[Federal Register: October 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 204)]
[Notices]
[Page 65392-65393]
[DOCID:fr22oc10-131]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63121; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-119]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rule 652 (``Limitation
of Exchange Liability and Reimbursement of Certain Expenses'') To
Require Member Organizations on the Exchange's Trading Floor To Procure
and Maintain Liability Insurance

October 18, 2010.

I. Introduction

    On September 1, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``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\ a proposed rule change to amend Exchange Rule 652
(``Limitation of Exchange Liability and Reimbursement of Certain
Expenses'') to require member organizations on the Exchange's trading
floor to procure and maintain liability insurance. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on September
17, 2010.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the proposal. This
order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62892 (September 10,
2010), 75 FR 57090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to require that member organizations located
on the Exchange's trading floor procure and maintain liability
insurance by December 31, 2010. The insurance would provide defense and
indemnity coverage for the member organization, any person associated
with the member organization and the Exchange for any action or
proceeding brought, or claim made, to impose liability upon the member
organization, associated person or the Exchange which results from the
member organization's or associated person's conduct.
    According to the Exchange, it does not intend this amendment to
provide relief associated with financial loss related to buying and
selling securities; the insurance coverage is intended to provide
coverage to the Exchange for its sole, concurrent, or contributory
negligence or other wrongdoing connected to a claim arising from the
member organization's or associated person's conduct. The member
organization would be required to maintain insurance with a limit that
is not less than $1,000,000 without erosion by defense costs. Each
member organization located on the trading floor would be required to
provide a certificate of insurance to be issued directly to the
Exchange demonstrating the insurance was procured and is maintained.
The Exchange also proposes to expand the language in Rule 652 to apply
the rule to individuals of the Exchange, specifically officers,
directors and employees. The Exchange believes that this change will
clarify that individuals serving as officers, directors or employees
are also the subject of Rule 652.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\4\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\5\ which requires, among
other things, that the proposed rule change be designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general to protect investors and the public interest. The
Commission believes that the proposed rule change is a reasonable means
of protecting the Exchange's financial resources that are normally used
to support the Exchange's surveillance and self-regulatory
responsibilities, rather than having this capital diverted to defending
litigation claims.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that requiring member organizations to
obtain insurance coverage to protect the Exchange from claims resulting
from their own conduct is not an undue burden. Furthermore, the
Commission believes that the proposed rule change may conserve Exchange
capital resources, and will provide additional coverage for member
organizations since the member organizations are within the scope of
the required insurance's coverage.
    Finally, the Commission believes that amending Exchange Rule 652 to
add officers, directors and employees in addition to the Exchange will
remove any ambiguity or confusion by explicitly stating that the word
``Exchange'' as used in Rule 652 includes such individuals.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
\6\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2010-119) be, and it hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-26676 Filed 10-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39184-39187]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14276]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0322]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Cumberland River, Mile 190.5 to 194.0;
Nashville, TN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation for
all waters of the Cumberland River beginning at mile marker 190.5 and
ending at mile marker 194.0. This special local regulation is necessary
to

provide safety for the participants in the ``Thunder on the
Cumberland'' marine event. This rulemaking restricts transits into,
through and within the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative. We invite your
comments on this rulemaking to assess for future and events and similar
rulemakings.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m. on June 17, 2016 through 6
p.m. on June 19, 2016. Comments and related material must be received
by the Coast Guard on or before July 18, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0322 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Ashley Schad, MSD Nashville, Nashville, TN,
at<PHONE_NUMBER> or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    Fairchild Racing is conducting power boat races daily beginning on
June 17, 2016 through June 19, 2016. The Coast Guard is issuing this
temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant
to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a
rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency
for good cause finds that those procedures are ``impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not
publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this
rule because the scheduled race event, consisting of various sized
power vessels with at least 50 participants on the Cumberland River,
presents potential navigational safety hazards. The Captain of the Port
Ohio Valley (COTP) was notified of this event earlier this year and
upon receiving and understanding all the details of the racing event,
determined that additional safety measures are necessary to protect
participants, spectators, and waterway users during this event. It is
impracticable to publish an NPRM because we must establish this special
local regulation by June 17, 2016. This rule provides for a comment
period and comments received will be reviewed and analyzed to assist
the Coast Guard in future rulemakings establishing similar regulatory
requirements. The Coast Guard will notify the public and maritime
community that this special local regulation will be in effect and of
its enforcement periods via broadcast notices to mariners (BNM).
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective
date of this rule would be contrary to public interest because
immediate action is needed to establish a special local regulation to
protect participants and spectators during the ``Thunder on the
Cumberland'' racing event beginning on June 17, 2016.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1233. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined that
potential safety hazards associated with a speed-boat race on a
navigable waterway present safety concerns for participants,
spectators, and other person and vessels on the waterway. This rule is
needed to protect personnel, vessels, and these navigable waters
before, during, and after the scheduled racing event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a special local regulation which will be
enforced from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. and 12 p.m. to 6 p.m. daily from June
17, 2016 through June 19, 2016, for all waters of the Cumberland River
beginning at mile marker 190.5 and ending at mile marker 194.0. The
duration of the special local regulation is intended to ensure the
safety of vessels, participants, spectators and other waterway users
before, during, and after the scheduled event. No vessel or person
would be permitted to enter the regulated area without obtaining
permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory
text for this rule appears at the end of this document.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive order related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the special local regulation.
This special local regulation restricts transit on the Cumberland River
from mile 190.5 to mile 194.0, for 8 hours a day for three days in
June; Broadcast Notices to Mariners and Local Notices to Mariners will
inform the community of this special local regulation and any changes
in the planned scheduled so that they may plan accordingly for transits
during this short restriction. Vessel traffic may request permission
from the COTP Ohio Valley or a designated representative to enter the
restricted area.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
special local regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons
stated in section V.A above this rule would not have a significant
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule

would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves special local regulated area that would prohibit entry to
unauthorized vessels. It is categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

VI. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of future regulations
and rulemakings. If you submit a comment, please include the docket
number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this TFR as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233

0
2. Add Sec.  100.35T08-0322 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35T08-0322  Special Local Regulation; Cumberland River Mile
190.5 to 194.0, Nashville, TN.

    (a) Regulated area. All waters of the Cumberland River beginning at
mile marker 190.5 and ending at mile marker 194.0 at Nashville, TN.
    (b) Periods of enforcement. This rule will be enforced from 9 a.m.
to 11 a.m. and from 12 p.m. to 6 p.m. daily June 17, 2016 through June
19, 2016.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Entry into or transit through this area is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or
a designated representative.
    (2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the
area must request permission from the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley
or a designated representative. U.S. Coast Guard Sector Ohio Valley may
be contacted on VHF Channel 13 or 16, or at 1-800-253-7465.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley
or a designated representative will inform

the public through broadcast notices to mariners of the enforcement
period for this special local regulation as well as any changes in the
dates and times of enforcement.

    Dated: May 26, 2016.
R. V. Timme,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2016-14276 Filed 6-15-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 245 (Friday, December 20, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70000-70003]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0406; Product Identifier 2019-NM-059-AD; Amendment
39-21006; AD 2019-24-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model MD-90-30 airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports indicating that certain center wing stringers and skins are
potentially susceptible to cracking. This AD requires repetitive eddy
current, low frequency (ETLF) inspections of the left and right side
fastener holes for any crack; repetitive eddy current, high frequency
(ETHF) inspections of the lower skin for any crack; and repair if any
crack is found. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 24, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 24,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110 SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0406.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0406; 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 regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is 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: David Truong, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-627-
5210; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model MD-90-30 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
June 21, 2019 (84 FR 29105). The NPRM was prompted by reports
indicating that based on Model MD-80 airplane service experience,
certain center wing stringers and skins are potentially susceptible to
fatigue-related cracking on Model MD-90 airplanes. The Model MD-80 and
Model MD-90 wings share the same basic design and experience similar
stresses, but no such cracking has been found on Model MD-90 airplanes.
Cracks on Model MD-80 airplanes were found in the center wing lower
stringers, at the inboard end where they are joined to the airplane
centerline by end fittings; in the lower stringer end fittings, at the
outboard end where they attach to stringers; and in the lower forward
and aft skins, underneath cracked stringers. If not addressed, this
cracking could result in the inability of the structure to sustain
limit loads, and adversely affect the structural integrity of the
airplane. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive ETLF inspections of
the left and right side fastener holes for any crack; repetitive ETHF
inspections of the lower skin for any crack; and repair if any crack is
found.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request for Clarification of Other Relevant Rulemaking Section

    Boeing requested clarification regarding the number of cracking
occurrences reported in areas outside of those addressed by AD 2016-07-
28, Amendment 39-18473 (81 FR 21253, April 11, 2016) (``AD 2016-07-
28''), or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-

57A244, dated March 3, 2016. Boeing noted that in the NPRM, the Other
Relevant Rulemaking section stated that since AD 2016-07-28 was issued,
cracking was found at fastener holes common to stringers (S) S-11
through S-22, and around the external bracket angle at S-18 and S-19.
Boeing emphasized that there was only one case of cracking, at S-13.
    In addition, Boeing requested that the Other Relevant Rulemaking
section in the NPRM be revised to explain that the new service
information that Boeing is developing for Model MD-80 airplanes is to
address potential cracking in new stringer locations and is not in
response to actual in-service reports of cracking.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's assessment of crack findings.
Of the cracks found since issuance of AD 2016-07-28, only one was found
at S-13--the only area not addressed by AD 2016-07-28. All remaining
crack findings were within the scope of the requirements of AD 2016-07-
28. As a result of these cracks, Boeing made the determination to
expand the inspection to stringers S-11 through S-22. This AD addresses
those stringers on Model MD-90-30 airplanes.
    The FAA acknowledges that the service information for the Model MD-
80 airplanes, Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-57A244, dated March 3, 2016,
which is mandated by AD 2016-07-28, has been revised. Boeing Service
Bulletin MD80-57A244, Revision 1, dated October 1, 2019, updates the
inspection method and expands the inspection area. The FAA may consider
further rulemaking in the future to mandate these changes for Model MD-
80 airplanes.
    Because the Other Relevant Rulemaking section in SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION is not retained in final rules, the FAA has not revised
this final rule in regard to these issues.

Request To Revise Cost Information

    Delta Air Lines (DAL) requested clarification regarding the number
of airplanes on the U.S. registry that would be affected by the NPRM.
DAL stated that the Costs of Compliance paragraph indicated that an
estimated 43 airplanes would be affected. However, DAL is the only U.S.
operator of the affected airplanes, and DAL reports that there are 65
airplanes in their operations specification.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter and has revised the Costs of
Compliance paragraph in this final rule accordingly.

Request for Legible Service Information

    DAL requested that better quality copies of certain sheets of
Boeing Drawing SN09570007 be provided to operators. The commenter
stated that the poor quality of these sheets renders them useless in
terms of doing inspections and is concerned about showing compliance
with the requirements specified in the proposed AD.
    The FAA acknowledges the commenter's concern regarding the
legibility of certain sheets of Boeing Drawing SN09570007. Since Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated March 19, 2019, does not
include Boeing Drawing SN09570007 in the ``Required for Compliance
(RC)'' section, the drawing is not required to comply with this AD. The
drawing is referenced in Paragraph 1.J.2., Planning Information,
References, Data Supplied with the Service Bulletin, in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated March 19, 2019. Operators notified
Boeing about the illegible drawing sheets, and in response, Boeing
issued Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-19-0549-01B, dated October
4, 2019, which provides clearer images of Boeing Drawing SN09570007.
The FAA recognizes that Boeing Drawing SN09570007 may provide helpful
information to operators. Therefore, the FAA has added Note 1 to
paragraph (g) of this AD to notify operators that if they have
illegible pages of Boeing Drawing SN09570007, additional guidance can
be found in Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-19-0549-01B, dated
October 4, 2019.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously
and minor editorial changes. The FAA determined that these minor
changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    The FAA also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator (other than the estimated number of
affected airplanes as explained under the ``Request to Revise Cost
Information'' section of this final rule) or increase the scope of this
final rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated
March 19, 2019. This service information describes procedures for
repetitive ETLF inspections of the left and right side fastener holes
for any crack, repetitive ETHF inspections of the lower skin for any
crack, and repair if any crack is found. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 65 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
         Action                   Labor cost            Parts cost      Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection..............  30 work-hours x $85 per                $0   $2,550 per            $165,750 per
                           hour = $2,550 per                           inspection cycle.     inspection cycle.
                           inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates 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.
    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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

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

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):

2019-24-17 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-21006; Docket No. FAA-
2019-0406; Product Identifier 2019-NM-059-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 24, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model MD-90-30
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports indicating that certain center
wing stringers and skins are potentially susceptible to cracking.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracking of the center wing
stringers and skins, which could result in the inability of the
structure to sustain limit loads, and adversely affect the
structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated March 19, 2019, do
all applicable actions identified as ``RC'' (required for
compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated
March 19, 2019.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated March 19, 2019, refers to Boeing Drawing
SN09570007, as data supplied with this service bulletin. If the
pages of Boeing Drawing SN09570007 are illegible, guidance can be
found in Boeing Multi Operator Message MOM-MOM-19-0549-01B, dated
October 4, 2019.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated
March 19, 2019, uses the phrase ``the original issue date of this
service bulletin,'' this AD requires using ``the effective date of
this AD.''
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated March
19, 2019, specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions and
doing the repair: This AD requires doing the repair using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO 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 (j)(1) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los
Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: For service
information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (ii) of
this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact David Truong,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5224; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (4) of this AD.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) 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) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-57A031, dated March 19,
2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110 SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (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_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on December 4, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-27465 Filed 12-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 123)]
[Notices]
[Page 35291-35293]
[DOCID:fr27jn07-108]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55939; File No. SR-OCC-2007-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Credit Default
Basket Options

June 21, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on April 20, 2007, The
Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') and on June 16, 2007, amended the
proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which
items have been prepared primarily by OCC. 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 purposed rule change would permit OCC to clear and settle
credit default basket options (``CDBOs'').

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

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC 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. OCC 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 OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 permit OCC to clear
and settle CDBOs, which are options related to the creditworthiness of
an issuer or guarantor (``reference entity'') of one or more specified
debt securities (``reference obligations''). CDBOs are proposed to be
traded by the Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'').\3\ CDBOs are
binary options that pay a fixed amount to the holder of the option upon
the occurrence of a ``credit event'' affecting the reference
obligations.\4\ Characteristics of CDBOs are described below, followed
by an explanation of the specific rule changes being proposed in order
that OCC may clear and settle them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55938 (June 21, 2007)
(notice of filing of proposed rule change) [File No. SR-CBOE-2007-
26].
    \4\ ``Binary'' options (also sometimes referred to as
``digital'' options) are ``all-or-nothing'' options that pay a fixed
amount if automatically exercised and otherwise pay nothing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of Credit Default Basket Options
    CDBOs are structured as binary options with an automatic exercise
feature. They are very similar to Credit Default Options (``CDOs'')
that were recently approved for trading by CBOE and clearing by OCC
except that CDBOs are based upon multiple reference entities instead of
a single reference entity.\5\ A CDBO will be automatically exercised
and an exercise settlement amount will be payable if a ``credit event''
occurs with respect to any one of the reference entities at any time
prior to the last day of trading. As in the case

of a CDO, a ``credit event'' is generally defined as any failure to pay
on any of the reference obligations or any other occurrence that would
constitute an ``event of default'' or ``restructuring'' under the terms
of any of the reference obligations of a particular reference entity
and that the listing exchange has determined would be a credit event
for purposes of the CDBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55871 (June 6, 2007), 72
FR 32372 (June 12, 2007) [File No. SR-CBOE-2006-84]. See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55872 (June 6, 2007), 72 FR
32693 (June 13, 2007) [File No. SR-OCC-2007-01].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CDBOs may be thought of as a bundle of CDOs in that there is a
fixed exercise settlement amount that is determined for each of the
reference entities included in the basket of reference entities
underlying the CDBO. The exercise settlement amount may be the same for
all of the reference entities or it may be different for each one.
    CDBOs come in two types: Multiple payout CDBOs and single payout
CDBOs. A multiple payout CDBO is automatically exercised each time
there is a credit event affecting any one of the reference entities.
Once the CDBO has been exercised with respect to that reference entity
such reference entity is removed from the basket. In the unlikely event
that a CDBO is exercised with respect to all of the reference entities
in the basket, the expiration of the option would be accelerated. A
single payout CDBO, on the other hand, is automatically exercised only
the first time that a credit event is confirmed with respect to any one
of the reference entities. A single payout CDBO cannot be exercised
again with respect to any other reference entity and its expiration
date will be accelerated. With either a multiple payout CDBO or a
single payout CDBO, the exercise settlement amount is the exercise
settlement amount that was assigned by the listing exchange to the
reference entity affected by the credit event.
By-Law and Rule Amendments Applicable to CDOs
    In order to accommodate the clearing and settlement of CDBOs, OCC
proposes to amend the By-Law Article and Rule Chapter that were adopted
for CDOs.
1. Terminology--Article I, Section 1 and Article XIV, Section 1 of the
By-Laws
    The definition of ``option contract'' in Article I of the By-Laws
is amended to include CDBOs. ``Adjustment event'' and ``credit event''
are defined in Article XIV by reference to the rules of the listing
exchange. The terms ``credit event confirmation'' and ``credit event
confirmation deadline'' are used, respectively, to refer to the notice
that must be provided by the listing exchange or other reporting
authority to OCC that a credit event has occurred (and that a CDBO will
therefore automatically be exercised) and to the deadline for receipt
of such notice if it is to be treated as having been received on the
business day on which it is submitted. Credit event confirmations
received after the deadline on the expiration date but before the
expiration time will be given effect but may result in delayed exercise
settlement.
    OCC is also amending the definition of the term ``exercise
settlement amount'' in Article XIV for purposes of CDBOs. The exercise
settlement amount of a CDBO is the amount specified by the exchange on
which the option is traded that will be paid in settlement when a CDBO
is automatically exercised as a result of a credit event affecting a
particular reference entity. The exercise settlement amount for each
reference entity will be determined by the exchange at the time of
listing when the exchange fixes the other variable terms for the
options of a particular class or series.
    OCC is replacing the definitions of ``variable terms,''
``premium,'' and ``multiplier'' in Article I of the By-Laws with
revised definitions in Article XIV, Section 1, that are applicable to
CDBOs. The term ``class'' is also redefined in Article XIV, Section 1.
To be within the same class, CDBOs must have the same reporting
authority, which OCC anticipates will ordinarily be the listing
exchange. This is necessary because of the degree of discretion that
the reporting authority will have in determining whether a credit event
has occurred.
    Other terms that were created or amended for CDOs will be modified
to apply to CDBOs as well.
2. Terms of Cleared Contracts--Article VI, Section 10(e)
    A new paragraph (e) is added to Article VI, Section 10 so that an
exchange is required to designate the exercise settlement amount and
expiration date for a series of CDBOs at the time the series is opened
for trading. Section 10(e) also reminds the reader that CDBOs are
subject to adjustment under Article XIV.
3. Rights and Obligations--Article XIV, Section 2
    Article XIV, Section 2A defines the general rights and obligations
of holders and writers of CDBOs. As noted above, the holder of a CDBO
that is automatically exercised has the right to receive the fixed
exercise settlement amount for the particular reference entity affected
by a credit event, and the assigned writer has the obligation to pay
that amount.
4. Adjustments of Credit Default Basket Options--Article XIV, Section
3; Determination of Occurrence of Credit Event--Article XIV, Section 4
    Article XIV, Section 3 provides for adjustment of CDBOs in
accordance with the rules of the listing exchange. For example, CBOE's
proposed rules provide for adjustment of CDBOs in the case of certain
corporate events affecting the reference obligations, and OCC proposes
simply to defer to those rules and to the determinations of CBOE
pursuant to those rules. Accordingly, as in the case of CDOs, OCC will
have no responsibility for adjustment determinations with respect to
CDBOs.
    Similarly, Section 4 provides that the listing exchange for a class
of CDBOs will have responsibility for determining the occurrence of a
credit event that will result in automatic exercise of the options of
that class with respect to a particular reference entity. The listing
exchange has the obligation to provide a credit event confirmation to
OCC in order to trigger the automatic exercise.
5. Exercise and Settlement--Chapter XV of the Rules and Rule 801
    CDBOs would not be subject to the exercise-by-exception procedures
applicable to most other options under OCC's Rules but would instead be
automatically exercised prior to or at expiration if the specified
criterion for exercise is met. The procedures for the automatic
exercise of CDBOs, as well as their assignment and settlement
(including during periods when a clearing member is suspended), are set
forth in Rules 1501 through 1505 of new Chapter XV and in revised Rule
801(b).
6. Special Margin Requirements--Rule 601; Deposits in Lieu of Margin--
Rule 1506
    As in the case of CDOs, OCC will not initially margin CDBOs through
its ``STANS'' system in the same way that other options are margined.
Because of the fixed payout feature of CDOs and CDBOs, further systems
development is needed to accommodate these options in STANS on a
portfolio basis. Until such development is completed, elements of STANS
will be used to determine the expected liquidating value of each class
of CDBOs and CDOs by extracting certain information regarding the
default probability from the listed equity options on the common stock
of the reference entity and the market price of the CDBOs and CDOs.
Expected liquidating values can then be derived from simulated price
movements in the stock over a range of values. Thus, general principles
of

STANS will be applied, but each class of CDBOs and CDOs will be treated
as a separate portfolio and will not be included within the entire
portfolio of a particular account. An exception to this will be in the
case where a firm has a net long position in CDBO or CDO contracts that
are not required to be segregated and the risk computed under this
methodology is less than 100% of the premium value of the net long
position, the excess long value will be used to cover requirements
associated with other cleared contracts. This margin methodology will
result in a more conservative risk estimate than if the contracts were
fully integrated in STANS since offsets in the risk calculation between
these products and others will not be recognized except to the extent
of any excess long value. Ultimately, CDBOs will be incorporated into
the STANS system and will be valued and margined on a risk basis.
    OCC does not propose to accept escrow deposits in lieu of clearing
margin for CDBOs. Therefore, Rule 1506 states that Rule 610, which
otherwise would permit such deposits, does not apply to CDBOs.
7. Acceleration of Expiration Date--Rule 1507
    This provision would accelerate the expiration date of a single
payout CDBO when the option is deemed to have been automatically
exercised on any day prior to the expiration date and to accelerate the
expiration date of a multiple payout CDBO when the option is deemed to
have been automatically exercised with respect to every reference
entity underlying such option prior to the expiration date.
    The proposed changes to OCC's By-Laws and Rules are consistent with
the purposes and requirements of Section 17A of the Act, as amended,
because they are designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance
and settlement of transactions in, including exercises of, credit
default basket options, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in the clearance and settlement of such transactions,
to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a national system
for the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of such
transactions, and in general to protect investors and the public
interest. They accomplish these purposes by applying substantially the
same rules and procedures to these transactions as OCC applies to
similar transactions in other cash-settled options except to the extent
that special rules and procedures are required in order to accommodate
unique features of CDBOs. Other than as described in this Item II, the
proposed rule change is not inconsistent with the existing rules of
OCC, including rules proposed to be amended.

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

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would 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 were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the proposed rule change, and none have been received.

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

    Within thirty-five 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 ninety 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-OCC-2007-06 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-OCC-2007-06. 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 OCC and on OCC's Web
site at http://www.theocc.com/publications/rules/proposed_changes/sr_occ_07_06.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-OCC-
2007-06 and should be submitted on or before July 12, 2007.

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-12425 Filed 6-26-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P