[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 26, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28250-28253]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11136]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0228; Special Conditions No. 25-787-SC]

Special Conditions: Haeco Cabin Solutions, Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Model 737-800 Airplane; Structure-Mounted Airbags

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes (Boeing) Model 737-800 airplane. This airplane, as modified
by Haeco Cabin Solutions (Haeco), will have a novel or unusual design
feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the
airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. This design
feature is structure-mounted airbags designed to protect each occupant
from serious head injury in the event of an emergency landing. The
applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for this

design feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety
standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.

DATES: Effective May 26, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Shelden, Human Machine Interface,
AIR-626, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, Washington 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 1, 2020, Haeco applied for a supplemental type
certificate for structure-mounted airbags in the Boeing Model 737-800
airplane. The Boeing Model 737-800 airplane, which is a derivative of
the Boeing Model 737 airplane currently approved under Type Certificate
No. A16WE, is a twin-engine, transport-category airplane with seating
for 189 passengers and a maximum takeoff weight of 174,200 pounds.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Haeco must show that the Boeing Model 737-800 airplane, as
changed, continues to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations
listed in Type Certificate No. A16WE or the applicable regulations in
effect on the date of application for the change, except for earlier
amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (e.g., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Boeing Model 737-800 airplane
because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are
prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type
certificate to modify any other model included on the same type
certificate to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature,
these special conditions would also apply to the other model under
Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Boeing Model 737-800 airplane must comply with the fuel
vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the noise
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Boeing Model 737-800 airplane will incorporate the following
novel or unusual design features:
    Airbags mounted to structure to prevent head injury.

Discussion

    Haeco will install structure-mounted airbags instead of inflatable
lap belts as a means to protect each occupant from serious injury in
the event of an emergency landing, as required by Sec.  25.562(c)(5),
on 737-800 airplanes.
    Such use of airbags to provide injury protection for the occupant
is a novel or unusual feature for this airplane model, and the
applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate airworthiness standards for these design features.
Therefore, special conditions are needed to address requirements
particular to installation of airbags in this manner.
    Special conditions exist for airbags installed on seat belts, known
as inflatable lap belts, which have been installed on transport
airplane passenger seats. Structure-mounted airbags, although a novel
design, were first introduced on Jetstream Aircraft Limited Model 4100
series airplanes, which resulted in issuance of Special Conditions 25-
ANM-127 on May 14, 1997. These special conditions supplemented 14 CFR
part 25 and, more specifically, Sec. Sec.  25.562 and 25.785.
    The structure-mounted airbag, similar to the inflatable lap belt,
is designed to limit occupant forward excursion in the event of an
emergency landing. These airbags will reduce the potential for serious
injury, including reducing the head-injury criterion measurement
defined in part 25. However, structure-mounted airbags function
similarly as automotive airbags, where the airbag deploys from
furniture located in front of the passenger, relative to the airplane's
direction of flight, forming a barrier between the structure and
occupant. Also, unlike the inflatable lap belt, the structure-mounted
airbag does not move with the occupant. To account for out-of-position
and brace-position occupants, the airbag is designed to conform to the
curvature of the exposed structure in the head-strike zone.
    Because the airbag system is essentially a single-use device, it
could deploy under crash conditions that are not sufficiently so severe
as to require the injury protection the airbag system provides. Because
an actual crash is frequently composed of a series of impacts before
the airplane comes to rest, a larger impact following the initial
impact could render the airbag system unavailable. This potential
situation does not exist with standard upper-torso restraints, which
tend to provide continuous protection regardless of impact severity, or
number of impacts, in a crash event. Therefore, the airbag system
installation should be such that it provides protection, when it is
required, by not expending its protection when it is not required. If
the airbag deployment threshold is unnecessarily low, the airbag would
need to continue to provide protection when an impact requiring
protection occurs.
    These special conditions are based upon Special Conditions 25-605-
SC for the Boeing Model 787-9 airplanes equipped with B/E Aerospace
Super-Diamond model business-class passenger seats and associated
furniture. Additionally, the special conditions address protection of
the occupant's neck and spine for the structure-mounted airbag
deployment. When using the HIC15 head-injury method for airbag impacts
(calculated in accordance with 49 CFR 571.208) the neck and spine
limits are included as part of the allowance.
    These additional conditions are based on special conditions issued
previously on oblique seats. The proposed special conditions contain
the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers
necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established
by the existing airworthiness standards.

Discussion of Comments

    The FAA issued Notice of Proposed Special Conditions No. 25-21-01-
SC for the Boeing Model 737-800 series airplane, which was published in
the Federal Register on March 16, 2021 (86 FR 14387). No comments were
received, and the special conditions are adopted as proposed.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Boeing Model 737-800 airplane as modified by Haeco. Should Haeco apply
at a later date for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other
model included on Type Certificate No. A16WE to incorporate the same
novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would apply
to that model as well.
    Under standard practice, the effective date of final special
conditions would be 30 days after the date of publication in the
Federal Register. However, as the

certification date is imminent, the FAA finds that good cause exists to
make these special conditions effective upon publication.

Conclusion

    This action affects only a certain novel or unusual design features
on one model of airplane. It is not a rule of general applicability and
affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of these
features on the airplane.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Boeing Model 737-800 airplanes, as
modified by Haeco Cabin Solutions:
    1. The applicant must demonstrate by test that the structure-
mounted airbag will deploy and provide protection under crash
conditions where it is necessary to prevent serious injury to a 50th
percentile occupant, as specified in Sec.  25.562. The means of
protection must provide a consistent approach to energy absorption for
a range of occupants, from a two-year-old child to a 95th percentile
male. In addition, the following situations should be considered:
    1. The seat occupant is holding an infant.
    2. The seat occupant is a child in a child restraint device.
    3. The seat occupant is a child not using a child restraint device.
    4. The seat occupant is a pregnant woman.

a. Head-Injury Criteria

    Compliance with Sec.  25.562(c)(5) is required, except that, if the
ATD has no apparent contact with the seat/structure but has contact
with an airbag, a head-injury criterion (HIC) unlimited score in excess
of 1000 is acceptable, provided the HIC15 score (calculated in
accordance with 49 CFR 571.208) for that contact is less than 700.

b. Body-to-Wall/Furnishing Contact

    If a seat is installed aft of structure (e.g., an interior wall or
furnishing) that does not provide a homogenous contact surface for the
expected range of occupants and yaw angles, then additional analysis or
tests may be required to demonstrate that the injury criteria are met
for the area that an occupant could contact. For example, if different
yaw angles could result in different airbag performance, then
additional analysis or separate tests may be necessary to evaluate
performance.

c. Neck-Injury Criteria

    The seating system must protect the occupant from experiencing
serious neck injury. The assessment of neck injury must be conducted
with the airbag device activated, unless there is reason to also
consider that the neck-injury potential would be higher for impacts
below the airbag-device deployment threshold.
    (1) The Nij (calculated in accordance with 49 CFR
571.208) must be below 1.0, where Nij = Fz/
Fzc + My/Myc, and Nij
critical values are:

    (a) Fzc = 1,530 lb for tension
    (b) Fzc = 1,385 lb for compression
    (c) Myc = 229 lb-ft in flexion
    (d) Myc = 100 lb-ft in extension

    (2) In addition, peak Fz must be below 937 lb in tension
and 899 lb in compression.
    (3) Rotation of the head about its vertical axis, relative to the
torso, is limited to 105 degrees in either direction from forward-
facing.
    (4) The neck must not impact any surface that would produce
concentrated loading on the neck.

d. ATD and Test Conditions

    Longitudinal tests conducted to measure the injury criteria above
must be performed with the FAA Hybrid III ATD, as described in SAE
1999-01-1609, ``A Lumbar Spine Modification to the Hybrid III ATD for
Aircraft Seat Tests.'' The tests must be conducted with an undeformed
floor, at the most-critical yaw cases for injury, and with all lateral
structural supports (e.g., armrests or walls) installed.
    Note: Applicant must demonstrate that the installation of seats via
plinths or pallets meets all applicable requirements. Compliance with
the guidance contained in policy memorandum PS-ANM-100-2000-00123,
``Guidance for Demonstrating Compliance with Seat Dynamic Testing for
Plinths and Pallets,'' dated February 2, 2000, is acceptable to the
FAA.
    2. The structure-mounted airbag must provide adequate protection
for each occupant regardless of the number of occupants of the seat
assembly.
    3. The structure-mounted airbag system must not be susceptible to
inadvertent deployment as a result of wear and tear, or inertial loads
resulting from in-flight or ground maneuvers (including gusts and hard
landings) likely to be experienced in service.
    4. The applicant must demonstrate that an inadvertent deployment
that could cause injury to a standing or sitting person is improbable.
Inadvertent deployment must not cause injury to anyone who may be
positioned close to the structure-mounted airbag (e.g., seated in an
adjacent seat, or standing adjacent to the airbag installation or the
subject seat). Cases where a structure-mounted airbag is inadvertently
deployed near a seated occupant or an empty seat must be considered.
    5. Inadvertent deployment of the structure-mounted airbag during
the most critical part of flight will either not cause a hazard to the
airplane or is extremely improbable.
    6. Deployment of the structure-mounted airbag must not introduce
hazards or injury mechanisms to the seated occupant, including
occupants in the brace position. Deployment of the structure-mounted
airbag must also not result in injuries that could impede rapid exit
from the airplane.
    7. Effects of the deflection and deformation of the structure to
which the airbag is attached must be taken into account when evaluating
deployment and location of the inflated airbag. The effect of loads
imposed by airbag deployment, or stowed components where applicable,
must also be taken into account.
    8. The applicant must demonstrate that the structure-mounted
airbag, when deployed, does not impair access to the seatbelt- or
harness-release means, and must not hinder evacuation. This will
include consideration of adjacent seat places and the aisle.
    9. The airbag, once deployed, must not adversely affect the
emergency-lighting system, and must not block escape-path lighting to
the extent that the light(s) no longer meet their intended function.
    10. The structure-mounted airbag must not impede occupants' rapid
exit from the airplane 10 seconds after its deployment.
    11. Where structure-mounted airbag systems are installed in or
close to passenger evacuation routes (other than for the passenger seat
for which the airbag is installed), possibility of impact on emergency
evacuation (e.g., hanging in the aisle, potential trip hazard, etc.)
must be evaluated.
    12. The airbag electronic system must be designed to be protected
from lightning per Sec.  25.1316(b), and high-

intensity radiated fields per Sec.  25.1317(c).
    13. The structure-mounted airbag system must not contain or release
hazardous quantities of gas or particulate matter into the cabin.
    14. The structure-mounted airbag installation must be protected
from the effects of fire such that no hazard to occupants will result.
    15. The inflatable bag material must meet the 2.5-inches-per-minute
horizontal flammability test defined in 14 CFR part 25, appendix F,
part I, paragraph (a)(1)(iv).
    16. The design of the structure-mounted airbag system must protect
the mechanisms and controls from external contamination associated with
that which could occur on or around passenger seating.
    17. The structure-mounted airbag system must have a means to verify
the integrity of the structure-mounted airbag activation system.
    18. The applicant must provide installation limitations to ensure
installation compatibility between the seat design and opposing
monument or structure.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO, on May 21, 2021.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Manager, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-11136 Filed 5-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 2, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 1)]
[Notices]
[Page 154-155]
[DOCID:fr02ja09-62]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59159; File No. SR-ISE-2008-97]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change Relating to the Amendment of the International Securities
Exchange Holdings, Inc.'s Certificate of Incorporation

December 23, 2008.
    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 December 23, 2008, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the
``Exchange'' or ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. ISE has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is proposing to make technical changes to the
certificate of incorporation (the ``Certificate of Incorporation'') of
its parent, International Securities Exchange Holdings, Inc.
(``Holdings''), which will be adopted in connection with a corporate
transaction (the ``Transaction''), in which the ISE Stock Exchange, LLC
(``ISE Stock''), a Delaware limited liability company, will merge with
and into Maple Merger Sub, LLC (``Maple Merger Sub''), a Delaware
limited liability company and a wholly owned subsidiary of Direct Edge
Holdings LLC (``Direct Edge''), with Maple Merger Sub being the
surviving entity.

Certificate of Incorporation

    The Exchange is proposing to make a technical change to the
Certificate of Incorporation to: (1) Correct the date of incorporation;
(2) correct the address of Holdings' registered address in the state of
Delaware; and (3) adopt the attestation language on the signature page.
Specifically, the title of the document, Article FIRST and Article
SECOND of the Certificate of Incorporation and the attestation language
would be amended or adopted, as applicable, to read in its entirety as
follows:

Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of International
Securities Exchange Holdings, Inc.

    First: The name of the corporation is International Securities
Exchange Holdings, Inc. (the ``Corporation''). The Corporation was
incorporated on November 16, 2004 by filing its Certificate of
Incorporation with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware
under the name International Securities Exchange Holdings, Inc.
    Second: The address of the Corporation's registered office in
the State of Delaware is 160 Greentree Drive, Suite 101, in the City
of Dover, County of Kent, Delaware 19904. The name of its registered
agent at such address is National Registered Agents, Inc.
* * * * *
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation has been duly adopted in accordance with the
provisions of Sections 242 and 245 of the DGCL and has been executed
by a duly authorized officer of the Corporation this 23rd day of
December, 2008.
Name:------------------------------------------------------------------
Title:-----------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site http://www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization 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
    On December 22, 2008, the Commission approved a rule filing
submitted by the Exchange in connection with the Transaction \5\ which
included the Certificate of Incorporation. The purpose of this rule
filing is to make technical changes to the Certificate of Incorporation
necessary to permit the Exchange and Holdings to effect the
Transaction. The Exchange is proposing to make technical changes to the
Certificate of Incorporation: (1) Correct the date of incorporation;
(2) correct the address of Holdings' registered address in the state of
Delaware; and (3) adopt attestation language on the signature page.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Release No. 34-59135 (December 22, 2007); File No. SR-ISE-
2008-85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(1) that an exchange be so organized so
as to have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the
Exchange Act and to comply, and (subject to any rule or order of the
Commission pursuant to Section 17(d) or 19(g)(2) of the Exchange Act)
to enforce compliance by its members and persons associated with its
members, with the provisions of the Exchange Act, the rules and
regulations thereunder and the rules of the exchange. The Exchange also
believes this proposed rule change furthers the objective of Section
6(b)(5) that an exchange have rules that, among other things, are
designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism for a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. In particular, the proposed
rule change will allow the Exchange to effect the Transaction, which
was approved by the Commission on December 22, 2008.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See footnote 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change does 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 has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) \8\ thereunder. At any
time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the
Commission may summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2008-97 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-97. 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 Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of ISE. 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 publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-97 and should be
submitted on or before January 23, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-31192 Filed 12-31-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 146 (Wednesday, July 29, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45630-45631]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16423]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP20-1-001]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on July 20, 2020, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 700
Louisiana Street, Suite 700, Houston, Texas, 77002-2700, filed in
Docket No. CP20-1-001 an application for an amendment, pursuant to
Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the
Commission's regulations, to the certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued on March 19, 2020 in this proceeding, relative to the
interim lease by ANR of base gas owned by Mid Michigan Gas Storage
Company (Mid Michigan) in the Austin, Goodwell, Lincoln-Freeman,
Loreed, and Reed City storage fields.
    Specifically, ANR seeks authorization to amend the Lease of Base
Gas Agreement (Lease Agreement) between ANR and Mid Michigan to reflect
changes to certain provisions of Exhibit 1 of the Lease Agreement
pertaining to the open season procedures applicable to ANR's base gas
purchases, all as more fully described in their application which is on
file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202)502-8659.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Sorana
Linder, Director, Modernization & Certificates, ANR Pipeline Company,
700 Louisiana Street, Suite 700, Houston, Texas, by telephone at (832)
320-5209, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9),
within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will issue a Notice
of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the environmental assessment (EA) for this proposal. The issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    As of the February 27, 2018 date of the Commission's order in
Docket No. CP16-4-001, the Commission will apply its revised practice
concerning out-of-time motions to intervene in any new NGA section 3 or
section 7 proceeding.\1\ Persons desiring to become a party to a
certificate proceeding are to intervene in a timely manner. If seeking
to intervene out-of-time, the movant is required to ``show good cause
why the time limitation should be waived,'' and should provide
justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule 214(d)(1) of
the Commission's Rules and Regulations.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C., 162 FERC ] 61,167 at
] 50 (2018).
    \2\ 18 CFR 385.214(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at
http://www.ferc.gov. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a
paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 13, 2020.

    Dated: July 23, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-16423 Filed 7-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 21 (Thursday, January 31, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6725-6726]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02032]

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

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

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

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

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2013 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0940; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-26-AD;
Amendment 39-17321; AD 2013-01-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Turbomeca S.A. Arriel 2D turboshaft engines. This AD was prompted by a
low fuel pressure event caused by deterioration and a loss of the low-
pressure drive function within the hydro-mechanical metering unit
(HMU). This AD requires replacing the HMU at a reduced life. We are
issuing this AD to prevent an uncommanded in-flight shutdown of the
engine, and possible loss of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 7, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frederick Zink, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 9, 2012 (77
FR 61303). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
states:

    During an Arriel 2D endurance test, the illumination of the low
fuel pressure warning light was observed. The investigation of the
high pressure/low pressure (HP/LP) pump assembly within the hydro-
mechanical metering unit (HMU), removed following this occurrence,
revealed a deterioration and a loss of the LP pump drive function.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to an
uncommanded engine in-flight shut down.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (77 FR 61303).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD (77 FR 61303) as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect about 27 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
will take about 0.7 hour per engine to comply with this AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per hour. Required parts will cost about $14,400 per
engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S.
operators to be $390,407.

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.

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 (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is provided in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2013-01-07 Turbomeca S.A.: Amendment 39-17321; Docket No. FAA-2012-
0940; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-26-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective March 7,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Turbomeca S.A. Arriel 2D turboshaft
engines.

(d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a low fuel pressure event caused by a
deterioration and loss of the low-pressure drive function within the
hydro-mechanical metering unit (HMU). We are issuing this AD to
prevent an uncommanded in-flight shutdown of the engine, and
possible loss of the helicopter.

(e) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, replace the HMU with an HMU eligible for
installation:
    (1) Before the HMU exceeds 800 operating hours since new; or
    (2) Within 800 operating hours since last replacement of the
low-pressure pump spindle wheel assembly, high-pressure pump
complete sleeve, bearings/pinions (matched assembly), and sleeve
assembly.

(f) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install any HMU onto
any engine, or install any engine onto any helicopter, unless in
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (e) of this AD.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, may approve AMOCs for
this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.

(h) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Frederick Zink,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 781-
238-7199.
    (2) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency AD No. 2012-0141,
dated July 31, 2012, and Turbomeca S.A. Alert Mandatory Service
Bulletin No. A292 73 2847, Version A, dated May 29, 2012, for
related information.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Turbomeca, 40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 40 00; telex:
570 042; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 15. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on January 11, 2013.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-02032 Filed 1-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 235 (Friday, December 8, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 85523-85525]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26798]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-2175; Airspace Docket No. 23-ANM-16]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Green River Municipal Airport,
Green River, UT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace area
extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth
at Green River Municipal Airport, Green River, UT. This action would
support the airport's operations transition from visual flight rules
(VFR) to instrument flight rules (IFR).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 22, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by FAA Docket No. FAA-2023-2175 and
Airspace Docket No. 23-ANM-16 using any of the following methods:
    * Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and follow
the

online instructions for sending your comments electronically.
    * Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    * Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    * Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11H, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith T. Adams, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; 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
the 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 would establish Class E airspace to support IFR
operations at Green River Municipal Airport, Green River, UT.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. The most
helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain
the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should submit only one time if comments are filed electronically, or
commenters should send only one copy of written comments if comments
are filed in writing.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The FAA may change this proposal in light
of the comments it receives.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Operations office (see ADDRESSES section for address, phone number, and
hours of operations). An informal docket may also be examined during
normal business hours at the office at the Northwest Mountain Regional
Office of the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200 S
216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198.

Incorporation by Reference

    Class E5 airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This
document proposes to amend the current version of that order, FAA Order
JO 7400.11H, dated August 11, 2023, and effective September 15, 2023.
These updates would be published in the next update to FAA Order JO
7400.11. That order is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this document.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11H lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to establish
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more from the
surface of the earth at Green River Municipal Airport, Green River, UT.
    The airport is transitioning from VFR to IFR operations. Class E
airspace should be established with a 5.5-mile radius and extensions to
the south-through-north to contain arriving IFR aircraft descending
below 1,500 feet above the surface and departing aircraft until it
reaches 1,200 feet above the surface.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
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
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and

Procedures,'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 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 14 CFR 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 JO
7400.11H, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 11,
2023, and effective September 15, 2023, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ANM UT E5 Green River, UT [New]

Green River Municipal Airport, UT
    (Lat. 38[deg]57'42'' N, long. 110[deg]13'38'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 5.5-mile radius of the airport, from the 145[deg] bearing
clockwise to the 278[deg] bearing within 6.8 miles southwest of the
airport, and from the 278[deg] bearing clockwise to the 337[deg]
bearing within 8.5 miles northwest of the airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on November 30, 2023.
B.G. Chew,
Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2023-26798 Filed 12-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87820-87822]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27784]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-99152; File No. SR-PEARL-2023-68]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange
Rule 100, Definitions, Rule 530, Limit Up-Limit Down, Rule 2612,
Minimum Price Variations, Rule 2614, Orders and Order Instructions, and
Rule 2705 Prohibition Against Trading Ahead of Customer Orders

December 13, 2023.
    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 December 6, 2023, MIAX PEARL LLC (``MIAX Pearl'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to update citations to Rule 600(b) of
Regulation National Market System (``Regulation NMS'') in Exchange Rule
100, Definitions, Rule 530, Limit Up-Limit Down, Rule 2612, Minimum
Price Variations, Rule 2614, Orders and Order Instructions, and Rule
2705 Prohibition Against Trading Ahead of Customer Orders.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://www.miaxglobal.com/markets/us-equities/pearl-equities/rule-filings, at MIAX Pearl'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, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to update citations to Rule 600(b) of
Regulation NMS in Exchange Rule 100, Definitions, Rule 530, Limit Up-
Limit Down, Rule 2612, Minimum Price Variations, Rule 2614, Orders and
Order Instructions, and Rule 2705 Prohibition Against Trading Ahead of
Customer Orders.
    In 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') amended Regulation NMS under the Act in connection with
the adoption of the Market Data Infrastructure Rules.\3\ As part of
that initiative, the Commission adopted new definitions in Rule 600(b)
of Regulation NMS and renumbered the remaining definitions, including
the definitions of Trading Center (formerly Rule 600(b)(82)), Regular
Trading Hours (formerly Rule 600(b)(77)), NMS Stock (formerly Rule
600(b)(48)), and Intermarket Sweep Order (formerly Rule 600(b)(31)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90610, 86 FR 18596
(April 9, 2021) (S7-03-20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange accordingly proposes to update the relevant citations
to Rule 600(b) in its rules as follows:
     The citation to the definition of Trading Center in Rule
100 would be changed to Rule 600(b)(82).
     The citation to the definition of Regular Trading Hours in
Rule 530, Limit Up-Limit Down, would be changed to Rule 600(b)(77).
     The citation to the definition of NMS Stock in Rule
2612(a) would be changed to Rule 600(b)(55).
     The citation to the definition of Intermarket Sweep Order
in Rule 2614 and Rule 2705, would be changed to Rule 600(b)(38).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rules changes are consistent
with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of section 6(b) of the
Act.\4\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rules changes
are consistent with section 6(b)(5) \5\ requirements that the rules of
an exchange be 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 regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to its rules to
correct citations to Rule 600(b) of Regulation NMS would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because the proposed change is designed to
update an external rule reference. The Exchange believes that Members
\6\ would benefit from the increased clarity, thereby reducing
potential confusion and ensuring that those subject to the Exchange's
jurisdiction, regulators, and the investing public can more easily
navigate and understand the Exchange's rules. The Exchange further
believes that the proposed changes would not be inconsistent with the
public interest and the protection of investors because investors will
not be harmed and in fact would benefit from increased clarity, thereby
reducing potential confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization that
is registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of Exchange
Rules for purposes of trading on the Exchange as an ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are deemed
``members'' under the Exchange Act. See the Definitions Section of
the Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rules changes would not
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rules changes
is not intended to address competitive issues but rather would modify
Exchange rules to update citations to Rule 600(b) of Regulation NMS.
Since the proposal does not substantively modify System \7\
functionality or processes on the Exchange, the proposed changes will
not impose any burden on competition nor are they meant to affect
competition among the exchanges. For these reasons, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rules changes reflect this competitive
environment and do not impose any undue burden on intermarket
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
\9\ thereunder, the Exchange has designated this proposal as one that
effects a change that: (i) does not significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its terms, does not
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of
its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \11\ permits the Commission
to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests
that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the
proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The proposal
raises no novel legal or regulatory issues, and operative delay waiver
would permit the Exchange to promptly correct citations to Rule 600(b)
of Regulation NMS in order to alleviate potential investor or public
confusion and add clarity to its rules. Therefore, the Commission
believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the
proposed rule change operative upon filing.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also 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 the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-PEARL-2023-68 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-PEARL-2023-68. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All

submissions should refer to file number SR-PEARL-2023-68 and should be
submitted on or before January 9, 2024.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-27784 Filed 12-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 76)]
[Notices]
[Page 20426-20428]
[DOCID:fr20ap06-65]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53640; File No. SR-Amex-2005-096]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto
Relating to the Relocation of Registered Options Traders Assigned
Options Classes

April 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 September 22, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On April
5, 2006, the Amex 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 (``Amendment No. 1'') supersedes and
replaces the original filing in its entirety. The substance of
Amendment No. 1 is incorporated into this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to permit registered options traders
(``ROTs'') to send proprietary electronic orders, representing a bona
fide hedge or position liquidations, in an assigned option class for a
period of up to three (3) months following a relocation of such option
class when the ROT is no longer physically present in such trading
crowd.
    Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new
language is in italics.

Options Transactions of Registered Options Traders

    Rule 958-ANTE No registered options trader shall initiate an
Exchange option transaction on the Floor and through the facilities of
the Exchange for any account in which he has an interest except in
accordance with the following provisions:
    (a) through (i) No Change
    Commentary * * *
    .01 through .09 No Change
    .10 A Registered Options Trader may apply to the Exchange for the
ability to send electronic bona fide hedging and/or liquidating orders
in a formerly assigned option class(es) that have been relocated to a
different location on the trading floor, for up to a three (3) month
period from the date the application is granted. The Registered Options
Trader will not be required to be physically present in the new trading
location for the purpose of sending bona fide hedging and/or
liquidating orders to the option class(es) that have been relocated.
Application is required to be made in writing to the Exchange's
Division of Regulation and Compliance. The Exchange's Division of
Regulation and Compliance is required to approve each application
before a Registered Options Trader may send electronic orders pursuant
to this Commentary. An extension of the three (3) month time period is
not permitted. Upon the expiration of the three (3) month period,
Registered Options Traders will no longer be permitted to
electronically send orders from the floor of the Exchange for the
purpose of bona fide hedging and/or liquidating positions in the
formerly assigned options class.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    According to the Amex, the purpose of the proposed rule change is
to provide ROTs who are no longer physically present in the trading
crowd of his or her formerly assigned option class \4\ with the ability
to send electronic

orders in such option class or classes that have been relocated. The
proprietary electronic orders of such ROT would be required to be part
of a bona fide hedge \5\ position or the liquidation of positions. The
Exchange believes that providing ROTs with this limited ability to send
orders for the purpose of creating a bona fide hedge or liquidating
positions in an option class that has been relocated would provide an
effective and efficient means for ROTs to reduce position risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange states that a ROT would no longer be considered
assigned to an option class once an assigned option class has been
relocated to a different floor location and the ROT has not
communicated his intention to relocate with such assigned options
class. A ROT must communicate his intention to relocate if he wants
to keep the assigned option class. This proposed rule change
proposes a three (3) month grace period in which the ROT may
electronically send orders to close-out or hedge those assigned
options class positions. Therefore, for purposes of this rule
filing, such relocated assigned option class shall be referred to as
a ROT's ``formerly assigned option class.''
    \5\ Although the Act does not specifically define a ``bona fide
hedge,'' the Exchange notes that the Commission has stated that it
implies an appreciable offset of risk, for all or part of the
position being hedged. A bona fide hedge may be established either
by contemporaneous transactions in two securities where each
position acquired reduces the risk of the other, or by a single
transaction in which a position acquired in one security reduces the
risk of a previously established position in another security. Any
portion of a position that does more than offset the risk of the
position or positions on the other side is not considered part of a
bona fide hedge. See Commentary .13 to Amex Rule 111. An example of
a bona fide hedge position would be owning the short sell position
and then ``fully hedging'' (delta neutral) it with a long call
position in the underlying securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange pursuant to Amex Rule 110 (applicable to options
through Amex Rule 950-ANTE(a)) and Amex Rule 958-ANTE(a) require that
each ROT be qualified and registered with the Exchange as a ROT and
assigned by the Exchange in one or more classes of options. In
addition, Amex Rule 958-ANTE(a) further provides that Exchange options
transactions initiated by a ROT on the floor of the Exchange for any
account in which such ROT has an interest must be in his or her
assigned classes.
    In those cases where an option class is relocated on the trading
floor, a ROT has two alternatives: (i) Stay in his or her present
location and no longer keep that assigned options class, in which case,
the ROT may only hedge and/or liquidate positions by sending orders to
another options exchange; \6\ or (ii) keep the assigned options class
and relocate with the option to the new location which may be
difficult, and near impossible, depending on the ROTs other assigned
classes. Accordingly, the Exchange submits that permitting ROTs,
although not physically present in the trading crowd, to apply to the
Exchange to send proprietary electronic orders constituting bona fide
hedging and/or position liquidations in a formerly assigned option
class or classes that have been relocated to different locations on the
floor for up to a three (3) month period from the date the application
is granted, would be reasonable and should help to reduce position risk
and efficiently relocate options classes on the trading floor. The
Exchange determined that three (3) months is a reasonable amount of
time considering that that is the time period within which an
expiration normally occurs. The Exchange also considered whether
advance notice of an option class relocation is more suitable than a
three (3) month extension; however, advance notice may be difficult, if
not impossible, for such occurrences as market maker consolidations and
mergers which is often the cause for the relocation. Therefore, the
Exchange believes that the three (3) month extension is the best
alternative to option class relocations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Amex Rule 958-ANTE(a). In addition, Amex Rule 958-
ANTE(h) provides, ``(i) Registered options traders may choose to
either use an Exchange provided or proprietary automated quote
calculation system to calculate and submit quotes in all or some of
their assigned classes; join the specialist's disseminated quotation
with the ability to manually change that quotation on a series-by-
series basis in those classes the registered options trader has
chosen not to use an automated quote calculation system; or enter
orders into the ANTE System from their hand-held device. Whenever a
registered options trader is either using an automated quote
calculation system (pursuant to (i) above); joining the specialist's
quote in a given option class (pursuant to (ii) above); or sending
an order into the ANTE System, the registered options trader must be
physically present at the specialist's post on the floor of the
Exchange where that option class is traded.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Commentary .10 to Amex Rule 958-ANTE provides that a ROT
would be required to apply to the Exchange and be granted approval in
order to take advantage of the ability to send electronic orders under
this proposal. Application in writing would have to be submitted to the
Exchange's Division of Regulation and Compliance (``R&C''). The R&C
would take into consideration several factors in determining whether to
grant the ROT approval, including, but not limited to, if the ROT is in
good standing with the Exchange, whether the ROT has had any recent
regulatory issues and whether advance notice of the relocation was
provided. The R&C would generally approve a ROT application to take
advantage of the ability to send electronic orders under this proposal
consistent with the absence of regulatory issues and sufficient advance
notice of relocation. Once approved by R&C, a ROT would be able to send
proprietary electronic orders, representing a bona fide hedge or
position liquidation, in a formerly assigned option class, when such
ROT is no longer physically present in the trading crowd, for a period
of up to three (3) months without extension.
    In connection with this proposal, the Exchange submits that rules
governing ROTs relating to their assigned options classes would
continue to apply to the use of electronic bona fide hedging and/or
liquidating orders and that ROTs must continue to adhere to these
rules. For example, ROTs would be required to adhere to their in-person
trading requirements. Specifically, Amex Rule 958-NTE(g) provides that,
except as otherwise determined by the Exchange, a minimum of 25% of a
ROT's option contract volume, and a minimum of 25% of a ROT's total
number of options transactions in any calendar quarter would have to be
executed in person and not through the use of orders represented by
another member or member organization. However, in any calendar quarter
in which a ROT receives ROT treatment for off-floor orders in
accordance with Commentary .01 of Amex Rule 958-ANTE, in addition to
satisfying the requirements of Commentary .03 of Amex Rule 958-ANTE,
the ROT would have to execute in person, and not through the use of
orders represented by another member or member organization, at least
80% of his total transactions and option contract volume. Commentary
.03 to Amex Rule 958-ANTE generally provides that at least 50% of a
ROT's trading activity in any quarter be in his or her assigned
classes. The Exchange notes that, if ROTs take advantage of this
proposal, then they would become subject to the higher 75% requirement
contained in Commentary .03 to Amex Rule 958-ANTE, whereby at least 75%
of a ROT's trading activity in any quarter must be in his or her
assigned classes.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ According to the Exchange, the reason that a ROT would be
subject to the higher 75% requirement is because the 50% requirement
set forth in Commentary .03 to Amex Rule 958-ANTE applies to option
transactions initiated by a ROT on the floor. Since the 75%
requirement applies to ROTs receiving ROT treatment for off-floor
orders, this higher 75% requirement would apply to ROTs who have
been approved to take advantage of the ability to send electronic
orders under this proposal due to the fact that electronic orders
are considered off-floor orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Amex Rule 935-ANTE(a) provides that non-broker-dealer customer
orders are afforded priority over all other market participants. In
addition, the orders for the accounts of all ``non-public customers,''
(i.e., broker-dealers and members) are treated equally and may only
retain priority over or be on parity with other orders of broker-
dealers. Orders for the account of a ROT in connection with this
proposal will not have priority over orders of

customers and other broker-dealers, including specialists, other ROTs,
away market makers and firms. Consistent with the Exchange's current
rules on priority, parity, and precedence, the electronic hedging and/
or liquidating orders of ROTs, as provided in this proposal, would be
on parity with the orders of other broker-dealers, specialists, ROTs,
and away market makers. The electronic hedging and/or liquidating
orders of ROTs will continue to receive market maker treatment because
the orders would be executed to reduce the risk of the positions put on
by the ROT in connection with his market maker responsibilities in the
formerly assigned option class.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. The Exchange believes that providing ROTs with this
limited ability to send orders in connection with a bona fide hedge or
liquidating position in an option class that has been relocated would
provide an effective and efficient means for ROTs to reduce position
risk, and thereby, promote a free and open national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change, as amended, does
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

    No written comments were solicited or received by the Exchange on
this proposal, as amended.

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 Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve the proposed rule change, as amended, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, 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-Amex-2005-096 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2005-096. 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 Room. Copies of the
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-Amex-2005-096 and should be submitted on or before May
11, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-5920 Filed 4-19-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                             WASHINGTON, DC

                                   	Issued by the Department of
Transportation on July 7, 2003

		       NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-15180

________________________________________________________________________
______________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of      Continental Airlines, Inc.       filed    5/13/03
for:

XX  Exemption under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between any point or points in the United States and any point or points
in the United Arab Emirates directly and via intermediate points, and
beyond the United Arab Emirates to any point or points in third
countries, and to combine this authority with its existing exemption and
certificates.  Continental intends to operate this service under a
code-share arrangement with Emirates.  Continental requested this
authority for an indefinite duration.

Applicant rep:    R. Bruce Keiner, Jr.<PHONE_NUMBER>      DOT Analyst:
 Sylvia Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

XX  Balance dismissed (i.e., request for longer-term authority)

The above action was effective when taken:    July 7, 2003,   through
July 7, 2005

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX  The exemption authority granted is consistent with the aviation
agreement between the United States and United Arab Emirates.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:     XX  Holder’s
Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity

	      XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

	      XX  Statement of authorization approving Continental/Emirates
code-share operations,

	      dated July 1, 2003, and conditions therein

(See Reverse Side)

2

Conditions:  The route integration authority granted is subject to the
condition that any service provided under this exemption shall be
consistent with all applicable agreements between the United States and
the foreign countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in award of
the route integration authority requested should be construed as
conferring upon Continental rights (including fifth-freedom intermediate
and/or beyond rights) to serve markets where U.S. carrier entry is
limited unless Continental notifies the Department of its intent to
serve such a market and unless and until the Department has completed
any

necessary carrier selection procedures to determine which carrier(s)
should be authorized to exercise such rights; and (b) should there be a
request by any carrier to use the limited-entry route rights that are
included in Continental's authority by virtue of the route integration
exemption granted here, but that are not then being used by Continental,
the holding of such authority by route integration will not be
considered as providing any preference for Continental in a competitive
carrier selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be
entitled to use the authority at issue.

The authority granted to serve intermediate and beyond points is limited
to countries with which the United States has signed open-skies
agreements and/or countries for which the carrier holds authority to
serve under certificates or exemptions issued by the Department, and for
which it holds route integration authority by virtue of either the
present action or other action of the Department.

Remarks:  Consistent with our standard practice for this type of
application, we granted Continental’s exemption authority for a period
of two years and dismissed its request for longer-term authority.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the exemption was consistent with the public
interest, and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of operations authorized, the U.S. carrier applicant(s)
shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration Regulations and with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

 To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, inform
its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its plans
and to find out whether the Transportation Security Administration has
determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be
served.

06/2003