[Federal Register: September 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 177)]
[Notices]
[Page 52416-52418]
[DOCID:fr13se07-91]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56372; File No. SR-NSCC-2007-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its
Rules and Procedures With Regard to the Automated Customer Account
Transfer Service (ACATS) and ACATS Fund/SERV Processing

September 7, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on August 15, 2007, National
Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change
described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared
primarily by NSCC. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change consists of modifications to NSCC's Rules
and Procedures relating to its Automated Customer Account Transfer
Service (``ACATS'') and ACATS Fund/SERV processing.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NSCC 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. NSCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by NSCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to modify NSCC's Rules
as necessary to shorten the account transfer time frame with respect to
certain types of ACATS and ACATS Fund/SERV transfers.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Rule 50 (Automated Customer Account Transfer Service) is
generally nonspecific with respect to account transfer time frames.
Rule 52 (Mutual Fund Services), Section 16 (ACAT/Transfers) is
nonspecific with respect to account transfer time frames and does
not require modification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Background
    ACATS enables members of NSCC to effect automated transfers of
customer accounts among themselves. In operation since 1985, ACATS was
designed to facilitate compliance with New York Stock Exchange
(``NYSE'') Rule 412 and National Association of Securities Dealers
(``NASD'') \4\ Uniform

Practice Code Section 11870 that require NYSE and NASD members to use
automated clearing agency customer account transfer services and to
effect customer account transfers within specified time frames. ACATS
has been modified over time, with its most significant redesign in
1999, to provide NSCC members with a more seamless and timely customer
account transfer process.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Rule 50 (Automated Customer Account Transfer Service) is
generally nonspecific with respect to account transfer time frames.
Rule 52 (Mutual Fund Services), Section 16 (ACAT/Transfers) is
nonspecific with respect to account transfer time frames and does
not require modification.
    \5\ The NASD is now known as The Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Proposed Modifications
    NSCC, its members, the Customer Account Division of the Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association (``SIFMA''), NYSE, and NASD
believe that because technology and processing has improved since the
1999 redesign additional modifications to ACATS processing can be made
that will further enhance the timeliness and efficiency of customer
account transfers. FINRA has submitted a comparable rule filing on
behalf of the NYSE and NASD with the Commission.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56373 (September 7,
2007) (notice of filing of proposed rule change) [File No. SR-FINRA-
2007-005].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(a) Standard ACATS Transfers
    Standard ACATS transfers currently include a three business day
``Request'' period. The proposed change will reduce the ``Request''
time frame from three business days to one business day. The time frame
within which an account transfer may be responded to (i.e., accepted or
rejected) will accordingly be shortened.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In addition to changes to the ``Request'' period, NSCC
proposes to modify the ACATS ``status'' time frames for Request-
Adjust, Request-Adjust Past, Request-Past, and Review-Error, from a
maximum of three business days to a maximum of one business day.
Rule 50 is nonspecific with respect to these time frames.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Nonstandard ACATS Transfers--Partial Transfer Receiver
    Partial Transfers may be generated by either the Receiving Member
(Partial Transfer Receiver or ``PTR'') or the Delivering Member
(Partial Transfer Deliverer or ``PTD''). PTRs currently have a two
business day ``Request'' period. The proposed change will reduce the
``Request'' time frame from two business days to one business day. The
time frame within which an account transfer may be responded to (i.e.,
accepted or rejected) will accordingly be shortened.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Other non-standard transfers are: fail reversals, reclaims,
and residual credits (see Rule 50, Sec. 12). PTD's do not have a
``Request'' status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) ACAT Fund/SERV
    In an ACAT transfer that includes mutual fund assets, during the
``Review'' period the Receiving Member (or if applicable its ACATS-
Fund/SERV Agent) requests the reregistration of mutual fund assets by
submitting a Fund Registration input record through ACATS to the Fund
Member/Mutual Fund Processor. The Fund Member/Mutual Fund Processor
then has four business days to either reject or acknowledge the
request.
    NSCC has found that the majority of Fund Member/Mutual Fund
Processors act upon such requests during the first day of receipt.
Therefore, NSCC is proposing to reduce the time frame from four
business days to one business day.
3. Technical Correction to Rule 50
    NSCC is also making a technical correction to Rule 50, Section 13.
Section 13 (which addresses Receiving Member initiated Partial
Transfers) states that a Delivering Member may respond to a request at
any time by following the procedure set forth in Section 12. However,
Section 12 addresses actions taken with respect to Delivering Member
initiated transactions. NSCC is correcting this text accordingly.
4. Implementation of the Proposed Changes:
    NSCC is coordinating implementation of the proposed changes with
FINRA and SIFMA. Contingent upon the Commission's approval of the NSCC
and FINRA proposed changes, NSCC anticipates that implementation of the
changes set forth in this rule filing will take place in October of
2007. Members will be advised of the implementation through an NSCC
Important Notice.
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of a clearing agency be designed to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a national system for prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\9\ By reducing the
time frame for the transfer of customer accounts between NSCC members,
the proposed amendments will bring enhanced efficiency to members and
benefit their customers. As such, the proposed rule change is
consistent with NSCC's statutory obligation to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a national system for prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NSCC does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact or impose any burden on competition.

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

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not yet
been solicited or received. NSCC will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by NSCC.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period: (i) As the Commission
may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period
to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as
to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission
will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-NSCC-2007-13 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-NSCC-2007-13. 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 NSCC and on NSCC's
Web site at http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/rule_filings/2007/nscc/2007-13.pdf.
 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-
NSCC-2007-13 and should be submitted on or before October 4, 2007.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-18077 Filed 9-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 13 (Friday, January 20, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3631-3634]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01101]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0020; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-01566-E;
Amendment 39-22305; AD 2023-01-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A. (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Turbomeca, S.A.) Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A. (Safran) Makila 1A and Makila 1A1 model
turboshaft engines. This AD was prompted by reports of false engine
fire warnings. This AD requires replacing the affected fire detectors,
as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD,
which is incorporated by reference. This AD also prohibits the
installation of affected fire detectors. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective February 6, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 6,
2023.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by March 6, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0020; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For EASA material incorporated by reference in this AD,
contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone:
+49 221 8999 000; email: [email protected]; website: easa.europa.eu.
You may find this material on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is
also available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-0020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Clark, Aviation Safety Engineer,
ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:
(781) 238-7088; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments
about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-0020; Project Identifier MCAI-
2022-01566-E'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this final rule because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Kevin
Clark, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2022-0244, dated December 8, 2022
(EASA AD 2022-0244), (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for all Safran Makila 1A and Makila 1A1 model
turboshaft engines. The MCAI states that there were reports of false
engine fire warnings. The subsequent investigation results identified a
manufacturing non-compliance on the fire detectors, which caused a
shift of the detection threshold towards temperature values that are
lower than specified, potentially leading to a false engine fire
warning. When two engines on a helicopter are fitted with an affected
part, an engine fire warning could occur on both engines during the
same flight. This condition, if not addressed, could lead to commanded
in-flight engine shut-down, possibly resulting in damage to the
helicopter and reduced control of the helicopter.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0020.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed EASA AD 2022-0244, which specifies procedures for
replacing affected fire detectors. This material is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in
ADDRESSES.

FAA's Determination

    These products have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design
Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI described above. The FAA is issuing this AD after determining
that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or
develop on other products of these same type designs.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD
2022-0244, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD. This AD also prohibits the installation of
affected fire detectors.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result,
EASA AD 2022-0244 is incorporated by reference in this AD. This AD
requires compliance with EASA AD 2022-0244 in its entirety through that
incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in
the regulatory text of this AD. Using common terms that are the same as
the heading of a particular section in EASA AD 2022-0244 does not mean
that operators need comply only with that section. For example, where
the AD requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance
times,'' compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the
section titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance

Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2022-0244. Service information required by EASA AD
2022-0244 for compliance will be available at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-0020 after this AD is published.

Justification for Immediate Adoption and Determination of the Effective
Date

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 551 et seq.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and
comment procedures for rules when the agency, for ``good cause,'' finds
that those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to
the public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking
comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA
authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days,
upon a finding of good cause.
    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies foregoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule
because fire detectors that do not conform to the type design could
lead to false engine fire warnings. Safran was informed of three
occurrences of illumination of the engine fire alarm without confirmed
fire (untimely illumination) on airframes equipped with affected fire
detectors. False engine fire warnings are an unsafe condition requiring
urgent corrective action because, if a helicopter is equipped with two
engines with an affected fire detector installed, an engine fire
warning could occur on both engines during the same flight. This unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could lead to commanded in-flight engine
shut-down, possibly resulting in damage to the helicopter and reduced
control the helicopter. Replacement of the fire detectors must be
accomplished within 30 flight hours or 60 days from the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, notice and opportunity
for prior public comment are impracticable and contrary to the public
interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
    In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days,
for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forego notice and
comment.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The requirements of the RFA do not apply when an agency finds good
cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and
comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt
this rule without prior notice and comment, RFA analysis is not
required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1 engine installed on a
helicopter of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to
comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace fire detectors................  1 work-hour x $85 per             $1,800          $1,885          $1,885
                                         hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is 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

    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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866, and
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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 airworthiness
directive:

2023-01-11 Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A. (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Turbomeca, S.A.): Amendment 39-22305; Docket No.
FAA-2023-0020; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-01566-E.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective February 6, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Safran Helicopter Engines, S.A. (Type
Certificate previously held by Turbomeca, S.A.) Makila 1A and Makila
1A1 model turboshaft engines.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7200, Engine
(Turbine/Turboprop).

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of false engine fire warnings.
The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent false engine fire warnings.
The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could lead to commanded in-
flight engine shut-down, possibly resulting in damage to the
helicopter and reduced control of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD:
Perform all required actions within the compliance times specified
in, and in accordance with European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2022-0244, dated December 8, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-0244).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022-0244

    (1) Where EASA AD 2022-0244 requires compliance from its
effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this
AD.
    (2) This AD does not adopt the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2022-0244.
    (3) Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2022-
0244 specifies to discard any removed fire detectors, this AD
requires removing those parts from service.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2022-0244
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (k) of this AD and email to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Kevin Clark,
Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2022-0244,
dated December 8, 2022.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2022-0244, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
[email protected]. You may find this material on the EASA website
at ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email: [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on January 13, 2023.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-01101 Filed 1-18-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10811-10814]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02992]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79995; File Nos. SR-ISEGemini-2016-16; SR-ISEMercury-
2016-22]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; ISE Mercury, LLC;
Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Changes, as Modified by
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, To Permit Nasdaq Execution Services,
LLC To Become an Affiliated Member of Each Exchange To Perform Certain
Routing and Other Functions

February 9, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On December 9, 2016, ISE Gemini, LLC (``ISE Gemini'') and ISE
Mercury, LLC (``ISE Mercury,'' and each of ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury
an ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\
proposed rule changes related to the routing of orders, cancellation of
orders, and handling of error positions. The proposed rule changes
would also permit Nasdaq Execution Services, LLC (``NES'') to become an
affiliated Member \3\ of each Exchange to perform certain routing and
other functions. On December 20, 2016, each Exchange filed Amendment
No. 1 to its respective proposed rule change, which amended and
replaced each original filing in its entirety. Also on December 20,
2016, each Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to its respective proposed
rule change.\4\ The proposed rule changes, each as modified by
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, were published for comment in the Federal
Register on December 29, 2016.\5\ The Commission received no comments
on the proposed rule changes. This order grants approval of the
proposed rule changes, each as modified by the respective Amendment
Nos. 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ A ``Member'' is an organization that has been approved to
exercise certain trading rights on the Exchange. See ISE Gemini Rule
100(a)(23); ISE Mercury Rule 100(a)(23).
    \4\ Each Amendment No. 2 amended the description of one of the
inbound routing conditions that would apply. Specifically, each
Exchange modified the third condition to specify that the report
that FINRA will provide to the Exchange's chief regulatory officer
on a quarterly basis will quantify all alerts, of which the Exchange
or FINRA (rather than solely FINRA) are aware, that identify NES as
a participant that has potentially violated Commission or Exchange
rules.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 79664 (December 22,
2016), 81 FR 96136 (``ISE Gemini Notice''); 79663 (December 22,
2016), 81 FR 96089 (``ISE Mercury Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

    On June 21, 2016, the Commission approved a proposed rule change
relating to a corporate transaction in which Nasdaq, Inc. would become
the ultimate parent of International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE''), ISE Gemini, and ISE Mercury (collectively, the ``ISE
Exchanges'').\6\ The transaction closed on June 30, 2016.\7\ Nasdaq,
Inc. is the ultimate parent of NASDAQ BX, Inc. (``BX''), The NASDAQ
Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), and NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' and,
together with Nasdaq and BX, the ``Nasdaq Exchanges'').\8\ Nasdaq, Inc.
is also the ultimate parent of NES,\9\ a broker-dealer that is a
member, and affiliate, of each of the Nasdaq Exchanges.\10\ As a result
of this transaction, the ISE Exchanges and the Nasdaq Exchanges became
affiliates,\11\ and NES became an affiliate of the ISE Exchanges.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78119 (June 21,
2016), 81 FR 41611 (June 27, 2016) (SR-ISE-2016-11; SR-ISE Gemini-
2016-05; SR-ISE Mercury-2016-10) (order approving Nasdaq, Inc.'s
acquisition of ISE, ISE Gemini, and ISE Mercury) (``Nasdaq
Acquisition Order'').
    \7\ See http://ir.nasdaq.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=977785
(Nasdaq press release announcing completion of its acquisition).
    \8\ See Nasdaq Acquisition Order, supra note 6, at 41611.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69233 (March 25,
2013), 78 FR 19352 (March 29, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-028) (order
approving a proposed rule change to make permanent a pilot program
to permit Nasdaq to accept inbound orders routed by NES from the BX
Equities market and PSX) at 19352 n.6 and accompanying text (``BX
Equity Routing Approval''). See also ISE Gemini Notice, supra note
5, at 96137; ISE Mercury Notice, supra note 5, at 96089.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 79661 (December
22, 2016), 81 FR 96100 (December 29, 2016) (SR-BX-2016-068) at
96100; 79662 (December 22, 2016), 81 FR 96087 (December 29, 2016)
(SR-NASDAQ-2016-169) at 96087; and 79660 (December 22, 2016), 81 FR
96060 (December 29, 2016) (SR-Phlx-2016-120) at 96061. See also ISE
Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96137; ISE Mercury Notice, supra
note 5, at 96089.
    \11\ See Nasdaq Acquisition Order, supra note 6, at 41611 n.8.
The Nasdaq Exchanges, together with ISE, ISE Gemini (with respect to
ISE Mercury), and ISE Mercury (with respect to ISE Gemini), are
referred to herein as the ``Affiliated Exchanges.''
    \12\ See generally ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96137
(discussing that NES is a broker-dealer owned and operated by
Nasdaq, Inc. and affiliated with ISE Gemini and the Affiliated
Exchanges); ISE Mercury Notice, supra note 5, at 96089 (discussing
that NES is a broker-dealer owned and operated by Nasdaq, Inc. and
affiliated with ISE Mercury and the Affiliated Exchanges).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in more detail below, ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury have
now proposed rule changes (1) to permit each respective Exchange to
receive inbound orders in options routed through NES from the
Affiliated Exchanges, pursuant to certain limitations and conditions;
and (2) to permit NES to become a Member of each Exchange to perform
certain routing and other functions.
    ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury's respective rulebooks incorporate by
reference Chapter 19 of ISE's rulebook, which contains rules relating
to the routing of orders, cancellation of orders, and handling of
certain error positions.\13\ ISE submitted a related proposed rule
change to: (1) Route outbound orders in options listed and open for
trading on ISE's system to away markets through NES, either directly or
through a third-party routing broker-dealer; (2) adopt rules regarding
the cancellation of orders and the handling of certain error positions,
including maintenance by NES of an error account; and (3) make related
conforming changes.\14\ These ISE rules, which the Commission is also
approving today, concerning the outbound routing of orders,
cancellation of orders, and handling of error accounts, will be
incorporated by reference into ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury's rules,\15\
and are similar to

rules of Phlx,\16\ as well as the other Nasdaq Exchanges.\17\ Finally,
ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury requested that the Commission approve their
proposals to permit NES to become a Member of each respective Exchange,
as required by ISE Gemini Rule 309 and ISE Mercury Rule 309 because of
NES's affiliation with the Exchanges,\18\ to perform certain functions
relating to routing orders inbound from the Affiliated Exchanges, the
outbound routing of orders to away markets, cancellation of orders, and
the maintenance of an error account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See ISE Gemini Rules, Chapter 19 (incorporating by
reference rules in ISE Rules, Chapter 19); ISE Mercury Rules,
Chapter 19 (incorporating by reference rules in ISE Rules, Chapter
19).
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79665 (December 22,
2016), 81 FR 96092 (December 29, 2016) (``ISE Notice'') (notice of
filing that proposes, among other things, to amend ISE Rules 1903,
1904, and 1905, and make conforming changes to ISE Rule 1901). The
Commission is also today approving this proposed rule change. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79994 (February 9, 2017) (``ISE
Exchange Routing Order'').
    \15\ Consistent with the proposals by ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury
described herein, the ISE rules that the Commission is approving
today also (1) permit ISE to receive inbound orders in options
routed through NES from the Affiliated Exchanges, pursuant to
certain limitations and conditions; and (2) permit NES to become a
Member of ISE to perform certain routing and other functions. See
ISE Notice, supra note 14, at 96093-94; ISE Exchange Routing Order,
supra note 14.
    \16\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96138; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96090-91. See also Phlx Rules 985(c)(2),
1080(m)(ii), (iii), and (v).
    \17\ See Nasdaq Rule 2160(c) and Nasdaq Options Rules, Chapter
VI, Section 11(d)-(g); and BX Rule 2140(c) and BX Options Rules,
Chapter VI, Section 11(d)-(g).
    \18\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96137; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds, as discussed in more
detail below, that the proposed rule changes, as modified by Amendment
Nos. 1 and 2, are consistent with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\19\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule changes, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, are consistent
with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,\20\ which requires, among other
things, that a national securities exchange be so organized and have
the capacity to carry out the purpose of the Act, and to comply and
enforce compliance by its members and persons associated with its
members, with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations
thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange. Further, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule changes, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1
and 2, are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\21\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
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, and 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.
Section 6(b)(5) also requires that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination among customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ In approving these proposed rule changes, the Commission
has considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Restriction on Affiliation

    As noted above, ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury proposed that NES be
permitted to become a Member of each respective Exchange to perform
certain routing and other functions, as described in more detail
below.\22\ Absent Commission approval, ISE Gemini Rule 309 and ISE
Mercury Rule 309 would prohibit NES from becoming a Member of either
Exchange because of its affiliation with each Exchange and its
affiliation with affiliates of each Exchange. Specifically, pursuant to
ISE Gemini Rule 309, without prior Commission approval, a Member of the
Exchange ``shall not be or become an affiliate of the Exchange, or any
facility of the Exchange, or any entity with which the Exchange or any
facility of the Exchange is affiliated.'' \23\ ISE Mercury Rule 309
contains the same restriction.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96137; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96090. See also infra Sections III.B-C.
    \23\ See ISE Gemini Rule 309. See also ISE Gemini Notice, supra
note 5, at 96137.
    \24\ See ISE Mercury Rule 309. See also ISE Mercury Notice,
supra note 5, at 96090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the past, the Commission has expressed concern that the
affiliation of an exchange with one of its members raises potential
conflicts of interest and the potential for unfair competitive
advantage.\25\ Although the Commission continues to be concerned about
potential unfair competition and conflicts of interest between an
exchange's self-regulatory obligations and its commercial interest when
the exchange is affiliated with one of its members, the Commission
believes that it is consistent with the Act, as discussed in more
detail below, to permit NES, an affiliate of each Exchange, to be a
Member of each Exchange to perform each of the proposed functions,
subject to the proposed limitations and conditions. The Commission also
believes that the proposed limitations and conditions will mitigate its
concerns about potential conflicts of interest and unfair competitive
advantage,\26\ and that each Exchange's proposed rules are designed to
ensure that NES cannot use any information advantage it may have
because of its affiliation with each Exchange.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54170 (July
18, 2006), 71 FR 42149 (July 25, 2006) (SR-NASDAQ-2006-006) (order
approving Nasdaq's proposal to adopt Nasdaq Rule 2140, restricting
affiliations between Nasdaq and its members); 53382 (February 27,
2006), 71 FR 11251 (March 6, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2005-77) (order
approving the combination of the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. and
Archipelago Holdings, Inc.); 58673 (September 29, 2008), 73 FR 57707
(October 3, 2008) (SR-Amex-2008-62 and SR-NYSE-2008-60) (order
approving the combination of NYSE Euronext and the American Stock
Exchange LLC); 59135 (December 22, 2008), 73 FR 79954 (December 30,
2008) (SR-ISE-2008-85) (order approving the purchase by ISE Holdings
of an ownership interest in Direct Edge Holdings LLC); 59281
(January 22, 2009), 74 FR 5014 (January 28, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2008-120)
(order approving a joint venture between NYSE and BIDS Holdings
L.P.); 58375 (August 18, 2008), 73 FR 49498 (August 21, 2008) (File
No. 10-182) (order granting the exchange registration of BATS
Exchange, Inc.); 61698 (March 12, 2010), 75 FR 13151 (March 18,
2010) (File Nos. 10-194 and 10-196) (order granting the exchange
registration of EDGX Exchange, Inc. and EDGA Exchange, Inc.); and
62716 (August 13, 2010), 75 FR 51295 (August 19, 2010) (File No. 10-
198) (order granting the exchange registration of BATS-Y Exchange,
Inc.).
    \26\ See infra note 39 and accompanying text.
    \27\ See infra note 40 and accompanying text. The Commission
also notes that the functions to be performed by NES for ISE Gemini
and ISE Mercury, as well as the related limitations and conditions,
are consistent with those previously approved by the Commission for
other exchanges. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
67256 (June 26, 2012), 77 FR 39277 (July 2, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-030)
(order approving rules relating to the establishment of the BX
options market, including the use of an affiliated member for
outbound and inbound routing of options orders) at 39280-82; and
67280 (June 27, 2012), 77 FR 39552 (July 3, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-034)
(order approving a proposed rule change with respect to the
authority of the BX or NES to cancel orders when a technical or
systems issue occurs and the operation of an error account); BX
Equity Routing Approval, supra note 9. In addition, the Commission
is approving today ISE's proposal to allow NES to become a member of
ISE to perform equivalent functions, subject to the same limitations
and conditions. See ISE Exchange Routing Order, supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Inbound Routing

    As discussed above, NES is currently a member of each Nasdaq
Exchange. NES also operates as a facility of each of Nasdaq, Phlx, and
BX that provides outbound options routing from each to other market
centers, subject to certain conditions.\28\ The Commission is approving
today ISE's proposal that NES operate as a facility of ISE that
provides outbound options routing to other market centers, subject to
similar conditions.\29\ The operation of NES as a facility of each of
the Affiliated Exchanges providing outbound routing

services will be subject to oversight by ISE, Nasdaq, BX, and Phlx,
respectively, as well as Commission oversight. Each of the Affiliated
Exchanges will be responsible for ensuring that NES's outbound options
routing services are operated consistent with Section 6 of the Act and
with the respective Affiliated Exchange's rules. In addition, the
Affiliated Exchanges must each file with the Commission rule changes
and fees relating to their outbound options routing services provided
by NES.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Phlx Rule 1080(m)(ii) and (iii); Nasdaq Options Rules,
Chapter VI, Section 11(d)-(f); BX Options Rules, Chapter VI, Section
11(d)-(f). The Commission notes that these conditions are consistent
with the conditions the Commission is approving today for ISE Gemini
and ISE Mercury's operation of NES as a facility of each Exchange
for outbound options routing to other market centers. See infra
Section III.C.
    \29\ See ISE Exchange Routing Order, supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recognizing that the Commission previously expressed concern that
the affiliation of an exchange with one of its members raises the
potential for unfair competitive advantage and potential conflicts of
interest between an exchange's self-regulatory obligations and its
commercial interest, ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury proposed the following
limitations and conditions to permit each Exchange to accept inbound
options orders that NES routes in its capacity as a facility of the
Affiliated Exchanges: \30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96137-38; ISE
Mercury Notice, supra note 5, at 96090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     First, each Exchange and the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (``FINRA'') will maintain a Regulatory Services Agreement
(``RSA''), as well as an agreement pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act
(``17d-2 Agreement'').\31\ Pursuant to the RSA and the 17d-2 Agreement,
FINRA will be allocated regulatory responsibilities to review NES's
compliance with certain Exchange rules.\32\ Pursuant to the RSA,
however, each Exchange retains ultimate responsibility for enforcing
its rules with respect to NES.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
    \32\ NES is also subject to independent oversight by FINRA, its
designated examining authority, for compliance with financial
responsibility requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Second, FINRA will monitor NES for compliance with each of
the Exchange's trading rules, and will collect and maintain certain
related information.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Pursuant to the RSA, both FINRA and the respective Exchange
will collect and maintain all alerts, complaints, investigations and
enforcement actions in which NES (in its capacity as a facility of
each of the Affiliated Exchanges routing orders to the Exchange) is
identified as a participant that has potentially violated applicable
Commission or Exchange rules. The respective Exchange and FINRA will
retain these records in an easily accessible manner in order to
facilitate any potential review conducted by the Commission's Office
of Compliance Inspections and Examinations. See ISE Gemini Notice,
supra note 5, at 96137 n.14 and accompanying text; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96090 n.14 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Third, FINRA will provide a report to each Exchange's
chief regulatory officer (``CRO''), on a quarterly basis, that: (i)
Quantifies all alerts (of which the Exchange or FINRA is aware) that
identify NES as a participant that has potentially violated Commission,
or the respective Exchange's, rules, and (ii) lists all investigations
that identify NES as a participant that has potentially violated
Commission, or the respective Exchange's, rules.
     Fourth, ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury proposed to amend ISE
Gemini Rule 309 and ISE Mercury Rule 309, respectively, to add ISE
Gemini Rule 309(b) and ISE Mercury Rule 309(b), which will provide that
Nasdaq, Inc., as the holding company owning both the Exchange and NES,
shall establish and maintain procedures and internal controls
reasonably designed to ensure that NES does not develop or implement
changes to its system, based on non-public information obtained
regarding planned changes to the Exchange's systems as a result of its
affiliation with the Exchange, until such information is available
generally to similarly situated Exchange Members, in connection with
the provision of inbound routing to the Exchange.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See proposed ISE Gemini Rule 309(b); proposed ISE Mercury
Rule 309(b). ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury each proposed to designate
existing ISE Gemini Rule 309 and ISE Mercury Rule 309, respectively,
as subparagraph (a). See proposed ISE Gemini Rule 309(a); proposed
ISE Mercury Rule 309(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury's proposed
rule changes to permit each Exchange to accept inbound options orders
routed by NES from its Affiliated Exchanges, including the related
change to ISE Gemini Rule 309 and ISE Mercury Rule 309, are consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. Specifically,
the Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent with
Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,\35\ and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). See also supra note 20 and
accompanying text.
    \36\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). See also supra note 21 and
accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the past, the Commission has expressed concern that the
affiliation of an exchange with one of its members raises potential
conflicts of interest and the potential for unfair competitive
advantage.\37\ Although the Commission continues to be concerned about
potential unfair competition and conflicts of interest between an
exchange's self-regulatory obligations and its commercial interest when
the exchange is affiliated with one of its members, for the reasons
discussed below, the Commission believes that it is consistent with the
Act to permit NES, in its capacity as a facility of each of the
Affiliated Exchanges, to route options orders inbound to ISE Gemini and
ISE Mercury, subject to the limitations and conditions described
above.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See supra note 25 and accompanying text.
    \38\ The Commission notes that these limitations and conditions
are consistent with those previously approved by the Commission for
other exchanges. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
67256, supra note 27, at 39281-82; and 69299 (March 25, 2013), 78 FR
19337 (March 29, 2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-15) (order approving a proposed
rule change to make permanent a pilot program to permit PSX to
accept inbound orders routed by NES from BX); and BX Equity Routing
Approval, supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that these limitations and conditions will
mitigate its concerns about potential conflicts of interest and unfair
competitive advantage. In particular, the Commission believes that a
non-affiliated SRO's oversight of NES,\39\ combined with a non-
affiliated SRO's monitoring of NES's compliance with each of the
respective Exchange's rules and quarterly reporting to the respective
Exchange, will help to protect the independence of ISE Gemini and ISE
Mercury's regulatory responsibilities with respect to NES. The
Commission also believes that proposed ISE Gemini Rule 309(b) and
proposed ISE Mercury Rule 309(b) are designed to ensure that NES cannot
use any information advantage it may have because of its affiliation
with ISE Gemini or ISE Mercury.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ This oversight will be accomplished through the 17d-2
Agreement between FINRA and each Exchange and the RSA.
    \40\ See supra note 34 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Outbound Routing, Cancellation of Orders, and Error Accounts

    As discussed above, the Commission is today approving a proposed
rule change by ISE that will amend certain provisions in Chapter 19 of
ISE's rulebook, which is incorporated by reference to, and will
therefore also become, the rules of ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury.\41\
Specifically, these new rules incorporated by reference will (1) permit
ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury to route outbound orders in options listed
and open for trading on their respective systems to away markets
through NES, either directly or through a third-party routing broker-
dealer; and (2) govern cancellation of orders by the Exchange or NES as
either deems necessary to maintain a fair and orderly market if a
technical or systems issue occurs at the Exchange, NES, or a routing
destination, and the maintenance of an error account by NES for the
purpose of addressing error positions that result from a

technical or systems issue at the Exchange, NES, a routing destination,
or an unaffiliated third-party routing broker-dealer that affects one
or more orders.\42\ The Commission found these rules, which will also
become rules of ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury, to be consistent with the
Act.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See supra notes 13-15 and accompanying text.
    \42\ See supra note 14 and accompanying text.
    \43\ See ISE Exchange Routing Order, supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury each proposed that NES be permitted to
perform the same functions pursuant to the same conditions with respect
to the outbound routing of orders, cancellation of orders, and the
handling of error positions as set forth in the ISE proposal.\44\ As
discussed in the ISE Exchange Routing Order, the Commission believes
that the proposed rules and procedures regarding the Exchanges' use of
NES to route orders to away markets, cancellation of orders, and
handling of error positions, which will also apply to ISE Gemini and
ISE Mercury's use of NES, are consistent with the Act, for the reasons,
and pursuant to the protections and considerations, discussed in such
order.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96138; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96091.
    \45\ See ISE Exchange Routing Order, supra note 14, at Section
III.B and III.D. The proposal by ISE being approved today also makes
other conforming changes to rules incorporated by reference. See ISE
Exchange Routing Order, supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchanges propose to make a related, conforming
rule change to ISE Gemini Rule 705 and ISE Mercury Rule 705,
respectively, which do not incorporate by reference ISE's rules.
Currently, pursuant to ISE rules incorporated by reference, ISE Gemini
and ISE Mercury utilize Linkage Handlers \46\ unaffiliated with the
Exchange to route outbound orders.\47\ Pursuant to the proposed rule
change by ISE, as applied to the Exchanges, ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury
will no longer utilize unaffiliated Linkage Handlers to route outbound
orders and instead, NES will route orders to other options exchanges,
either directly, or indirectly through unaffiliated third-party routing
broker-dealers, on behalf of ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury.\48\
Accordingly, ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury have proposed to remove ISE
Gemini Rule 705(d)(4) and ISE Mercury Rule 705(d)(4), respectively,
which provide an exception to the limits on compensation in ISE Gemini
Rule 705(d) and ISE Mercury Rule 705(d) for Members to the extent such
Members are acting as Linkage Handlers.\49\ ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury
explained that Phlx does not have a similar provision and ISE is also
removing this provision from its comparable rule.\50\ The Commission
believes that this minor, conforming revision is consistent with the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ A ``Linkage Handler'' is a broker that is unaffiliated with
the Exchange with which the Exchange has contracted to provide
Routing Services, as that term is defined in ISE Rule 1903, by
routing ISO(s) to other exchange(s) as an agent on behalf of Public
Customer and Non-Customer Orders according to the requirements of
Rule 1901 (prohibition on trade-throughs) and Rule 1902 (prohibition
on locked and crossed markets). See ISE Rule 1901, Supplementary
Material .03. ISE Gemini Rules 100(a)(28) and (39), and ISE Mercury
Rules 100(a)(28) and (39), define ``Non-Customer Order'' and
``Public Customer Order,'' respectively.
    \47\ See ISE Rule 1903(a).
    \48\ See ISE Exchange Routing Order, supra note 14.
    \49\ See proposed ISE Gemini Rule 705(d); proposed ISE Mercury
Rule 705(d).
    \50\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96138; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96091. See also ISE Notice, supra note 14,
at 96095 (noting that, unlike NES, Linkage Handlers are not
affiliated with ISE and ISE does not believe that such an exception
to compensation limits is necessary for NES).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Implementation of Proposed Rule Change

    ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury stated that they intend to begin
implementation of the proposed rule changes in the first quarter of
2017 and third quarter of 2017, respectively, and that the migration
will be on a symbol-by-symbol basis.\51\ The Commission expects that
the Exchanges will issue alerts to Members to announce the relevant
migration date for specific symbols. ISE Gemini and ISE Mercury
represented that they will add notations in each rulebook to cross-
reference the amended rule text and clarify the respective
implementation dates.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96138; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96091.
    \52\ See ISE Gemini Notice, supra note 5, at 96138; ISE Mercury
Notice, supra note 5, at 96091.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\53\ that the proposed rule changes (SR-ISEGemini-2016-16; SR-
ISEMercury-2016-22), each as modified by their respective Amendment
Nos. 1 and 2, be, and hereby are, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-02992 Filed 2-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 221)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 66722]
[DOCID:fr16no06-31]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 239 and 258

[EPA-R07-RCRA-2006-0877; FRL-8242-8]

Adequacy of Missouri Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve Missouri's Research, Development
and Demonstration (RD&D) permit program and updates to the approved
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Permit (MSWLP) program. On March 22,
2004, the EPA issued final regulations allowing RD&D permits to be
issued to certain municipal solid waste landfills by approved states.
On April 14, 2006, Missouri submitted an application to the EPA seeking
Federal approval of its RD&D requirements and to update Federal
approval of its MSWLP program.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
December 18, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2006-0877 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov : Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Send written comments to Chilton McLaughlin, EPA Region 7,
Solid Waste/Pollution Prevention Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas
City, Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to Chilton
McLaughlin, EPA Region 7, Solid Waste/Pollution Prevention Branch, 901
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday,
8 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chilton McLaughlin at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of the Federal
Register, EPA is approving Missouri's Research, Development and
Demonstration permit program and updates to the approved Municipal
Solid Waste Landfill Permit (MSWLP) program as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipates no relevant adverse comments to
this action. If no relevant adverse comments are received in response
to this action, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this
action. If EPA receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final
rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed action. EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule
and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule
which is located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: November 6, 2006.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
 [FR Doc. E6-19383 Filed 11-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 111)]
[Notices]
[Page 32150]
[DOCID:fr11jn07-89]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC
20549

Extension:
    Rule 17a-1, SEC File No. 270-244, OMB Control No. 3235-0208

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 17a-1 (17 CFR 240.17a-1) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) requires that all national
securities exchanges, national securities associations, registered
clearing agencies, and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board keep
on file for a period of five years, two years in an accessible place,
all documents that they make or receive respecting their self-
regulatory activities, and that such documents be available for
examination by the Commission.
    The Commission staff estimates that the average number of hours
necessary for compliance with the requirements of Rule 17a-1 is 50
hours per year. There are 22 entities required to comply with the rule:
10 national securities exchanges, 1 national securities association, 10
registered clearing agencies, and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board. In addition, 3 national securities exchanges notice-registered
pursuant to Section 6(g) of the Act are required to preserve records of
determinations made under Rule 3a55-1, which the Commission staff
estimates will take 1 hour per exchange, for a total of 3 hours.
Accordingly, the Commission staff estimates that the total number of
hours necessary to comply with the requirements of Rule 17a-1 is 1,103
hours. The average cost per hour is $50. Therefore, the total cost of
compliance for the respondents is $55,150.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Comments should be directed to: R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an e-
mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted within 60
days of this notice.

    Dated: June 4, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-11164 Filed 6-8-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37770-37772]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14829]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0035; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-178-AD;
Amendment 39-17094; AD 2012-12-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports of fatigue cracking on the lower main sill inner
chord of the hatch opening of the overwing emergency exit. This AD
requires repetitive inspections for cracking, corrosion damage, and any
other irregularity of the lower main sill inner chord and surrounding
structure, and repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct fatigue cracking on the lower main sill inner chord of the
hatch opening of the overwing emergency exit, which could result in
reduced structural integrity of the hatch opening of the overwing
emergency exit and consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective July 30, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of July 30,
2012.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6577; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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 published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2012 (77 FR
3187). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections for
cracking, corrosion damage, and any other irregularity of the lower
main sill inner chord and surrounding structure, and repair if
necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(77 FR 3187, January 23, 2012) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Clarify Terminating Action and Post-Repair Inspection
Program

    Boeing requested that we revise the wording in paragraph (g) of the
NPRM (77 FR 3187, January 23, 2012) to clarify that the AD terminates
only the repetitive inspections required by the NPRM. Boeing also
stated that the inspection area designated in the NPRM may be subject
to other repetitive inspections following repairs done per another AD.
    All Nippon Airways (ANA) requested that we confirm that the post-
repair inspection program is not mandatory.
    Delta Air Lines (Delta) requested that the NPRM (77 FR 3187,
January 23, 2012) be revised to include the use of the ``proactive''
doubler installations as a terminating action. Delta stated that
paragraph (g) of the NPRM authorizes only the on-condition repair as a
terminating action. Delta requested that we include a separate
paragraph to define the terminating action provisions.

    We agree that clarification is needed. Other ADs require
inspections of certain structure covered by this AD. The certification
basis of the airplane includes damage tolerance inspections for these
repairs, and they are already available in the service repair manual
(SRM). The required SRM repairs include post-repair inspections. These
inspections are required by the regulations identified in the
certification basis of the airplane and other operational rules, and
not by this AD. We have clarified the terminating action for the
inspections in this AD by revising paragraph (g) of this AD and adding
paragraph (h) to this AD. To further clarify, the ``proactive'' doubler
installation and the on-condition repair both terminate the
inspections.

Request To Clarify the Applicability Regarding the Installation of
Winglets

    American Airlines (American) requested that we revise the NPRM (77
FR 3187, January 23, 2012) to clearly state how the compliance times
for airplanes covered by the applicability of the NPRM are affected by
the installation of winglets. American stated that many operators have
affected airplanes by this AD which have been modified to have
winglets.
    Aviation Partners Boeing (APB) stated it has reviewed Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated July 28, 2011, and the NPRM (77 FR
3187, January 23, 2012) as it relates to the APB winglet supplemental
type certificate (STC) ST01920SE and determined that the installation
of the winglet STC does not affect this proposed rule. APB noted that
data to support this comment is available from APB upon request from
the FAA. We infer that APB is requesting that we clarify the effect of
the STC on the proposed rule.
    We agree to clarify. The installation of winglets as specified in
STC ST01920SE does not affect accomplishment of the requirements of
this AD, and an AMOC is not necessary for a ``change in product'' AMOC
approval request. We have therefore added this provision in new Note 1
to paragraph (c) of this AD.

Request To Allow Re-Sequencing of Steps

    American requested that we revise the ``Differences Between
Proposed AD and the Service Information'' paragraph of the preamble,
and paragraph (h)(2) of the NPRM (77 FR 3187, January 23, 2012) to
allow re-sequencing of ``open-up'' and ``close-up'' steps only, while
maintaining the sequence for inspection and repair. American stated
that allowing re-sequencing of those steps would reduce the number of
AMOC requests for tasks that do not address the unsafe condition.
    We partially agree with the request. Because the ``Differences
Between Proposed AD and the Service Information'' paragraph is not
restated in the final rule, we have not made any change to the AD in
that regard. However, we have revised paragraph (i)(2) of this AD
(referred to as paragraph (h)(2) in the NPRM (77 FR 3187, January 23,
2012)) to state that ``open-up'' and ``close-up'' steps may be done in
any practical order.

Change to Paragraph (j)(3) of the NPRM (77 FR 3187, January 23, 2012)

    We incorrectly included a reference to 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment 45
in paragraph (i)(3) of the NPRM (77 FR 3187, January 23, 2012). That
reference has been removed from this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (77 FR 3187, January 23, 2012) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 3187, January 23, 2012).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 377 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Action                         Labor cost             Parts cost        Cost per product                 Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.......................  28 work-hours x $85 per hour =           $0   $2,380 per inspection      $897,260 per inspection cycle.
                                    $2,380 per inspection cycle.                  cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    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 that this AD:
    (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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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 airworthiness
directive (AD):

2012-12-14 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17094; Docket No. FAA-
2012-0035; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-178-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective July 30, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-200 and -300
series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated July 28, 2011.

    Note 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD: Supplemental Type
Certificate (STC) ST01920SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory--and--
Guidance--Library/rgstc.nsf/0/082838ee177dbf62862576a4005cdfc0/
$FILE/ST01920SE.pdf) does not affect the ability to accomplish the
actions required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC
ST01920SE is installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method
of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply
with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of fatigue cracking on the lower
main sill inner chord of the hatch opening of the overwing emergency
exit. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking
on the lower main sill inner chord of the hatch opening of the
overwing emergency exit, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the hatch opening of the overwing emergency exit and
consequent rapid decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections and Repair

    Within the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0228,
dated July 28, 2011, except as provided by paragraph (i)(3) of this
AD: Do a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection for cracking
of the lower main sill inner chord around body station (STA) 883.5;
a detailed inspection for cracking, corrosion damage, and any other
irregularity, of the lower main sill inner chord and surrounding
structure around STA 883.5; and a detailed inspection for cracking,
corrosion damage, or other irregularity, of the lower main sill
inner chord and surrounding structure around STA 903.5; as
applicable; and do all applicable repairs; in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
53A0228, dated July 28, 2011, except as required by paragraphs
(i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable repairs before
further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter within
the applicable times and intervals specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated
July 28, 2011. Doing a structural repair specified in paragraph (h)
of this AD, terminates the inspections for that location only.

(h) Optional Terminating Action

    Doing a structural repair (doubler installation) in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated July 28, 2011, terminates the
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD for that location
only.

(i) Exceptions

    (1) If any cracking, corrosion damage, or other irregularity is
found during any inspection required by this AD, and Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated July 28, 2011, specifies to
contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair
the cracking, corrosion damage, or other irregularity, using a
method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (j) of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated July
28, 2011, specifies that the sequence of steps to do the actions can
be changed, this AD does not allow the sequence of steps to be
changed for the inspection and repair; however, the open-up and
close-up steps may be done in any practical order.
    (3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated July
28, 2011, specifies a compliance time ``after the original issue
date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within
the specified compliance time ``after the effective date of this
AD.''

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Berhane Alazar,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1)You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference (IBR) of the following service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51:
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0228, dated July 28,
2011.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 7, 2012.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-14829 Filed 6-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 147 (Wednesday, August 2, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 35942]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16221]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

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

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1794-002.
    Applicants: Innovative Solar 42, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Revision to Market Base Rate Tariff
to be effective 6/10/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5049.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2146-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SA 780 4th Rev--NITSA with
Project Spokane, LLC to be effective 7/27/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5054.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2147-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Palo Verde North Gila Line ANPP
High Voltage Switchyard Interconnection Agreemen to be effective 7/26/
2017.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2148-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-07-26_Prairie Power
Attachment O Clean-Up Filing to be effective 9/25/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2149-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of the Alternative Transmission
Service Agreement (Rate Schedule No. 521) of Northern States Power
Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2150-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Cost Responsibility
Agreement SA No. 4733, Queue Position #NQ147 to be effective 7/19/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5080.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES17-42-000.
    Applicants: AEP Generating Company, Appalachian Power Company,
Indiana Michigan Power Company, Kentucky Power Company, Kingsport Power
Company, Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Southwestern Electric
Power Company, Wheeling Power Company.
    Description: Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act
for Authorization to Issue Securities of AEP Generating Company et al.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5081.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

    Docket Numbers: ES17-43-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.
    Description: Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act
for Authorization to Issue Securities of Southwestern Electric Power
Company.
    Filed Date: 7/26/17.
    Accession Number: 20170726-5082.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 26, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-16221 Filed 8-1-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P