided market that must last in duration for at least 30 seconds
(unless traded) and for a minimum size designated by the appropriate
STOC Market Performance Committee. As part of their obligations, STOC
Market-Makers would be required to respond to at least 75% of all RFQs
in their appointed securities.
    Proposed Section C sets forth additional considerations and
requirements applicable to STOC DPMs and LMMs. As previously stated, a
STOC LMM essentially would be a rotating STOC DPM. There would never be
a STOC DPM and STOC LMM for the same security. As with the STOC Market-
Maker provisions, these provisions are patterned after rules in Chapter
44. STOC DPMs/LMMs would be required to provide continuous two-sided
markets in assigned securities and to handle customer orders received
by the STOC System that are not automatically executed or booked. Thus,
STOC DPMs/LMMs would have dealer and agent functions and obligations.
    Proposed Sections D and E relate to definitions and requirements
applicable to STOC Brokers and Clearing Firm Brokers. These provisions
are identical to provisions in Chapter 45.
Chapters 54 and 55
    Proposed Chapter 54 sets forth additional provisions that would be
applicable to certain product types that could trade on the STOC
System. These product types, which include index portfolio receipts
(IPRs) \12\ and Index Portfolio Shares (IPSs),\13\ are currently
available for trading on CBOE under Chapter 30. All of the proposed
rules in this Chapter are identical to rules contained in Chapter 30.
Proposed Chapter 55 contains CBOE's ITS-related rules, which are
modeled on PCXE's ITS rules. CBOE deemed those an appropriate model
because, like the proposed STOC system, PCXE is an all-electronic
trading platform. Lastly, CBOE is attaching an index to Chapters 50-55
to set forth the applicability of other CBOE rules to trading under
Chapters 50-55.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See CBOE Rule 1.1, Interpretations and Policies .02.
    \13\ See CBOE Rule 1.1, Interpretations and Policies .03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion
    CBOE believes that the proposed migration of trading of non-option
securities to the STOC System would significantly enhance the trading
of these products on the Exchange. CBOE proposes that Chapters 50-55 be
approved on a pilot basis for a period commencing on the approval date
of this filing and ending on the final compliance date for the Order
Protection Rule of Regulation NMS.\14\ CBOE acknowledges that it will
need to file additional rule changes to comply with Regulation NMS,\15\
and the Exchange commits to submitting such filings in a timely manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 242.611.
    \15\ See generally Securities Exchange Act Release 51808 (June
9, 2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005) (order adopting rules under
Regulation NMS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Exchange Act in general and furthers the objectives
of Section 6(b)(5) in particular in that it would enhance the trading
of non-option securities on CBOE and it should promote just and
equitable principles of trade, serve to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and protect investors and the public interest.

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would not
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments with respect
to the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date 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 such proposed rule change, as amended, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be
submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-CBOE-2004-21 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2004-21. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section. Copies of
such filings 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 only submit information you
wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File
Number SR-CBOE-2004-21 and should be submitted on or before February
13, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-662 Filed 1-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: January 15, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 10)]
[Notices]
[Page 2557-2558]
[DOCID:fr15ja10-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0701]

Interim Policy for the Sharing of Information Collected by the
Coast Guard Nationwide Automatic Identification System

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of policy and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has developed an interim policy for the access
and sharing of information collected by the Coast Guard Nationwide
Automatic Identification System (NAIS). The Coast Guard is also seeking
comments on the applicability and levels of sharing of information
collected by the NAIS, the definition of historical NAIS information,
and any commercial or security sensitivities with respect to sharing
NAIS information in order to assist us in the development of the final
policy on NAIS information sharing. This policy would serve as guidance
for Coast Guard program managers and field units regarding the sharing
of information collected by the NAIS with foreign governments, Federal,
State, local, and Indian tribal governments, and non-government
entities.

DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before February 16,
2010, or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.

ADDRESSES: This notice and the interim policy are available in the
docket and can be viewed by going to http://www.regulations.gov,
inserting USCG-2009-0701 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking
``Search.'' You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2009-0701 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or e-mail Irene Hoffman Moffatt, Maritime Domain Awareness and
Information Sharing Staff (CG-51M), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202-
372-2642, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments and related material on the
sharing of information collected by the NAIS. All comments received
will be posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you have provided.
    Submitting comments: If you submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this notice (USCG-2009-0701) and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online, or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop-down menu, select
``Notices'' and insert ``USCG-2009-0701'' in the ``Keyword'' box. Click
``Search,'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions'' column.
If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.
    Viewing the comments: To view the comments, go to http://
www.regulations.gov, click on the ``read comments'' box, which will
then become highlighted in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-
2009-0701'' and click ``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in
the ``Actions'' column. If you do not have access to the internet, you
may view the docket online by visiting the Docket Management Facility
in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to
use the Docket Management Facility.
    Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a
Privacy Act, system of records notice regarding our public dockets in
the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard has developed a policy that will serve as guidance
for Coast Guard program managers and field units regarding the sharing
of information collected by the NAIS with foreign governments, Federal,
State, local, and Indian tribal governments, and non-government
entities. Sharing information collected by the NAIS would improve
navigation safety, enhance the ability to identify and track vessels,
heighten our over-all Maritime Domain Awareness (the effective
understanding of anything associated with the global maritime
environment that could affect the security, safety, economy, or
environment of the U.S.), address threats to maritime transportation
safety and security, facilitate commerce, and enhance environmental
protection efforts.
    The Automatic Identification System (AIS) was developed to enhance
navigation safety through collision avoidance, waterways management,
and surveillance. It is a maritime digital broadcast technology that
continually transmits and receives voiceless exchange of vessel data.
The AIS technology and communication protocol have been adopted by the
International Maritime Organization as a global standard for ship-to-
ship, ship-to-shore, and shore-to-ship communication of navigation
information. In accordance with section 80.393 of the Rules and
Regulations of the Federal Communications Commission (47 CFR 80.393),
``Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) are a maritime broadcast
service.'' As a broadcast system (where communications are intended to
be

received by the public), there is no expectation of privacy of any
transmitted position, binary, or safety related messages, or any
information transmitted on AIS. In response to the Maritime
Transportation Security Act of 2002, the Coast Guard has developed a
two-way maritime data communication system based on AIS technology,
which is referred to as the NAIS.

Levels of Information Sharing

    The following three levels pertain to information collected by the
Coast Guard NAIS.
    The First level (Level A) is unfiltered (real-time) information
collected by the NAIS that is less than 12 hours from transmission.
Level A information may be shared with U.S. or foreign governments for
legitimate internal government use (i.e., law enforcement, maritime
safety, defense, and security purposes). The final policy would clarify
that this information should be handled in accordance with Department
of Homeland Security policies concerning sensitive but unclassified
information, including by marking this information ``For Official Use
Only'' (FOUO), or any successor controlled unclassified information
marking and handling requirements subsequently implemented by the
Department. Level A information would be handled as FOUO, or otherwise
in accordance with another controlled unclassified information
designation approved by the Department, due to the potential commercial
sensitivities of the information collected by the NAIS and the
unfiltered, embedded addressed and encrypted information, the release
of which may pose a security risk.
    The Second level (Level B) is filtered (real-time) information
collected by the NAIS that is less than 12 hours from transmission.
Level B information may be shared with foreign governments or U.S.
Federal, State, local, and Indian tribal governments, and with non-
government entities that are contractually supporting a Federal
government agency's operations or research and development efforts,
Coast Guard validated port partners, or non-governmental organizations
with which the U.S. has an established or formalized relationship
(e.g., port authorities, pilot associations, local law enforcement
agencies, etc.). Level B may filter out encrypted and addressed
information as appropriate and will be filtered as the NAIS system
filtering capabilities become available. As with Level A information,
the final policy would clarify that this information should also be
handled as FOUO or other appropriate designation due to the potential
(but unverified) commercial sensitivities of the information collected
by the NAIS and, if applicable, the embedded addressed and encrypted
information, the release of which may pose a security risk.
    The Third level (Level C) is information collected by the NAIS that
is more than 12 hours from transmission. This information should be
considered historical and no longer needing to be handled as FOUO.
Requests for filtered or unfiltered historical information would be
processed in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
552.
    In an effort to continue to enhance navigation safety and security,
and to protect commercial and proprietary interests, this information
may not be used for purposes other than those intended for the
disclosure as approved. Foreign governments, Federal, State, local and
Indian tribal governments, and non-government entities shall not
retransmit or redistribute the information stream in any form other
than those intended for the disclosure as approved, shall not charge a
fee for its usage, and will be required to execute documentation
imposing restrictions on the use of information collected by the NAIS.
Any provision of information collected by the NAIS to foreign
governments will be coordinated with and through the Department of
State, as needed.
    Implementation of the final policy would be subject to NAIS system
capability, especially with respect to evolving capabilities to filter
NAIS information.

Request for Comments

    We request your general comments on the applicability and levels of
the sharing of information collected by the NAIS, the definition of
historical NAIS information, and any commercial or security
sensitivities with respect to sharing of information collected by the
NAIS.
    We also seek comments on any or all of following specific questions
on the development of the NAIS final policy:
    1. How might providing real-time, near real-time, or historical
NAIS information to the public impact maritime commerce?
    2. What would be the impact of providing this information, if any,
on the following?
    a. Safety of ships and passengers or crew,
    b. Security of ships and their cargo,
    c. Economic advantage or disadvantage to commercial stakeholders,
    d. Environmental impact on extractable resources or coastal
activities.
    3. Is information collected by the NAIS considered sensitive?
    a. Is real-time or near real-time information collected by the NAIS
viewed differently than historical NAIS information, and if so, how?
    b. Does the sharing of information collected by the NAIS generate
concern about unfair commercial advantage? If so, for which segments of
the industry is this a concern?
    c. Is there a timeframe within which real-time or historical
information collected by the NAIS is considered sensitive or is no
longer considered sensitive?
    d. Given that ships last for decades and that their capabilities
and capacities are relatively stable, is there a concern that
historical NAIS information might be analyzed to derive a competitive
advantage?
    4. What controls on sharing real-time, near real-time, or
historical information collected by the NAIS with the public are
suitable?
    a. Who should receive each type of NAIS information?
    b. What are appropriate uses of information collected by the NAIS?
    c. Do message types matter?
    d. Should addressed messages be handled differently from broadcast
messages? Do addressed messages contain information significant to
understanding maritime activity? Should addressed messages be shared
with the public?

Written comments and responses to the above questions will be added to
the docket number for this notice (USCG-2009-0701). The Coast Guard
intends to review and analyze all comments received in order to develop
the final policy for the sharing of information collected by the NAIS.
    This notice is issued under authority of 5 U.S.C. 552 and 46 U.S.C.
70114.

    Dated: January 8, 2010.
Dana A. Goward,
Director, Assessment, Integration and Risk Management, U.S. Coast
Guard.
[FR Doc. 2010-632 Filed 1-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7931-7934]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0038; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-110-AD;
Amendment 39-16203; AD 2010-04-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A380-841, -842, and -861
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    During the flight test campaign of the A380-861 model (Engine
Alliance powered), some cracks were found on the Movable Flap Track
Fairing number 6 (MFTF6).
    These cracks were located at the pivot attachment support-ring
and at the U-frame in the attachment area to aft-kinematic. In
addition, delamination has been observed within the monolithic
Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) structure around the pivot
support-ring.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to in-flight loss
of the MFTF6, potentially resulting in injuries to persons
on the ground.
* * * * *
This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 10, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of March 10,
2010.
    On May 28, 2009 (74 FR 22422, May 13, 2009), the Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain
other publication listed in the AD.
    We must receive comments on this AD by April 9, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 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 AD, the regulatory 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1175; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On May 1, 2009, the FAA issued AD 2009-10-07, Amendment 39-15902
(74 FR 22422, May 13, 2009). That AD required actions intended to
address an unsafe condition on the products listed above.
    Since we issued that AD, the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Community, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009-0152,
dated July 14, 2009 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    During the flight test campaign of the A380-861 model (Engine
Alliance powered), some cracks were found on the Movable Flap Track
Fairing number 6 (MFTF6).
    These cracks were located at the pivot attachment support-ring
and at the U-frame in the attachment area to aft-kinematic. In
addition, delamination has been observed within the monolithic
Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) structure around the pivot
support-ring.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to in-flight loss
of the MFTF6, potentially resulting in injuries to persons
on the ground.
    To prevent the risk of a MFTF6 detachment, EASA AD
2008-0216 (which corresponds to FAA AD 2009-10-07) required an
inspection programme in order to

detect cracks before they become critical and in case of findings to
replace the MFTF6.
    This AD, which supersedes EASA AD 2008-0216:
     Cancels the MFTF6 General Visual Inspection
requirement,
     Refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8014 Revision
1 * * *
     Introduces an optional terminating action [installing
reinforced part].

    AD 2009-10-07 applies to all Airbus Model A380-841, -842, and -861
airplanes. This AD retains the requirements of AD 2009-10-07. Airplanes
were removed from the applicability of AD 2009-10-07 by excluding
airplanes on which Airbus modification 68729 is done in production.
This AD also revises the compliance time for the inspections of
replaced parts. The compliance time is reduced for certain parts and
extended for certain other parts, depending on the flight cycles since
first installation of the part. The replacement parts must be inspected
within the thresholds specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.

Relevant Service Information

    Since we issued AD 2009-10-07, Airbus has issued Mandatory Service
Bulletin A380-57-8014, Revision 01, dated June 5, 2009; and Service
Bulletin A380-57-8017, dated June 5, 2009. The actions described in
this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition
identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    There are no products of this type currently registered in the
United States. However, this rule is necessary to ensure that the
described unsafe condition is addressed if any of these products are
placed on the U.S. Register in the future.

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    Since there are currently no domestic operators of this product,
notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are
unnecessary.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0038; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NM-110-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this 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 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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15902 (74 FR
22422, May 13, 2009) and adding the following new AD:

2010-04-10 Airbus: Amendment 39-16203. Docket No. FAA-2010-0038;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-110-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective March
10, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2009-10-07, Amendment 39-15902.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A380-841, -842, and -861
airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers, except
airplanes on which Airbus modification 68729 has been done in
production.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    During the flight test campaign of the A380-861 model (Engine
Alliance powered), some cracks were found on the Movable Flap Track
Fairing number 6 (MFTF6).
    These cracks were located at the pivot attachment support-ring
and at the U-frame in the attachment area to aft-kinematic. In
addition, delamination has been observed within the monolithic
Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) structure around the pivot
support-ring.
    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to in-flight loss
of the MFTF6, potentially resulting in injuries to persons
on the ground.
    To prevent the risk of a MFTF6 detachment, EASA AD
2008-0216 required an inspection programme in order to detect cracks
before they become critical and in case of findings to replace the
MFTF6.
    This AD, which supersedes EASA AD 2008-0216:
     Cancels the MFTF6 General Visual Inspection
requirement,
     Refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8014 Revision
1, * * *
     Introduces an optional terminating action.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2009-10-07, With Revised Inspection,
Service Information, and Compliance Time for the Inspection of Replaced
Parts

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (f)(1)(i) or
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD for the left- and right-hand MFTF6,
do a special detailed (ultrasonic and high-frequency eddy current)
inspection of the filet radii of pivot supports, monolithic carbon
fibre reinforced plastic structures, and radii of the U-frame, for
cracking and delamination in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8014, dated November
21, 2008; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A380-57-8014,
Revision 01, dated June 5, 2009. After the effective date of this
AD, use only Revision 01.
    (i) For Airbus Model A380-841 and -842 airplanes: Before the
MFTF6 has accumulated 500 total flight cycles since its
first installation on an airplane, or within 30 flight hours after
May 28, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-10-07), whichever occurs
later.
    (ii) For Model A380-861 airplanes: Before the MFTF6 has
accumulated 100 total flight cycles since its first installation on
an airplane, or within 30 flight hours after May 28, 2009, whichever
occurs later.
    (2) If no cracking and no delamination are found during any
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, repeat the
inspections required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD thereafter at
intervals not to exceed the applicable time specified in paragraph
(f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For Model A380-841 and -842 airplanes: 50 flight cycles.
    (ii) For Model A380-861 airplanes: 10 flight cycles.
    (3) If any cracking or delamination is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, before
further flight, replace the MFTF6 with a new or serviceable
part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A380-57-8014, dated November 21, 2008; or Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A380-57-8014, Revision 01, dated June 5,
2009. For parts replaced before the effective date of this AD,
repeat the inspections specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD at
the later of the times specified in paragraphs (f)(3)(i) and
(f)(3)(ii) of this AD. For parts replaced on or after the effective
date of this AD, repeat the inspections specified in paragraph
(f)(1) of this AD at the applicable time defined in paragraph (f)(1)
of this AD. After the effective date of this AD, use only Revision
01 for the replacement.
    (i) At the applicable time defined in paragraph (f)(2) of this
AD.
    (ii) At the applicable time defined in paragraph (f)(1) of this
AD.

New Requirements of This AD

Actions and Compliance

    (g) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) In case of MFTF6 replacement, submit a report using
Appendix 01 of Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8014, dated November
21, 2008, to Airbus Central Entity, Dept SEES5, 1, Rond Point
Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac, France; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>at the applicable time specified in
paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (g)(1)(ii) of this AD. The report must
include the serial number of the removed MFTF6, the
associated airplane manufacturer serial number, and the number of
flight cycles accumulated by the MFTF6 at the time of
removal.
    (i) If the MFTF6 replacement was done on or after the
effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after
the MFTF6 removal.
    (ii) If the MFTF6 replacement was done before the
effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after
the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Replacement of the MFTF6 with a reinforced
MFTF6, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8017, dated June 5, 2009,
terminates the requirements of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal maintenance inspector
(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or
lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District
Office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (i) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009-0152, dated July 14, 2009;
Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8014, dated November 21, 2008;
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A380-57-8014, Revision 01, dated
June 5, 2009; and Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8017, dated June
5, 2009; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8014, including
Appendix 01, dated November 21, 2008; Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A380-57-8014, Revision 01, dated June 5, 2009; and Airbus
Service Bulletin A380-57-8017, dated June 5, 2009; as applicable; to
do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies
otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A380-57-8014, Revision 01, dated June 5, 2009; and Airbus Service
Bulletin A380-57-8017, dated June 5, 2009; under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and
1 CFR part 51.
    (2) The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the
incorporation by reference of Airbus Service Bulletin A380-57-8014,
including Appendix 01, dated November 21, 2008, on May 28, 2009 (74
FR 22422, May 13, 2009).
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EANA (Airworthiness Office); 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 562 110 253;
Fax +33 562 110 307; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the 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
425-227-1221 or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 5, 2010.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-3121 Filed 2-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P