[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 231 (Friday, December 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74138-74140]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26267]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP23-15-000; PF22-5-000]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Application and Establishing
Intervention Deadline

    Take notice that on November 14, 2022, ANR Pipeline Company, LLC
(ANR), 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 1300, Houston, Texas 77002-2700,
filed an application under sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas
Act (NGA), and Part

157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization to
construct and operate its Wisconsin Reliability Project (WRP or
Project), a reliability and expansion project located in Manitowoc,
Marathon, Merrill, Oconto, Outagamie, Portage, Sheboygan, Washington,
Waupaca, and Winnebago Counties, Wisconsin, and McHenry County,
Illinois. ANR estimates the cost for the project to be $757,606,203.
    Specifically, ANR's proposed Project consists of (a) the
replacement of approximately 48 miles of ANR's existing pipeline with
approximately 51 miles of new larger-diameter pipeline, located mostly
within ANR's existing right-of-way, (b) modification and replacement of
compression facilities at two existing compressor stations, (c)
modifications to six meter stations, and (d) the installation and
removal of auxiliary facilities. The Project will upgrade existing
pipeline and compression facilities with new, more modern pipeline and
compression facilities that will provide safe and reliable natural gas
transportation service to ANR's existing customers and provide 132,000
dekatherms per day (Dth/d) of incremental mainline capacity on ANR's
pipeline system. The incremental capacity of 132,000 Dth/d created as
part of the Project, in conjunction with the utilization of 12,000 Dth/
d of existing reserved capacity, will provide much needed natural gas
supply to residential, commercial, and industrial consumers in the
states of Wisconsin and Illinois, while increasing the base system
reliability, safety and the long-term integrity of ANR's system.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application should be directed to
David A. Alonzo, Manager of Project Authorizations, ANR Pipeline
Company, 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 1300, Houston, Texas 77002-2700,
by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
[email protected].
    On April 4, 2021 the Commission granted the Applicant's request to
utilize the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Pre-Filing Process
and assigned Docket No. PF22-5-000 to staff activities involved in the
Project. Now, as of the filing of the November 14, 2022 application,
the Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time
forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP23-15-000 as
noted in the caption of this Notice.
    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\1\ within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will
either: complete its environmental review and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or environmental
assessment (EA) for this proposal. The filing of an EA in the
Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's FEIS or EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 157.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project: you can file comments on the project, and you can file a
motion to intervene in the proceeding. There is no fee or cost for
filing comments or intervening. The deadline for filing a motion to
intervene is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 19, 2022.

Comments

    Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. Comments
may include statements of support or objections to the project as a
whole or specific aspects of the project. The more specific your
comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments
are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments on or
before December 19, 2022.
    There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. In all instances, please reference the Project docket
number CP23-015-000 in your submission.
    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website at www.ferc.gov
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy
method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a
project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide
comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Comment on a
Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address below. Your written comments must reference the
Project docket number (CP23-015-000).
    To mail via USPS, use the following address: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    To mail via any other courier, use the following address: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments (options 1
and 2 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected] Persons who comment on the
environmental review of this project will be placed on the Commission's
environmental mailing list, and will receive notification when the
environmental documents (EA or EIS) are issued for this project and
will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's
environmental review process.
    The Commission considers all comments received about the project in
determining the appropriate action to be taken. However, the filing of
a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. To become a party, you must intervene in the proceeding.
For instructions on how to intervene, see below.

Interventions

    Any person, which includes individuals, organizations, businesses,
municipalities, and other entities,\2\ has the option to file a motion
to intervene in this proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to
request rehearing of Commission orders issued in this proceeding and to
subsequently challenge the Commission's orders in the U.S. Circuit
Courts of Appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 385.102(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the
Commission in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure \3\ and the regulations under the NGA \4\ by the
intervention deadline for the project, which is December 19, 2022. As
described further in Rule 214, your motion to intervene must state, to
the extent known, your position regarding the proceeding, as well as
your interest in the proceeding. [For an individual, this could include
your status as a landowner, ratepayer, resident of an impacted
community, or recreationist. You do not need to have property directly
impacted by the project in order to intervene.] For more information
about motions to intervene, refer to the FERC website at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 385.214.
    \4\ 18 CFR 157.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are two ways to submit your motion to intervene. In both
instances, please reference the Project docket number CP23-015-000 in
your submission.
    (1) You may file your motion to intervene by using the Commission's
eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website
(www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. New eFiling
users must first create an account by clicking on ``eRegister.'' You
will be asked to select the type of filing you are making; first select
``General'' and then select ``Intervention.'' The eFiling feature
includes a document-less intervention option; for more information,
visit https://www.ferc.gov/sites//files/2020-05/document-less-intervention.pdf; or
    (2) You can file a paper copy of your motion to intervene, along
with three copies, by mailing the documents to the address below. Your
motion to intervene must reference the Project docket number CP23-015-
000.
    To mail via USPS, use the following address: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    To mail via any other courier, use the following address: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    The Commission encourages electronic filing of motions to intervene
(option 1 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Protests and motions to intervene must be served on the applicant
either by mail or email (with a link to the document) at: David A.
Alonzo, Manager of Project Authorizations, ANR Pipeline Company, 700
Louisiana Street, Suite 1300, Houston, Texas 77002-2700, or at
[email protected]. Any subsequent submissions by an intervenor
must be served on the applicant and all other parties to the
proceeding. Contact information for parties can be downloaded from the
service list at the eService link on FERC Online.
    All timely, unopposed \5\ motions to intervene are automatically
granted by operation of Rule 214(c)(1).\6\ Motions to intervene that
are filed after the intervention deadline are untimely and may be
denied. Any late-filed motion to intervene must show good cause for
being late and must explain why the time limitation should be waived
and provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule
214(d) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.\7\ A person obtaining
party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the
Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies (paper or
electronic) of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The applicant has 15 days from the submittal of a motion to
intervene to file a written objection to the intervention.
    \6\ 18 CFR 385.214(c)(1).
    \7\ 18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and (d)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracking the Proceeding

    Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project
will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at
(866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link as described above. The eLibrary link also provides
access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission,
such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. For more information and to register, go to https://ferconline.ferc.gov/LogIn.aspx.
    Intervention Deadline: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 19, 2022.

    Dated: November 28, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-26267 Filed 12-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 118 (Thursday, June 19, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35037-35041]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13835]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0415; Directorate Identifier 2008-SW-065-AD;
Amendment 39-17865; AD 2014-12-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (BHTI)
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2003-01-04 for
BHTI Model 204B, 205A, 205A-1, 205B, and 212 helicopters. AD 2003-01-04
required inspecting the main rotor grip (grip) and reporting certain
inspection results to the FAA. AD 2003-01-04 also required performing
additional inspections, repair, or replacement depending on whether a
crack or delamination was found, and determining and recording the
hours time-in-service (TIS) and the engine start/stop cycles for each
grip on a component history card or equivalent record. This new AD
requires the same actions as AD 2003-01-04 but adds a retirement life
to certain grips and expands the applicability to include the Model 210
helicopter and additional part-numbered grips. This AD was prompted by
the discovery of additional cracked grips. We are issuing this AD to
prevent failure of a grip, separation of a main rotor blade, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective July 24, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 30,
2003 (68 FR 1955, January 15, 2003).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact BHTI,
P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax (817)
280-6466, or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Kohner, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, Texas 76137, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2003-01-04, Amendment 39-13015 (68 FR 1955,
January 15, 2003) (AD 2003-01-04). AD 2003-01-04 applied to certain
BHTI Model 204B, 205A, 205A-1, 205B, and 212 helicopters. AD 2003-01-04
required inspecting each grip, reporting certain inspection results to
the FAA, and performing additional inspections, repair, or replacement
depending on whether a crack or delamination was found. AD 2003-01-04
also required determining and recording the hours TIS and the engine
start/stop cycles for each grip on a component history card or
equivalent record.
    The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 20, 2012 (77 FR
23638) and proposed to require the same actions as AD 2003-01-04 but
add a retirement life to certain grips and expand the applicability to
include the Model 210 helicopter and additional part-numbered grips.
Specifically, the NPRM proposed:
     Within 10 hours TIS, determining and recording the hours
TIS and the engine start/stop cycles for each grip on a component
history card or equivalent record.
     Within 10 hours TIS and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 25 hours TIS, visually inspecting the exposed surfaces of the
upper and lower tangs of each grip for a crack, using a 10-power or
higher magnifying glass.
     At specified intervals, depending on the hours TIS or the
engine start/stop cycles, conducting initial and repetitive ultrasonic
(UT) inspections of each grip.
     At intervals not to exceed 1,200 hours TIS or 24 months,
whichever occurs first, inspecting each buffer pad on the tang inner
surfaces for delamination, and removing the buffer pad and inspecting
the grip surface for corrosion and other damage if there is
delamination.
     Within 2,400 hours TIS or at the next overhaul of the main
rotor hub, whichever occurs first, and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 2,400 hours TIS, inspecting the surface of each affected grip
for corrosion or other damage and conducting a fluorescent penetrant
inspection of the grip for a crack.
     Before further flight, repairing or replacing any grip
that has a crack, corrosion, or other damage.
     Before further flight, removing any grip, part number (P/
N) 204-011-121-009 or ASI-4011-121-9, that has 15,000 or more hours
TIS; and removing any grip, P/N 204-011-121-121, that has 25,000 or
more hours TIS.
     Establishing a new retirement life of 15,000 hours TIS for
grip, P/N 204-011-121-009 or ASI-4011-121-9, and 25,000 hours TIS for
grip, P/N 204-011-121-121.
    This AD was prompted by the discovery of additional cracked grips.
We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of a grip, separation of a
main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Comments

    After our NPRM (77 FR 23638, April 20, 2012) was published, we
received comments from six commenters.

Request

    Alpine Helicopters Ltd., Eagle Copters Ltd., Wildcat Helicopters,
Inc., and two commenters from BHTI disagreed with the proposed life
limit because the inspection procedures are sufficient to detect a
crack in the grips.
    We do not agree. The life limits for the -009 and -121 grips are
necessary to correct the unsafe condition. While the UT inspections of
the grips have increased the level of safety because grips have been
discovered with a crack using this technique, we disagree with relying
solely on the repetitive UT inspections of the lower grip tang without
establishing a retirement life. Using a safety-by-inspection approach
for a critical component has been shown to have an inherent amount of
risk. Early failures of these grips, which have not been attributed to
mechanical or other damage, have indicated the need to establish a
retirement life to avoid possible cracking in the future.
    Eagle Copters, Ltd., and Wildcat Helicopters, Inc., requested that
we consider implementing shorter inspection intervals or a higher level
of

training and experience to complete the inspections.
    We disagree because we do not believe shorter inspection intervals
or a higher level of training would provide an adequate long term
solution to correct the unsafe condition. The risk of the onset of
fatigue cracking in a grip from other than induced damage and its
subsequent failure continually increases the further the part's safe-
life (retirement life) is exceeded.
    Eagle Copters Ltd., Wildcat Helicopters, Inc., Alpine Helicopters
Ltd., and one commenter from BHTI expressed concern that a sufficient
number of replacement parts will not be available. Eagle Copters Ltd.,
and Wildcat Helicopters, Inc., specifically requested that affected
grips with no known time-in-service be allowed to remain in service for
up to 3 years.
    We disagree. While every effort is made to avoid grounding of
aircraft, the FAA must nonetheless take action to correct an unsafe
condition, such as the one in this case.
    Eagle Copters, Ltd., and Wildcat Helicopters Inc., requested that
we increase the retirement life of the grips. Eagle Copters, Inc.
requested that we increase the retirement life of the -009 grip from
15,000 hours TIS to 25,000 hours TIS, because a life limit of 15,000
hours TIS is not justified based on service history of the -009 grip.
Wildcat Helicopters, Inc., requested that we increase the retirement
life of the -009 and -121 grip to 30,000 hours TIS.
    Similarly, Satria Air Service (SAS) requested that we conduct
further research on these failures and questioned our calculation of
the proposed life limits. SAS stated that the proposed retirement life
for the -121 grip is higher than the -009 grip even though the -121
grip is more prone to failure, which would indicate the need for a
lower retirement life. SAS further stated that in a recent failure, the
-121 grip had only accumulated 4,900 hours TIS, which is less than the
proposed retirement life of 25,000 hours TIS. SAS also noted the 150
hour TIS repetitive inspection interval of the -121 grip is lower than
the 400 hour TIS repetitive inspection interval for the -009 grip,
which indicates there is a reason for the shorter inspection interval
on the -121 grip.
    We disagree with the request to increase the life limits of the
grips, as this would not provide an acceptable level of safety in
addressing the unsafe condition. The retirement lives for the -009 and
-121 grips were determined using a crack initiation methodology (e.g.,
using the S-N curves and Miner's Rule). This method accounts for damage
induced by fatigue loading but does not account for flaws and defects
due to manufacturing or in-service conditions. The apparent discrepancy
raised by the commenters can be explained by different sets of material
properties being used to determine the retirement lives and inspection
intervals for the grips. The material for the -121 grips was originally
changed because of stress corrosion cracking that was occurring in the
barrel of the -009 grips. Different materials will have varying levels
for susceptibility to different types of damage. A more ``failure
prone'' component may not necessarily warrant a lower retirement life.
Early failures can occur from a crack initiating from damage induced by
other than fatigue. Several of the failed -121 grips were also found
with cracking at multiple origins. This would explain the apparent
discrepancy of -121 grips having a shorter interval for UT inspections
but yet a higher retirement life.
    SAS requested that we change the proposed method for calculating
the life of a grip with an unknown total of hours TIS, as it is
impractical because grips are often in storage as spare parts or as a
subcomponent of a main rotor hub assembly which may have been out of
service. The commenter suggested assigning a fixed high time to a time
since new unknown part, to allow an operator to plan for replacement at
the next scheduled overhaul.
    We partially agree. We agree that establishing a realistic in-
service life for a component which is currently unlimited and only
required to be replaced when damaged or corroded beyond repair is
difficult. We disagree that the proposed method should be changed,
however, because it is the same method as that in AD 2003-01-04 (68 FR
1955, January 15, 2003); only the number of hours TIS have been revised
with our proposal. As far as allowing an operator time to plan for
replacing a part, the proposed life limits are based on the actions we
determine necessary to address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination

    We have reviewed the relevant information, considered the comments
received, and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is likely
to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same type designs and
that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD
requirements as proposed except for minor editorial changes. In
paragraph (a) of this AD, the reference to ``the following model
helicopters'' has been changed to reference ``the model helicopters
listed in Table 1 to Paragraph (a) of this AD'' instead. ``Figure 1 to
Paragraph (f)'' has been changed to reference ``Figure 1 to Paragraphs
(f)(2)(ii) and (f)(4)(ii).'' ``Table 2 to Paragraph (f)'' has been
changed to reference ``Table 2 to Paragraph (f)(3).'' ``Note 1 to
Paragraph (f)'' has been changed to reference ``Note 1 to Paragraph
(f)(3).'' ``Note 2 to Paragraph (f)'' has been changed to reference
``Note 2 to Paragraph (f)(4).'' These minor editorial changes are
consistent with the intent of the proposals in the NPRM (77 FR 23638,
April 20, 2012) and will not increase the economic burden on any
operator nor increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information

    We reviewed the following BHTI service information:
     Operations Safety Notices 204-85-6, 205-85-9, and 212-85-
13, all dated November 14, 1985, (one notice with 3 identification
numbers), which describe a grip with a crack in the lower tang that was
returned by an operator;
     Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 212-94-92, Revision A,
dated March 13, 1995, which describes procedures for inspection and
overhaul requirements of certain grips;
     ASB No. 204-02-58, dated November 26, 2002; ASB No. 205-
02-88, dated November 26, 2002; and ASB No. 210-08-02, dated September
10, 2008. These ASBs specify a UT inspection of certain grips;
     ASB No. 205B-02-39, Revision B, dated November 22, 2002,
and ASB No. 212-02-116, Revision A, dated October 30, 2002, which
specify a UT inspection of certain grips and include the Nondestructive
Inspection Procedure, Log No. 00-340, Revision E, dated April 9, 2002;
and
     Information Letter 204-08-23, 205-08-38, 205B-08-21, and
212-08-62, Revision A, dated July 23, 2008 (one letter issued with 4
identification numbers), which describes a new, improved replacement
grip, P/N 204-011-121-125, that would not require the repetitive UT
inspections and would have a retirement life of 25,000 hours TIS or a
500,000 Retirement Index Number (RIN), whichever comes first.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    This AD requires life limits for grip P/Ns 204-011-121-009, 204-
011-121-121, and ASI-4011-121-9. The manufacturer's service bulletins
do not specify a service life for these grips. Also, this AD applies to
grip P/N ASI-4011-121-9, which is produced under an FAA parts
manufacturing approval,

and the manufacturer's service bulletins do not address this particular
grip.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 700 helicopters of U.S.
registry, and it will take approximately 7 work hours to create and
maintain the records, 6.25 work hours to conduct the inspections, and
20 work hours to replace a set of grips at an average labor rate of $85
per work hour. Required parts cost approximately $56,385 for a
replacement set of grips. Based on these figures, we estimate the total
cost impact of this AD on U.S. operators to be $6,596,875 for the
entire fleet, assuming the grip set (2 grips) is replaced on 100
helicopters.

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 to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; 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. We prepared an economic evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD
docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2003-01-04 (68 FR 1955, January 15, 2003), and adding the following new
AD:

2014-12-04 Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (BHTI): Amendment 39-17865;
Docket No. FAA-2012-0415; Directorate Identifier 2008-SW-065-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to the model helicopters listed in Table 1 to
Paragraph (a) of this AD with the listed part-numbered main rotor
grips installed, certificated in any category:

  Table 1 to Paragraph (a)--Helicopter Model and Main Rotor Grip (Grip)
                          Part Numbers Affected
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     With the following grip part number
               Model                                (P/N)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
204B..............................  204-011-121-005 if the grip was ever
                                     installed on a Model 205B
                                     helicopter.
204B, 205A, and 205A-1............  204-011-121-009, -117, -121 or ASI-
                                     4011-121-9.
205A and 205A-1...................  204-011-121-005 or -113 if the grip
                                     was ever installed on a Model 205B
                                     helicopter.
205B..............................  204-011-121-005, -009, -113, -117,
                                     or -121.
210...............................  204-011-121-009 or -121.
212...............................  204-011-121-009, -121, or ASI-4011-
                                     121-9.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in the main
rotor grip (grip), which could result in failure of a grip,
separation of a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of
the helicopter.

(c) Affected AD

    This AD supersedes AD 2003-01-04, Amendment 39-13015 (68 FR
1955, January 15, 2003).

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective July 24, 2014.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS), create a component
history card or equivalent record and determine and record the total
hours TIS for each grip. If the total hours TIS cannot be determined
from the helicopter records, assume and record 50 hours TIS for each
month for which the hours cannot be determined. Continue to count
and record the hours TIS and begin to count and record the number of
times the helicopter engine(s) are started (engine start/stop
cycles).
    (2) Within 10 hours TIS, and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 25 hours TIS, without removing the main rotor blades:
    (i) Clean the exposed surfaces of the upper and lower tangs of
each grip with denatured alcohol, and wipe dry.
    (ii) Using a 10-power or higher magnifying glass, visually
inspect the exposed surfaces of the upper and lower tangs of each
grip for a crack. Pay particular attention to the lower surface of
each lower grip tang from the main rotor blade bolt-bushing flange
to the leading and trailing edge of each grip tang as depicted in
Figure 1 to Paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) and (f)(4)(ii) of this AD.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19JN14.000

    (3) At the intervals shown in Table 2 to Paragraph (f)(3) of
this AD, ultrasonic (UT) inspect each grip in accordance with the
Bell Helicopter Textron Nondestructive Inspection Procedure, Log No.
00-340, Revision E, dated April 9, 2002. The UT inspection of the
grip must be performed by a Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) UT Level I
Special, Level II, or Level III inspector who is qualified under the
guidelines established by MIL-STD-410E, ATA Specification 105, AIA-
NAS-410, or an FAA-accepted equivalent for qualification standards
of NDT Inspection/Evaluation Personnel.

                          Table 2 to Paragraph (f)(3)--Ultrasonic Inspection Intervals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Thereafter, at intervals not to
                                                          Within 30 days,     exceed the following hours TIS or
                                                          or the following   engine start/stop cycles, whichever
                 UT inspect grip, P/N:                   hours TIS for the              occurs first:
                                                          grip, whichever  -------------------------------------
                                                           occurs later:                       Engine start/stop
                                                                                Hours TIS            cycles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
204-011-121-009 or ASI-4011-121-9......................              4,000                400              1,600
204-011-121-121........................................                500                150                600
204-011-121-005 or [dash]113, if the grip was EVER                   4,000                400              1,600
 installed on a Model 205B helicopter..................
204-011-121-117, if the grip was NEVER installed on a                4,000                150                600
 Model 205B helicopter.................................
204-011-121-117, if the grip was EVER installed on a                   500                150                600
 Model 205B helicopter.................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note 1 to Paragraph (f)(3) of this AD: You can find the
Nondestructive Inspection Procedure attached to BHTI Alert Service
Bulletin (ASB) No. 205B-02-39, Revision B, dated November 22, 2002,
or BHTI ASB No. 212 02-116, Revision A, dated October 30, 2002.

    (4) At intervals not to exceed 1,200 hours TIS or 24 months,
whichever occurs first:
    (i) Remove each main rotor blade, and

    (ii) Inspect each grip buffer pad on the inner surfaces of each
grip tang for delamination as depicted in Figure 1 to Paragraphs
(f)(2)(ii) and (f)(4)(ii) of this AD. If there is any delamination,
remove the buffer pad and inspect the grip surface for corrosion or
other damage.

    Note 2 to Paragraph (f)(4) of this AD: This inspection interval
coincides with the main rotor tension-torsion strap replacement
times.

    (5) Within 2,400 hours TIS, or at the next overhaul of the main
rotor hub, whichever occurs first, and thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 2,400 hours TIS:
    (i) Remove each main rotor blade.
    (ii) Remove each grip buffer pad (if installed) from the inner
surfaces of each grip tang.
    (iii) Visually inspect the grip tang surfaces for corrosion or
other damage.
    (iv) Fluorescent-penetrant inspect the grip for a crack, paying
particular attention to the upper and lower grip tangs. When
inspecting any grip, P/N 204-011-121-005, -009, -113, or ASI-4011-
121-9, pay particular attention to the leading and trailing edges of
the grip barrel.
    (6) Before further flight:
    (i) Replace any cracked grip with an airworthy grip.
    (ii) Replace any grip with any corrosion or other damage with an
airworthy grip, or repair the grip if the corrosion or other damage
is within maximum repair damage limitations.
    (iii) Replace any grip, P/N 204-011-121-009 or ASI-4011-121-9,
which has been in service for 15,000 or more hours TIS.
    (iv) Replace any grip, P/N 204-011-121-121, which has been in
service for 25,000 or more hours TIS.
    (7) Revise the Airworthiness Limitations sections of the
applicable maintenance manuals or the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness (ICAs) by establishing a new retirement life of 15,000
hours TIS for grip P/N 204-011-121-009 or ASI-4011-121-9, and 25,000
hours TIS for grip P/N 204-011-121-121, by making pen and ink
changes or inserting a copy of this AD into the applicable
maintenance manual or ICAs.
    (8) Record a 15,000 hours TIS life limit for each grip P/N 204-
011-121-009 or ASI-4011-121-9, and a 25,000 hours TIS life limit for
each grip P/N 204-011-121-121, on the applicable component history
card or equivalent record.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Certification Office, FAA, may
approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Michael Kohner,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a Part 119 operating
certificate or under Part 91, Subpart K, we suggest that you notify
your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the
manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate
holding district office before operating any aircraft complying with
this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

    (1) BHTI ASB No. 212-94-92, Revision A, dated March 13, 1995;
BHTI ASB No. 212-02-116, Revision A, dated October 30, 2002; BHTI
205B-02-39, Revision B, dated November 22, 2002; BHTI ASB No. 204-
02-58 and ASB No. 205-02-88, both dated November 26, 2002; BHTI ASB
No. 210-08-02, dated September 10, 2008; BHTI Operations Safety
Notice 204-85-6, 205-85-9, and 212-85-13, all dated November 14,
1985; and BHTI Information Letter, 204-08-23, 205-08-38, 205B-08-21,
and 212-08-62, Revision A, dated July 23, 2008; none of which are
incorporated by reference, contain additional information about the
subject of this AD.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact BHTI,
P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax
(817) 280-6466, or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may
review copies of this information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6220: Main Rotor
Head.

(j) 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.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
January 30, 2003 (68 FR 1955, January 15, 2003).
    (i) Bell Helicopter Textron Nondestructive Inspection Procedure,
Log No. 00-340, Revision E, dated April 9, 2002.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (4) For Bell Helicopter Textron service information identified
in this AD, contact BHTI, P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
    (6) You may also 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, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 4, 2014.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-13835 Filed 6-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 180 (Monday, September 17, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57001-57003]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22532]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0071; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-05-AD;
Amendment 39-17191; AD 2012-18-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Canada, Auxiliary Power
Units

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
serial numbers of Pratt & Whitney Canada (P&WC) PW901A auxiliary power
units (APUs) approved under Technical Standard Order TSO-C77A and
installed on, but not limited to, Boeing 747-400 series airplanes. This
AD requires modifications of the rear gas generator case, exhaust duct
support, and turbine exhaust duct flanges. This AD was prompted by
several events of high-pressure turbine blade fracture leading to
separation of the rear gas generator case and release of high energy
debris. We are issuing this AD to prevent separation of the rear gas
generator case and release of high energy debris, which could result in
injury and damage to the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective October 22, 2012. The Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in this AD as of October 22, 2012.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mazdak Hobbi, Aerospace Engineer, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone:
516-228-7330; 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 was published in the Federal Register on February 27, 2012
(77 FR 11421). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for
the specified products. Transport Canada, which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued AD CF-2011-40, dated October 26, 2011
(referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    The PW901A Auxiliary Power Units have experienced several events
of High Pressure Turbine (HPT) blade fracture, some of which have
resulted in the separation of the rear gas generator case, exhaust
duct support, the turbine exhaust duct flanges and the release of
high energy debris. Subsequent investigation revealed the turbine
exhaust duct can separate under excessive load conditions resulting
from extreme engine distress such as HPT blade fractures.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received. The following presents
the comments received on the proposal and the FAA's response to each
comment.

Support for the NPRM

    The Boeing Company indicated it supported the content of the
proposed rule.

Request To Increase Compliance Time

    Several commenters believed the compliance time in the AD should be
extended. Atlas Air requested that the compliance time be increased
from 42 to 60 months. Atlas Air noted that the 42-month requirement
would force them to remove APUs prior to their 8,000 hours soft time
threshold which is based on their budget and operating experience and
reliability. This threshold would increase the maintenance burden and
cost to Atlas Air.
    KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (KLM) also requested that the compliance
date be extended. KLM indicated that requiring all the affected APUs be
modified in 42 months would require forced unscheduled replacements.
    United Airlines (UAL) also requested that the compliance time be
extended from 42 to 48 months. United indicated that the 42-month
compliance time would require engines to be removed prematurely and
cause capacity problems for repair shops.
    We do not agree. We have no data that justifies extending the
compliance time to 48 months. Operators who want to a longer compliance
interval may request an AMOC using the procedures in 14 CFR part 39.
Operators contemplating an AMOC request are reminded that they must
show that their extension will

provide the same level of safety as provided by the 42-month compliance
interval.

Request To Increase Compliance Time for Those APUs Incorporating
Previous SB

    KLM also requested a longer compliance period for APU's modified
per SB 3910001-49-16250. KLM commented that the risk for these blades
is lower than the pre-SB blades. United Parcel Service Company also
requested that the compliance period be increased from 42 to 60 months
for APUs having SB-16250 previously incorporated (improved HPT blades).
    We do not agree. We have no data supporting the conclusion that
APUs modified per SB 3910001-49-16250 have a lower risk of separation
of the rear gas generator case or that an increased compliance time is
justified for these blades. We did not change the AD based on this
comment.

Question on Compliance Date

    KLM asked what the compliance date for this AD would be, since the
compliance date in AD CF-2011-40, dated October 26, 2011, is different
from the date in Pratt & Whitney Canada Service Bulletin (SB) 3910001-
49-16255, Revision No. 2, dated March 1, 2011.
    The compliance date for this AD will be 35 days after the date the
AD is published in the Federal Register. We did not change the AD based
on this comment.

Comment on Failure To Address Root Cause

    KLM indicated that accomplishing SB 391001-49-16255, Revision No.
2, dated March 1, 2011, and our AD will not prevent high pressure
turbine blades from failing.
    We do not agree. The root cause of the failure of the HPT blades is
excessive load resulting from extreme engine distress, which leads to
turbine exhaust duct separation. Accomplishing SB 391001-49-A16255,
Revision No. 2, dated March 1, 2011, will mitigate excessive load by
modifying the rear gas generator case, exhaust duct support and the
turbine exhaust duct flanges. We did not change the AD based on this
comment.

Comment on Increased Man-hours Needed To Accomplish the AD

    KLM noted that not all APUs can be modified during an overhaul.
Therefore, extra man-hours will be required to perform this
modification.
    We do not agree. The man-hours indicated in the SB and in this AD
are sufficient to modify the APU. The number of hours required to
perform an engine overhaul is not the subject of this AD. We did not
change the AD based on this comment.

Request To Clarify ``Preventative Maintenance'' in Compliance Statement

    Southern Air indicated that compliance paragraph (e)(1) is
misleading wherein it states ``within 42 months after effective date of
the AD or the first time any maintenance is done other than
preventative maintenance, whichever occurs first * * *.'' Southern Air
believes the statement should read: ``42 months after the effective
date of the AD or when maintenance which requires unmating of the
flanges, or overhaul, whichever occurs first.''
    UAL indicated the term ``preventative maintenance'' in paragraph
(e)(1) is vague and ambiguous. UAL noted that as currently stated the
AD would have to be accomplished if one was replacing a line
replaceable unit like an exciter or starter. UAL suggested that the
maintenance be accomplished when the exhaust support duct is
accessible, i.e., removed from the APU.
    We agree. We changed paragraph (e)(1) of the AD to read ``Within 42
months after the effective date of this AD or the first time the APU or
module is at a maintenance facility that can perform the modifications,
regardless of the maintenance action or reason for APU removal,
whichever occurs first, modify the rear gas generator case, exhaust
duct support, and turbine exhaust duct flanges.''

Request Not To Mandate Use of Service Bulletin in Compliance Section

    UAL commented that several steps in the accomplishment instructions
in P&WC SB No. 3910001-49-A16255, Revision No. 2, do not offer an
increase in safety and should not be mandated by the AD. UAL noted that
the component maintenance manual offers sufficient instructions to
perform the required modifications.
    We do not agree. UAL did not identify any unnecessary steps, we
know of none, and our inquiry of the OEM did not identify any
unnecessary steps. If the OEM determined that the component maintenance
manual was adequate, it would have been referenced in SB No. 3910001-
49-A16255, Revision No. 2. We did not change the AD based on this
comment.

Questions on APU Continuing To Meet Type Certification Requirements

    KLM asked that since the APU was originally certified to a TSO
should the certification basis be maintained during the lifetime of
operation.
    We reply to KLM's multi-layered comment as follows. First, we
granted TSO approval to PWC for this APU on September 20, 1988. Second,
the corrective actions required by this AD should return the product to
the level of safety intended by its certification basis. Finally,
whether or not an OEM covers the cost of actions mandated by our AD
actions is between the OEM and the product owner/operator.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD affects
about 135 APUs installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $39,899 per
APU. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the AD on U.S.
operators to be $5,386,365.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is provided in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2012-18-14 Pratt & Whitney Canada: Amendment 39-17191; Docket No.
FAA-2012-0071; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-05-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective October 22,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Pratt & Whitney Canada (P&WC) PW901A
auxiliary power units (APUs) approved under Technical Standard Order
TSO-C77A and installed on, but not limited to, Boeing 747-400 series
airplanes. The affected APU serial numbers are PCE 900001 through
PCE 900776 inclusive.

(d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by several events of high-pressure turbine
blade fracture leading to separation of the rear gas generator case
and release of high energy debris. We are issuing this AD to prevent
separation of the rear gas generator case and release of high energy
debris, which could result in injury and damage to the airplane.

(e) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 42 months after the effective date of this AD or the
first time the APU or module is at a maintenance facility that can
perform the modifications, regardless of the maintenance action or
reason for APU removal, whichever occurs first, modify the rear gas
generator case, exhaust duct support, and turbine exhaust duct
flanges.
    (2) Use paragraphs 3.A. through 3.B(3)(f) of Accomplishment
Instructions, and paragraph 4.A. of Appendix, of P&WC Alert Service
Bulletin (SB) No. 39100001-49-A16255, Revision No. 2, dated March 1,
2011, to do the modifications.

(f) Credit for Previous Action

    APUs modified before the effective date of this AD using P&WC
Alert SB No. A16255R1, dated September 12, 2008, or P&WC Alert SB
No. A16255, dated December 12, 2007, meet the modification
requirements of this AD.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(h) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Mazdak Hobbi,
Aerospace Engineer, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to Transport Canada AD CF-2011-40, dated October 26,
2011, and P&WC SB No. A16255R2, dated March 1, 2011, for related
information.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) 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.
    (2) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise:
    (i) Pratt & Whitney Canada Alert Service Bulletin No. 3910001-49
A16255, Revision No. 2, dated March 1, 2011.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Pratt
& Whitney Canada Corp., 1000 Marie-Victorin, Longueuil, Quebec,
Canada J4G 1A1; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information 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 Burlington, Massachusetts, on August 27, 2012.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-22532 Filed 9-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 171 (Friday, September 2, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60651-60653]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20890]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 275

[Release No. IA-4512; File No. S7-17-16]

Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers: Ban on
Third-Party Solicitation; Notice of Order With Respect to MSRB Rule G-
37

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice of intent to issue order.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or
``SEC'') intends to issue an order pursuant to section 206 of the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act'') and rule 206(4)-
5 thereunder (the ``SEC Pay to Play Rule'') finding that the Municipal
Securities Rulemaking Board (``MSRB'') rule G-37 (the ``MSRB Pay to
Play Rule'') imposes substantially equivalent or more stringent
restrictions on municipal advisors than the SEC Pay to Play Rule
imposes on investment advisers and is consistent with the objectives of
the SEC Pay to Play Rule.

DATES: Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on September 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sirimal R. Mukerjee, Senior Counsel,
Melissa Roverts Harke, Senior Special Counsel, or Sara Cortes,
Assistant Director, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Investment
Adviser Regulation Office, Division of Investment Management,
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-8549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Hearing or Notification of Hearing

    An order will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on September 19, 2016. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the
Advisers Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's
interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the
matter, the reason for the request, and

the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may
request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.
    The Commission intends to issue an order under the Advisers Act.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 80b. Unless otherwise noted, all references to
statutory sections are to the Advisers Act, and all references to
rules under the Advisers Act, including rule 206(4)-5, are to Title
17, Part 275 of the Code of Federal Regulations [17 CFR part 275].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    The Commission adopted the SEC Pay to Play Rule [17 CFR 275.206(4)-
5] under the Advisers Act [15 U.S.C. 80b] to prohibit an investment
adviser from providing advisory services for compensation to a
government client for two years after the adviser or certain of its
executives or employees (``covered associates'') make a contribution to
certain elected officials or candidates.\2\ Rule 206(4)-5 also
prohibits an adviser and its covered associates from providing or
agreeing to provide, directly or indirectly, payment to any third-party
for a solicitation of advisory business from any government entity on
behalf of such adviser, unless such third-party is a ``regulated
person'' (``third-party solicitor ban'').\3\ Rule 206(4)-5 defines a
``regulated person'' as an SEC-registered investment adviser,\4\ a
registered broker or dealer subject to pay to play restrictions adopted
by a registered national securities association that prohibit members
from engaging in distribution or solicitation activities if certain
political contributions have been made,\5\ or a registered municipal
advisor subject to pay to play restrictions adopted by the MSRB that
prohibit members from engaging in distribution or solicitation
activities if certain political contributions have been made.\6\ In
addition, in order for a broker-dealer or municipal advisor to be a
regulated person under rule 206(4)-5, the Commission must find, by
order, that these pay to play rules: (i) Impose substantially
equivalent or more stringent restrictions on broker-dealers or
municipal advisors than the SEC Pay to Play Rule imposes on investment
advisers; and (ii) are consistent with the objectives of the SEC Pay to
Play Rule.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers,
Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 3043 (July 1, 2010) [75 FR 41018
(July 14, 2010)] (``SEC Pay to Play Rule Release'').
    \3\ See id. at section II.B.2.(b). See also 17 CFR 275.206(4)-
5(a)(2)(i)(A).
    \4\ See 17 CFR 275.206(4)-5(f)(9)(i).
    \5\ See 17 CFR 275.206(4)-5(f)(9)(ii).
    \6\ See 17 CFR 275.206(4)-5(f)(9)(iii). On June 22, 2011, the
Commission amended the SEC Pay to Play Rule to add municipal
advisors to the definition of ``regulated persons.'' See Rules
Implementing Amendments to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940,
Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 3221 (June 22, 2011) [76 FR 42950
(July 19, 2011)] (``Municipal Advisor Addition Release''). The
Commission adopted final rules with respect to the registration of
municipal advisors on September 20, 2013. See Registration of
Municipal Advisors, Exchange Act Rel. No. 70462 (Sept. 20, 2013) [78
FR 67468 (Nov. 12, 2013)] (``Municipal Advisor Registration
Release'').
    \7\ See 17 CFR 275.206(4)-5(f)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 206(4)-5 became effective on September 13, 2010 and the
compliance date for the third-party solicitor ban was set to September
13, 2011.\8\ When the Commission added municipal advisors to the
definition of regulated person, the Commission also extended the third-
party solicitor ban's compliance date to June 13, 2012.\9\ In the
absence of a final municipal advisor registration rule, the Commission
extended the third-party solicitor ban's compliance date from June 13,
2012 to nine months after the compliance date of the final rule,\10\
which was July 31, 2015.\11\ On June 25, 2015, the Commission issued
notice of the July 31, 2015 compliance date.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See SEC Pay to Play Rule Release, supra footnote 2, at
section III.
    \9\ See Municipal Advisor Addition Release, supra footnote 6, at
section II.D.1.
    \10\ See Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers:
Ban on Third-Party Solicitation; Extension of Compliance Date,
Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 3418 (June 8, 2012) [77 FR 35263
(June 13, 2012)].
    \11\ The final date on which a municipal advisor must file a
complete application for registration was October 31, 2014. See
Municipal Advisor Registration Release, supra footnote 6, at section
V.
    \12\ See Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers:
Ban on Third-Party Solicitation; Notice of Compliance Date,
Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 4129 (June 25, 2015) [80 FR 37538
(July 2, 2015)]. On June 25, 2015, the Division of Investment
Management published an FAQ that provides that the Division would
not recommend enforcement action to the Commission against any
investment adviser or its covered associates for the payment to any
third person to solicit a government entity for investment advisory
services until the later of (i) the effective date of a pay to play
rule adopted by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority or (ii)
the effective date of a pay to play rule adopted by the MSRB. See
http://www.sec.gov/divisions/investment/pay-to-play-faq.htm#1.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 16, 2015, the MSRB filed with the Commission proposed
amendments to the MSRB Pay to Play Rule to extend its application to
municipal advisors, which the Commission published for notice and
comment on December 23, 2015 pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange Act'') and rule 19b-4
thereunder.\13\ On February 17, 2016, the MSRB published a regulatory
notice announcing that the proposed amendments to the MSRB Pay to Play
Rule were deemed approved by the Commission under section 19(b)(2)(D)
of the Exchange Act on February 13, 2016 and the effective date of the
rule is August 17, 2016.\14\ Prior to its amendment, the MSRB Pay to
Play Rule only applied to brokers, dealers and municipal securities
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change
Consisting of Proposed Amendments to Rule G-37, on Political
Contributions and Prohibitions on Municipal Securities Business,
Rule G-8, on Books and Records, Rule G-9, on Preservation of
Records, and Forms G-37 and G-37x, Exchange Act Rel. No. 76763 (Dec.
24, 2015) [80 FR 81710 (Dec. 30, 2015)] (the ``MSRB Pay to Play
Release'').
    \14\ On August 4, 2016, the MSRB published a regulatory notice
announcing that it filed with the Commission an amendment to the
MSRB Pay to Play Rule, effective on August 17, 2016, to clarify that
contributions by persons who become associated with a dealer and
become municipal finance professionals of the dealer, if made prior
to August 17, 2016, are subject to the two-year look-back and may
subject a dealer to a prohibition on municipal securities business.
This amendment does not change the rule's application to municipal
advisors. See MSRB Files Amendment to Rule G-37 to Clarify its
Application to Contributions before August 17, 2016, Regulatory
Notice 2016-18, dated August 4, 2016, available at http://msrb.org/
~/media/Files/Regulatory-Notices/Announcements/2016-18.ashx?n=1. A
dealer may become subject to a ban on municipal securities business
for a period of two years from the making of a contribution, even if
the contribution is made by a person who, although not a municipal
finance professional of the dealer at the time of the contribution,
becomes a municipal financial professional of the dealer within two
years of making the contribution (frequently referred to as the
``two-year look-back''). See Proposed Rule Change to Clarify an
Existing Requirement in Rule G-37 Regarding the Two-Year Look-Back,
SR-MSRB-2016-10 (Aug. 4, 2016), available at http://msrb.org/~/
media/Files/SEC-Filings/2016/MSRB-2016-10.ashx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion of Order

    Pursuant to section 206 of the Advisers Act and rule 206(4)-
5(f)(9)(iii)(B) thereunder, the Commission is providing notice \15\
that the Commission intends to issue an order finding that the MSRB Pay
to Play Rule (i) imposes substantially equivalent or more stringent
restrictions on municipal advisors than the SEC Pay to Play Rule
imposes on investment advisers and (ii) is consistent with the
objectives of the SEC Pay to Play Rule. The MSRB Pay to Play Rule
imposes substantially similar requirements for municipal advisors as
the SEC Pay to Play Rule imposes on investment advisers. For example,
the MSRB Pay to Play Rule will:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See section 211(c) of the Advisers Act (requiring the
Commission to provide appropriate notice and opportunity for hearing
for orders issued under the Advisers Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Prohibit a municipal advisor from engaging in municipal
advisory business with a municipal entity for two years, subject to
exceptions, following the making of a contribution to certain officials
of the municipal entity by the municipal advisor, a municipal advisor
professional of the municipal advisor, or a political action committee
controlled

by the municipal advisor or a municipal advisor professional of the
municipal advisor; \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ MSRB Pay to Play Release, supra footnote 13, at 81712.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Prohibit municipal advisors and municipal advisor
professionals from soliciting contributions, or coordinating
contributions, to certain officials of a municipal entity with which
the municipal advisor is engaging, or seeking to engage, in municipal
advisory business; \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Prohibit municipal advisors and certain municipal advisor
professionals from soliciting payments, or coordinating payments, to
political parties of states and localities with which the municipal
advisor is engaging in, or seeking to engage in, municipal advisory
business; \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Prohibit municipal advisors and municipal advisor
professionals from committing indirect violations of the MSRB Pay to
Play Rule; \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Extend applicable interpretive guidance under the existing
MSRB pay to play rule to municipal advisors; \20\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Include a new defined term (``municipal advisor third-
party solicitor'') for municipal advisors that undertake a solicitation
of a municipal entity on behalf of a third-party dealer, municipal
advisor or investment adviser. Certain aspects of the rule will apply
to this distinct type of municipal advisor.
    The Commission believes that the rule imposes substantially
equivalent or more stringent restrictions on municipal advisors than
rule 206(4)-5 imposes on investment advisers and would be consistent
with the objectives of rule 206(4)-5.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: August 25, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-20890 Filed 9-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 6, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8664-8666]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02554]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68775; File No. SR-FINRA-2013-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change Extending the Pilot Period Regarding the Use of
Multiple MPIDs on FINRA Facilities

January 31, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 24, 2013, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. FINRA has designated
the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-controversial'' rule
change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under the Act,\3\ which
renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this filing by the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA is proposing to extend through January 31, 2014, the current
rules permitting the use of multiple Market Participant Symbols
(``MPIDs'') in FINRA Rules 6160 (with respect to Trade Reporting
Facilities (``TRFs'')), 6170 (with respect to the Alternative Display
Facility (``ADF'')), and 6480 (with respect to the OTC Reporting
Facility (``ORF'')).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, FINRA 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. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    FINRA has three rules permitting the use of multiple MPIDs on FINRA
facilities: Rule 6160 (Multiple MPIDs for Trade Reporting Facility
Participants), Rule 6170 (Primary and Additional MPIDs for Alternative
Display Facility Participants), and Rule 6480 (Multiple MPIDs for
Quoting and Trading in OTC Equity Securities). The pilot period for all
three rules is scheduled to expire on January 25, 2013. FINRA believes
that there continue to be legitimate business reasons for members to
maintain multiple MPIDs for use on FINRA facilities, and FINRA intends
to file a proposed rule change later this year to make the rules
permanent. In the interim, FINRA is proposing to extend the pilot
period for each of the three rules until January 31, 2014. FINRA is not
proposing any other changes to the rules at this time.
(1) Rule 6160
    Rule 6160 provides that any Trade Reporting Facility Participant
that wishes to use more than one MPID for purposes of reporting trades
to a TRF must submit a written request to, and obtain approval from,
FINRA Operations for such additional MPIDs. In addition, Supplementary
Material to the rule states that FINRA considers the issuance of, and
trade reporting with, multiple MPIDs to be a privilege and not a right.
A Trade Reporting Facility Participant must identify the purpose(s) and
system(s) for which the multiple MPIDs will be used. If FINRA
determines that the use of multiple MPIDs is detrimental to the
marketplace, or that a Trade Reporting Facility Participant is using
one or more additional MPIDs improperly or for other than the
purpose(s) identified by the Participant, FINRA staff retains full
discretion to limit or withdraw its grant of the additional MPID(s) to
such Trade Reporting Facility Participant for purposes of reporting
trades to a TRF. FINRA believes that Rule 6160 is necessary to
consolidate the process of issuing, and tracking the use of, multiple
MPIDs used to report trades to TRFs.

    Rule 6160 was approved by the Commission in 2006 on a pilot
basis.\4\ The pilot period has been extended several times since the
rule was originally adopted and currently expires on January 25,
2013.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54715 (November 6,
2006), 71 FR 66354 (November 14, 2006); see also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 54715A (November 14, 2006), 71 FR 67183 (November
20, 2006).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66033 (December 22,
2011), 76 FR 82022 (December 29, 2011); see also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 63729 (January 18, 2011), 76 FR 4403 (January 25,
2011); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61297 (January 6, 2010),
75 FR 2173 (January 14, 2010); Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59183 (December 30, 2008), 74 FR 842 (January 8, 2009); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 57217 (January 28, 2008), 73 FR 6234
(February 1, 2008); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55206
(January 31, 2007), 72 FR 5479 (February 6, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Rule 6170
    Rule 6170 provides that a Registered Reporting ADF ECN may request
additional MPIDs for displaying quotes and orders and reporting trades
through the ADF trade reporting facility, TRACS, for any ADF-Eligible
Security. Among other things, Registered Reporting ADF ECNs are
prohibited from using an additional MPID to accomplish indirectly what
they are prohibited from doing directly through their Primary MPID. In
addition, FINRA staff retains full discretion to determine whether a
bona fide regulatory and/or business need exists for being granted an
additional MPID privilege and to limit or withdraw the additional MPID
display privilege at any time. The procedures for requesting, and the
restrictions surrounding the use of, multiple MPIDs are set forth in
Supplementary Material to the rule.
    The Commission approved Rule 6170 on a pilot basis on August 11,
2006.\6\ The pilot period has been extended several times since the
rule was originally adopted and currently expires on January 25,
2013.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54307 (August 11,
2006), 71 FR 47551 (August 17, 2006). By its terms, the initial
pilot period expired on January 26, 2007, to coincide with the
expiration of the ADF pilot period. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 53699 (April 21, 2006), 71 FR 25271 (April 28, 2006). On
January 26, 2007, the Commission approved a proposed rule change to
make the ADF rules permanent. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 55181 (January 26, 2007), 72 FR 5093 (February 2, 2007).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66033 (December 22,
2011), 76 FR 82022 (December 29, 2011); see also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 63729 (January 18, 2011), 76 FR 4403 (January 25,
2011); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61297 (January 6, 2010),
75 FR 2173 (January 14, 2010); Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59183 (December 30, 2008), 74 FR 842 (January 8, 2009); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 57217 (January 28, 2008), 73 FR 6234
(February 1, 2008); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55206
(January 31, 2007), 72 FR 5479 (February 6, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3) Rule 6480
    Like Rule 6160, Rule 6480 provides that any member that wishes to
use more than one MPID for purposes of quoting an OTC Equity Security
or reporting trades to the ORF must submit a written request to, and
obtain approval from, FINRA Operations for such additional MPIDs. The
rule also states that a member that posts a quotation in an OTC Equity
Security and reports to a FINRA system a trade resulting from such
posted quotation must utilize the same MPID for reporting purposes. In
addition, Supplementary Material to the rule states that FINRA
considers the issuance of, and trade reporting with, multiple MPIDs to
be a privilege and not a right. When requesting an additional MPID(s),
a member must identify the purpose(s) and system(s) for which the
multiple MPIDs will be used. If FINRA determines that the use of
multiple MPIDs is detrimental to the marketplace, or that a member is
using one or more additional MPIDs improperly or for purposes other
than the purpose(s) identified by the member, FINRA staff retains full
discretion to limit or withdraw its grant of the additional MPID(s) to
such member.
    FINRA adopted Rule 6480 on a pilot basis on July 23, 2009.\8\ The
pilot period has been extended several times and currently expires on
January 25, 2013.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60414 (July 31,
2009), 74 FR 39721 (August 7, 2009).
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66033 (December 22,
2011), 76 FR 82022 (December 29, 2011); see also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 63729 (January 18, 2011), 76 FR 4403 (January 25,
2011); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61297 (January 6, 2010),
75 FR 2173 (January 14, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness and has requested that the SEC waive the requirement that
the proposed rule change not become operative for 30 days after the
date of the filing, so FINRA can implement the proposed rule change on
January 25, 2013.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\10\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with these requirements because it will continue to provide
a process by which members can request, and FINRA can properly
allocate, the use of additional MPIDs for displaying quotes and orders
through the ADF or reporting trades to a TRF or the ORF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
limited to extending the pilot period for currently-existing rules and
does not substantively change any FINRA rule.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). FINRA has requested that the
Commission waive the requirement that FINRA provide the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date on which FINRA filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii). The
Commission hereby grants this request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \13\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. FINRA has requested
that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the
proposed rule change can become operative as soon as the current pilot
period expires. The Commission notes that the proposed rule change does
not present any new, unique, or substantive issues; rather, it simply
extends the pilot period permitting the use of multiple MPIDs with
respect to TRFs, the ADF, and the ORF. In addition, the waiver of the
30-

day operative delay will allow FINRA to keep in place without
interruption the pilot programs allowing use of multiple MPIDs with
respect to TRFs, the ADF, and the ORF. The Commission believes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and, therefore, designates the
proposed rule change as operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporary suspend such rule change
if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2013-008 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2013-008. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2013-008, and should
be submitted on or before February 27, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-02554 Filed 2-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P