[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25755-25758]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10410]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74840; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2015-31]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Modifying Its Rules To
Provide for the Use of Ports That Provide Connectivity to the
Exchange's Trading Systems Solely for the Cancellation or ``Takedown''
of Quotes and Changes to the NYSE Amex Options Fee Schedule Related to
This Quote Takedown Service

April 29, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on April 17, 2015, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to modify its rules to provide for the use of
ports that provide connectivity to the Exchange's trading systems
solely for the cancellation or ``takedown'' of quotes. In addition, the
proposed rule change reflects changes to the NYSE Amex Options Fee
Schedule (``Fee Schedule'') related to this quote takedown service. The
text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify its rules to provide for the use of
ports that provide connectivity to the Exchange's trading systems
solely for the cancellation or ``takedown'' of quotes. In addition, the
proposed rule change reflects changes to the Fee Schedule related to
this quote takedown service.
Order/Quote Entry Ports
    The Exchange currently makes available to ATP Holders order/quote
entry ports for connectivity to Exchange trading systems (each an
``order/quote entry port''). ATP Holders may be authorized to utilize
order/quote entry ports for option activity on NYSE Amex Options and
incur monthly Port Fees. Currently, the Exchange charges $450 per
month, per order/quote entry port for the first 40 ports and $150 per
month, per order/quote entry port for any additional ports in excess of
40 (i.e., ports 41 and greater).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Fee Schedule, available at, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/amex-options/NYSE_Amex_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf. Unutilized order/quote entry
ports that connect to the Exchange via its backup datacenter are
considered established for backup purposes and are not subject to
Port Fees. In addition, for purpose of calculating the number of
order/quote entry ports, the Exchange shall aggregate the ports of
Affiliates. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While order/quote entry ports may be used by ATP Holders registered
as Market Makers to both enter and cancel or remove quotes, Market
Makers may dedicate certain ports solely to the removal of quotes,
i.e., a ``quote takedown port,'' \5\ and, until now, the

Exchange has treated such dedicated quote takedown ports the same as
order/quote entry port for Port Fee purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Trader Update regarding Options Pre-Trade and Post-Trade
Risk Controls, available at, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/amex-options/US_Options_Risk_Controls_Client_Document.pdf
(announcing availability of ports dedicated to quote takedown to
minimize latency for quote takedowns).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote Takedown Ports
    The Exchange is proposing to modify its rules to provide ports
specifically dedicated to quote cancellation or ``quote takedown''
(each a ``Quote Takedown Port'') as a service distinct from order/quote
entry ports, which may be used both for entering quotes or orders and
removing or cancelling quotes. The proposed Quote Takedown Ports would
be designed to assist ATP Holders registered as Marker Makers in the
management of, and risk control over, their quotes, particularly if
they have a large number of options issues in their appointment. For
example, if a Market Maker detects market indications that may
influence the direction or bias of its quotes, the Market Maker may
attempt to cancel all of its quotes in a number of classes, thereby
avoiding unintended executions, while it evaluates the direction of the
market. Thus, to reduce uncertainty, the Marker Maker may submit to the
Exchange a ``quote takedown'' message through a dedicated Quote
Takedown Port for the prompt removal of quotes. By entering a quote
takedown message through a dedicated Quote Takedown Port, a Market
Maker may reduce its exposure to risk because of heavy quote traffic-
induced latency.
    The Exchange proposes to modify the Fee Schedule to provide that
certain Quote Takedown Ports would not be subject to Port Fees.
Specifically, for each order/quote entry port utilized, the Exchange
proposes to allow Market Makers to utilize, free of charge, one Quote
Takedown Port. Because Quote Takedown Ports would not be available for
quote or order submission, the Exchange is proposing to allow one Quote
Takedown Port free of charge for every order/quote entry port that a
Market Maker utilizes. In other words, provided a Market Maker does not
exceed a 1-to-1 ratio of order/quote entry port-to-Quote Takedown Port,
the Quote Takedown Port(s) would be free (the ``1-to-1 ratio'').
However, a Market Maker that exceeds the 1-to-1 ratio would be charged
for additional Quote Takedown Ports. For example, a Market Maker with
thirty-five (35) order/quote entry ports and forty-two (42) Quote
Takedown Ports would have forty-two (42) ports subject to charge
because the Exchange would charge for the 35 order/quote entry ports
and the seven Quote Takedown Ports that exceed the 1-1 ratio (42-35=7).
The Exchange would not charge for the first 35 Quote Takedown Ports
because those ports would meet the 1-to-1 ratio.
    Similarly, the Exchange would not include those Quote Takedown
Ports that meet the 1-to-1 ratio to determine a Market Maker's total
number of ports for purposes of calculating Port Fees. As noted above,
the Exchange charges $450 per month, per port for the first forty
ports, and $150 per month for each additional port in excess of forty.
Thus, using the example above, the Exchange would not count the thirty-
five (35) Quote Takedown Ports (which align with the 35 order/quote
entry ports) against the Market Maker's total number of ports utilized,
but would count seven (7) additional Quote Takedown Ports. Thus,
because the Market Maker would have forty-two (42) chargeable ports,
the Market Maker's total monthly port fee would be $18,300 (i.e., 40
ports x $450 per port = $18,000; and 2 ports x $150 per port $300).
    The Exchange notes that options Market Makers typically require
more than forty (40) order/quote entry ports, in part to satisfy their
obligation to maintain continuous two-sided markets in their appointed
classes. Thus, the Exchange believes that the proposed change would
enhance the ability of Market Maker firms to manage quotes, quote
traffic, and their quoting obligations by eliminating fees for certain
Quote Takedown Ports, which function as risk management tools rather
than trade opportunity tools. The Exchange believes this proposed
change would permit the Exchange to remain competitive with other
exchanges with respect to fees charged for ports.
    To reflect the proposed change, the Exchange proposes to add to the
Fee Schedule, in Section V. (Technology & System Access Fees),
subsection A. (Port Fees), a new category for ``Quote Takedown Ports,''
together with the following language: ``For each order/quote entry port
utilized, NYSE Amex Options Market Makers may utilize, free of charge,
one port dedicated to quote cancellation or `quote takedown,' which
port(s) will not be included in the count of order/quote entry ports
utilized. Any quote takedown port utilized by a NYSE Amex Options
Market Maker that is in excess of the number of order/quote entry ports
utilized will be counted and charged as an order/quote entry port.''
The Exchange also proposes to make clear that the Quote Takedown Ports
of Affiliates, like order/quote entry ports, are aggregated.\6\
Finally, to add clarity regarding Port Fees, the Exchange proposes a
non-substantive change to the layout of the table setting forth Port
Fees, which the Exchange believes will simplify and add transparency to
the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See proposed Fee Schedule, Section V.A. (``For purpose of
calculating the number of order/quote entry ports and quote takedown
ports, the Exchange will aggregate the ports of Affiliates.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposal to offer Quote Takedown Ports
would ensure a fair and reasonable use of resources by eliminating
charges to Market Makers for certain Quote Takedown Ports (described
above), which are used to control and manage risk exposure to the
benefit of all marker participants.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \7\ of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''), in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\8\ in particular, in that it is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would promote
just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market because offering ATP
Holders registered as Market Makers designated Quote Takedown Ports
would enhance Market Makers' ability to manage quotes, quote traffic,
and their quoting obligations, which would, in turn, improve their risk
controls to the benefit of all participants. The Exchange believes that
the Quote Takedown Ports would foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities because
Quote Takedown Ports minimize latency for quote takedown, which would
enable the fair and reasonable use of Market Makers' resources. Because
Quote Takedown Ports, as the name suggests, are only available for
quote takedowns and not order or quote entry (or order cancellation),
the Quote Takedown Ports are not designed to permit unfair
discrimination but rather are designed to enable Market Makers, that
are subject to heightened obligations that other market participants
are not, to meet their quoting obligations, which, in turn, benefits
all market participants.

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\10\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and
other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed change is reasonable, equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory for the following reasons. First, all
ATP Holders would be subject to the same schedule of Port Fees and ATP
Holders would continue to be able to request, and pay for only those
ports that they require, with no impact to other ATP Holders. As noted
above, because Quote Takedown Ports are uniquely designed to address
quotes and only Market Makers are obliged to quote, the proposed fee
structure for Quote Takedown Ports would not disadvantage non-Market
Makers trading on the Exchange. Second, the proposal to enable Market
Makers to utilize certain Quote Takedown Ports free of charge would
result in the fair and reasonable use of resources by Market Makers,
and would encourage trading on the Exchange, thus improving liquidity
and price discovery, to the benefit of all market participants. In
addition, providing Market Makers a free Quote Takedown Port for each
order/quote entry port may increase use of Quote Takedown Ports as a
cost effective means of improving risk controls. The increased use of
Quote Takedown Ports by Market Makers would improve Market Makers'
ability to manage quotes, quote traffic, and their quoting obligations,
which would, in turn, improve their risk controls to the benefit of all
participants.
    The Exchange likewise believes that not including those Quote
Takedown Ports that meet the 1-to-1 ratio (order/quote entry ports-to-
Quote Takedown Ports) in the count against a Market Maker's total
number of ports utilized for purposes of calculating the monthly Port
Fees is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The
Exchange notes that options Market Makers, require more than 40 ports
in order to satisfy their responsibilities and obligations to
investors, which stem from the significant number of series that exist
for any particular option class \11\ and the corresponding obligations
that Market Makers have to maintain continuous quotations in all series
in their appointed classes. Furthermore, Market Makers that quote
across a significant number, if not all, of the 2,520 classes traded on
the Exchange could have responsibility for upwards of 620,000
individual option series.\12\ Accordingly, the level of activity that
is required to satisfy the quoting obligations, which directly relates
to the number of ports needed, is such that the Exchange believes it is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to only include the number of
order/quote entry and Quote Takedown Ports in excess of the 1-to-1
ratio in determining the per port charge for Market Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For example, as of February 24, 2015, there were more than
1,952 individual option series overlying Chipotle Mexican Grill,
Inc.
    \12\ As of February 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed change is
reasonable, because the Quote Takedown Ports are used for purposes
distinct from order/quote entry ports, for which the Exchange
charges.\13\ In this regard, the Exchange believes that its Port Fees
are competitive with those charged by other venues, and that in some
cases its Port Fees are less expensive than many of its primary
competitors. For example, the Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'')
charges $750 per port per month for a Network Access Port.\14\ The
NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') charges $650 per port per month.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Exchange also charges for use of drop copy ports, which
are not discussed in this filing. See supra n. 4.
    \14\ See CBOE fee schedule, Command Connectivity Charges, at p
11, available at, http://www.cboe.com/publish/feeschedule/CBOEFeeSchedule.pdf (charging $750 per month for each Network Access
Port (1 Gbps) and $3,500 per month for each Network Access Port
(10Gbps)).
    \15\ See NOM Price List, Section 3, NASDAQ Options Market,
Access Services, available at, http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQTools/bookmark.asp?id=nasdaq-rule-options_XVS3&manual=/nasdaq/main/nasdaq-optionsrules/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\16\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden
on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. Because the proposed change results in the
fair and reasonable use of resources by ATP Holders, particularly
Market Makers, in that the Exchange allows ATP Holders to utilize one
Quote Takedown Port per one order/quote entry port free of charge, the
Exchange believes this change would benefit all market participants. In
addition, because Quote Takedown Ports enhance Market Makers' risk
controls for transactions executed on the Exchange, the Exchange
believes the proposal is pro-competitive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues. In
such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain competitive with other
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\18\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \19\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\20\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become

operative immediately upon filing and thereby enable Market Makers to
enhance their risk controls and risk management processes without
delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and
designates the proposal effective upon filing.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \21\ For purposes of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \22\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2015-31 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2015-31. 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 will also be
available for inspection and copying at the NYSE's principal office and
on its Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. 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-NYSEMKT-2015-31, and should be submitted
on or before May 26, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-10410 Filed 5-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 18 (Thursday, January 28, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4883-4884]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01502]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3899; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-14]

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace, Revocation of Class E
Airspace; Chico, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class D airspace, Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, and removes Class E
surface area airspace designated as an extension at Chico Municipal
Airport, Chico, CA. The FAA found it necessary to amend the airspace
area by increasing the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface for the safety and management of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) operations for arriving and departing aircraft at the
airport. The FAA found no standard instrument approach procedures
requiring Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to
Class D airspace. This action changes from navigation aids to
geographic coordinate references in the legal description and updates
the geographic coordinates of Chico Municipal and Ranchaero Airports
for the Class D and E airspace areas noted above.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, March 31, 2016. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 29591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
FAA Order 7400.9Z at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Haga, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at Chico, CA.

History

    On November 13, 2015, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to modify Class D airspace and
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, and
remove Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension at
Chico Municipal Airport, Chico, CA, (80 FR 70177). Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
Subsequent to publication, the FAA found slight changes were necessary
in the legal description of the Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above surface. These changes do not change the dimensions of
the proposal.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
paragraph 5000, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9Z,
dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B,
C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 modifies Class D airspace, Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface, and removes Class E surface area
airspace as an extension at Chico Municipal Airport, Chico, CA. Class E
airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface is modified
to within a 4.1-mile radius east of Chico Municipal, extending to 6
miles from the southeast to the north, excluding that airspace within 1
NM of Ranchaero Airport, CA. This action removes reference to
navigation aids and uses instead, geographic coordinate references in
the legal descriptions. The geographic coordinates of the Chico
Municipal and Ranchaero Airports are amended for the Class D and E
airspace areas to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental

Impacts: Policies and Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace
action is not expected to cause any potentially significant
environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that
warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and
effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

AWP CA D Chico, CA [Modified]

Chico Municipal Airport, CA
    (Lat. 39[deg]47'43'' N., long. 121[deg]51'30'' W.)
Ranchaero Airport, Chico, CA
    (Lat. 39[deg]43'10'' N., long. 121[deg]52'14'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
2,700 feet MSL within a 4.1-mile radius of Chico Municipal Airport,
excluding the portion within a 1-mile radius of Ranchaero Airport.
This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates
and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

AWP CA E4 Chico, CA [Removed]

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AWP CA E5 Chico, CA [Modified]

Chico Municipal Airport, CA
    (Lat. 39[deg]47'43'' N., long. 121[deg]51'30'' W.)
Ranchaero Airport, Chico, CA
    (Lat. 39[deg]43'10'' N., long. 121[deg]52'14'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
bounded by a line beginning at lat. 39[deg]43'57'' N., long.
121[deg]45'28'' W., clockwise along the Chico Municipal Airport 6-
mile radius to lat. 39[deg]41'45'' N., long. 121[deg]50'42'' W.;
thence along the 174[deg] bearing to lat. 39[deg]43'38'' N., long.
121[deg]51'05'' W., thence counter-clockwise along the Ranchaero
Airport 1-mile radius to lat. 39[deg]43'50'' N., long.
121[deg]53'12'' W., thence along the 200[deg] bearing to the Chico
Municipal Airport 6-mile radius, thence clockwise to lat.
39[deg]53'31'' N., long. 121[deg]53'31'' W.; thence to lat.
39[deg]51'48'' N., long. 121[deg]52'04'' W., clockwise along the
Chico Municipal Airport 4.1-mile radius to lat. 39[deg]45'40'' N.,
long. 121[deg]46'54'' W.; thence to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on January 15, 2016.
Tracey Johnson,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-01502 Filed 1-27-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P