[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 166 (Wednesday, August 27, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51083-51088]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19708]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0236; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-184-AD;
Amendment 39-17937; AD 2014-16-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A300 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by our
determination of the need to incorporate new life limits for the main
landing gear (MLG) barrel assembly, retraction actuator assembly
linkage, and flange duct. This AD requires revising the maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to include the new life limits. We
are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity of the
airplane and possible loss of controllability of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective October 1, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0236 or in person at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS,
Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac
Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM 116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A300
series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April
17, 2014 (79 FR 21651).
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0210, dated September 11, 2013 (referred
to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition all Airbus Model A300
series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Some life limits previously defined in Revision 00 of A300 ALS
[airworthiness limitations section] Part 1 have been removed [from]
that document at Revision 01 and should normally be included in an
ALS Part 4.
    At this time, there are no plans to issue an ALS Part 4 for A300
aeroplanes.
    Nevertheless, failure to comply with these life limits could
result in an unsafe condition.
    For the reasons described above, it has been decided to require
the application of these life limits through a separate [EASA] AD.
Consequently, this [EASA] AD requires application of life limits
applicable to Main Landing Gear (MLG) barrel assembly, retraction
actuator assembly linkage assembly and flanged duct which were
previously contained in Airbus ALS Part 1 Revision 00.
    EASA AD 2007-0293 [which corresponds with FAA AD 2009-18-15,
Amendment 39-16011 (74 FR 48143, September 22, 2009)], which
required compliance with the actions specified in ALS Part 1, will
be superseded by a new [EASA] AD, requiring compliance with ALS Part
1 at Revision 1.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0236-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We

received no comments on the NPRM (79 FR 21651, April 17, 2014) or on
the determination of the cost to the public.

``Contacting the Manufacturer'' Paragraph in This AD

    Since late 2006, we have included a standard paragraph titled
``Airworthy Product'' in all MCAI ADs in which the FAA develops an AD
based on a foreign authority's AD.
    We have become aware that some operators have misunderstood or
misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to allow the owner/
operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer as approval of
deviations during the accomplishment of an AD-mandated action. The
Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or other
information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the
requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product
paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer
for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not
cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-
required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request
the approval for an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required
actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the
Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed the paragraph and retitled
it ``Contacting the Manufacturer.'' This paragraph now clarifies that
for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a
manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a method approved
by the FAA, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or Airbus's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information
contained in the document are EASA-approved, which is also FAA-
approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer
that do not contain the DOA-authorized signature approval are not EASA-
approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer's message or
other information.
    This clarification does not remove flexibility previously afforded
by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA
policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This
is also consistent with the recommendation of the Airworthiness
Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase
flexibility in complying with ADs by identifying those actions in
manufacturers' service instructions that are ``Required for
Compliance'' with ADs. We continue to work with manufacturers to
implement this recommendation. But once we determine that an action is
required, any deviation from the requirement must be approved as an
alternative method of compliance.
    We also have decided not to include a generic reference to either
the ``delegated agent'' or ``design approval holder (DAH) with State of
Design Authority design organization approval,'' but instead we have
provided the specific delegation approval granted by the State of
Design Authority for the DAH throughout this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD with the changes described
previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (79 FR 21651, April 17, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 21651, April 17, 2014).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 7 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it takes about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $595, or $85 per product.

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0236; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

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):

2014-16-13 Airbus: Amendment 39-17937. Docket No. FAA-2014-0236;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-184-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective October 1, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C,
B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
Gear; and 36, Pneumatic.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by our determination of the need to
incorporate new life limits for the main landing gear (MLG) barrel
assembly, retraction actuator assembly linkage, and flange duct. We
are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity of the
airplane and possible loss of controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Revise the Maintenance or Inspection Program

    Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the
life limits specified in Appendix 1 of this AD into the Airbus A300
Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1. The initial
compliance time for the replacement is identified in Appendix 1 of
this AD and is prior to the applicable life limits specified in
Appendix 1 of this AD, or within 90 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later.

(h) No Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (g) of
this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may
be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2013-0210,
dated September 11, 2013, for related information. This MCAI may be
found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetailD=FAA-2014-0236-0002.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27AU14.000

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27AU14.001

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 4, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-19708 Filed 8-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 40381]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14559]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78079; File No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change to Rule 14.11, Managed Fund Shares, To List and Trade Shares of
the Pointbreak Agriculture Commodity Strategy Fund of the Pointbreak
ETF Trust

June 15, 2016.
    On April 15, 2016, Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (``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 list and
trade shares (``Shares'') of the Pointbreak Agriculture Commodity
Strategy Fund of the Pointbreak ETF Trust under BATS Rule 14.11(i). The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on May 3, 2016.\3\ The Commission received no comment letters on 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. 77723 (April 27,
2016), 81 FR 26600.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change.
Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\5\ designates August 1, 2016, as the date by which the Commission
should either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number
SR-BatsBZX-2016-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-14559 Filed 6-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 237 (Wednesday, December 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73362-73364]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28878]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73740; File Nos. SR-NYSE-2014-53; SR-NYSEMKT-2014-83;
SR-NYSEArca-2014-112]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE
MKT LLC; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, in Connection With the Proposed
Termination of the Amended and Restated Trust Agreement, Dated as of
November 13, 2013 and Amended on June 2, 2014 By and Among NYSE
Holdings LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, NYSE Group, Inc., a
Delaware Corporation, Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee,
and Each of Jacques de Larosi[egrave]re de Champfeu, Alan Trager and
John Shepard Reed, as Trustees

December 4, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On October 8, 2014, each of New York Stock Exchange LLC
(``Exchange''), NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT''), and NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``NYSE Arca'' and, with the Exchange and NYSE MKT, the ``NYSE
Exchanges''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\
proposed rule changes in connection with the proposed termination of
the Amended and Restated Trust Agreement, dated as of November 13, 2013
and amended on June 2, 2014 (the ``Trust Agreement''), by and among
NYSE Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (``NYSE
Holdings''), NYSE Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (``NYSE Group''),
Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee, and each of Jacques de
Larosi[egrave]re de Champfeu, Alan Trager and John Shepard Reed, as
Trustees. The proposed rule changes were published for comment in the
Federal Register on October 22, 2014.\3\ The Commission did not receive
any comment letters on the proposal. On October 21, 2014, the NYSE
Exchanges filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule changes.\4\ This
order approves the proposed rule changes as modified by Amendment No. 1
thereto.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 73373 (October 16,
2014), 79 FR 63191 (SR-NYSE-2014-53); 73372 (October 16, 2014), 79
FR 63201 (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-83); 73374 (October 16, 2014), 79 FR 63188
(SR-NYSEArca-2014-112).
    \4\ In Amendment No. 1, the NYSE Exchanges made a technical and
non-material correction to a statement in each filing regarding the
ownership of NYSE Amex Options LLC by ICE. The Commission notes that
the NYSE Exchanges submitted a comment letter to each filing on
October 24, 2014 attaching Amendment No. 1, and, consequently,
Amendment No. 1 is available in the public comment files for SR-
NYSE-2014-53, SR-NYSEMKT-2014-83, and SR-NYSEArca-2014-112 on the
Commission's Web site. Because Amendment No. 1 is technical in
nature, the Commission is not required to publish it for public
comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The NYSE Exchanges seek approval for their 100% direct parent, NYSE
Group, and its 100% indirect parent, NYSE Holdings, to terminate the
Trust Agreement.\5\ The NYSE Exchanges believe that the regulatory
considerations that led to the implementation of the Trust Agreement in
2007 are now moot as a result of the sale by Intercontinental Exchange,
Inc., a Delaware corporation (``ICE''), of Euronext N.V. (``Euronext'')
in June 2014 and certain changes in the corporate governance of ICE,
ICE Holdings and NYSE Holdings that occurred upon such sale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ICE, a public company listed on the Exchange, owns 100% of
Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(``ICE Holdings''), which in turn owns 100% of NYSE Holdings.
Through ICE Holdings, NYSE Holdings and NYSE Group, ICE indirectly
owns (1) 100% of the equity interest of three registered national
securities exchanges and self-regulatory organizations, the NYSE
Exchanges and (2) 100% of the equity interest of NYSE Market (DE),
Inc. (``NYSE Market''), NYSE Regulation, Inc. (``NYSE Regulation''),
NYSE Arca L.L.C. and NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. ICE also indirectly
owns a majority interest in NYSE Amex Options LLC. See Exchange Act
Release No. 70210 (August 15, 2013), 78 FR 51758 (August 21, 2013)
(SR-NYSE-2013-42; SR-NYSEMKT-2013-50; SR-NYSEArca-2013-62)
(approving proposed rule change relating to a corporate transaction
in which NYSE Euronext will become a wholly owned subsidiary of
IntercontinentalExchange Group, Inc.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2007, NYSE Group, which is the 100% owner of the NYSE Exchanges,
combined with Euronext (the ``Combination''). The new parent company
formed in the Combination, NYSE Euronext, operated several regulated
entities in the United States and various jurisdictions in Europe. In
the Commission's notice relating to the proposed Combination, the NYSE
Exchanges emphasized the importance of continuing to regulate
marketplaces locally:

    A core aspect of the structure of the Combination is continued
local regulation of the marketplaces. Accordingly, the Combination
is premised on the notion that . . . [c]ompanies listing their
securities only on markets operated by Euronext and its subsidiaries
will not become newly subject to U.S. laws or regulation by the SEC
as a result of the Combination, and companies listing their
securities only on the Exchange or NYSE Arca, will not become newly
subject to European rules or regulation as a result of the
Combination.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Exchange Act Release No. 55026 (Dec. 29, 2006) (SR-NYSE-
2006-120), 72 FR 814, 816-17 (January 8, 2007) (the ``NYSE Euronext
Notice''). NYSE Euronext acquired NYSE MKT, the third of the NYSE
Exchanges, in 2008.

    In connection with obtaining regulatory approval of the
Combination, NYSE Euronext implemented certain special arrangements
consisting of two standby structures, one involving a Dutch foundation
(Stichting) and one involving a Delaware trust. The Dutch foundation
was empowered to take actions to mitigate the effects of any material
adverse change in U.S. law that had an ``extraterritorial'' impact on
non-U.S. issuers listed on Euronext markets, non-U.S. financial
services firms that were members of Euronext markets or holders of
exchange licenses with respect to the Euronext markets. The Delaware
trust was empowered to take actions to mitigate the effects of any
material adverse change in European law that had an
``extraterritorial'' impact on the non-European issuers listed on NYSE
Group securities exchanges, non-European financial services firms that
were members of any NYSE Group securities market or holders of exchange
licenses with respect to the NYSE Group securities exchanges.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ An explanation of the terms of the Dutch foundation and the
Delaware trust is included in the NYSE Euronext Notice. Subsequent
modifications to the arrangements, to the extent relevant to the
proposed rule change, are described in the Notices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Dutch foundation and the Delaware trust remained in effect
after the merger of ICE Holdings (then known as
IntercontinentalExchange, Inc.) and NYSE Euronext in 2013 under ICE
(then known as IntercontinentalExchange Group, Inc.) as a new public
holding company. However, in connection with ICE's announced plan to
sell the Euronext securities exchanges in an initial public offering,
the Dutch Ministry of Finance permitted modifications of the terms of
the governing document of the Dutch foundation under which the powers
of the Dutch foundation would cease to apply to ICE and its affiliates
at such time as ICE ceased to hold a ``controlling interest'' in
Euronext, with ``controlling interest'' defined by reference to the
definition of ``control'' under Rule 10 of the International Financial
Reporting Standards (``IFRS 10'').\8\ In June 2014, ICE announced that

it had sold all but approximately 6% of the ownership interest in
Euronext in an underwritten public offering outside the United
States.\9\ As stated in the Notices, upon ICE's application, the Dutch
Ministry of Finance confirmed on July 16, 2014 that the conditions to
the cessation of the application of the Dutch foundation to ICE had
been satisfied or waived.\10\ As a result, the NYSE Exchanges represent
that ICE and its subsidiaries are no longer subject to the provisions
of the Dutch foundation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Excerpts from the Further Amended and Restated Governance
and Option Agreement, dated March 21, 2014, among the Dutch
foundation, Euronext Group N.V. and ICE are attached to the Notices
as Exhibit 5C.
    \9\ ICE's press release dated June 24, 2014 is available at the
following link: http://ir.theice.com/investors-and-media/press/press-releases/press-release-details/2014/Intercontinental-Exchange-Announces-Closing-of-Euronext-Initial-Public-Offering/default.aspx.
    \10\ An English translation provided by the NYSE Exchanges of
the Dutch Ministry of Finance's letter is attached to the Notices as
Exhibit 5D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2013 merger, NYSE Euronext was succeeded by the entity now
known as NYSE Holdings, which is currently a party to the Trust
Agreement. At that time, references to the nominating and governance
committee of the board of directors of NYSE Euronext, which selected
the Trustees of the Delaware trust, were replaced by references to the
nominating and governance committee of the board of directors of
ICE.\11\ Other provisions of the Trust Agreement are substantially
unchanged.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Exchange Act Release No. 70210 (August 15, 2013), 78 FR
51758 (August 21, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-42; SR-NYSEMKT-2013-50; SR-
NYSEArca-2013-62).
    \12\ See Exchange Act Release No. 72158 (May 13, 2014) (SR-NYSE-
2014-23), 79 FR 28784 (May 19, 2014) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness of proposed rule change relating to name changes of
the Exchange's ultimate parent and revising Trust Agreement to
reflect name changes of ICE and ICE Holdings).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the Combination of NYSE Group and Euronext in
2007 and the establishment of the Dutch foundation and the Delaware
trust, the Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws of NYSE Euronext
included several provisions relating to representation of European
interests on the board of directors and other provisions requiring the
board to give due consideration to European regulatory requirements and
the interests of identified categories of European stakeholders. These
provisions are summarized in the NYSE Euronext Notice. Each such
provision was subject to automatic revocation in the event that NYSE
Euronext no longer held a controlling interest in Euronext or certain
of its subsidiaries. For this purpose, ``controlling interest'' was
defined to mean 50% or more of the outstanding shares of each class of
voting securities and of the combined voting power of outstanding
voting securities entitled to vote generally in the election of
directors. Substantially identical provisions were added to the
Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws of ICE and ICE Holdings, and
were retained in the Operating Agreement of NYSE Holdings, when ICE
acquired NYSE Euronext in 2013, except that the ``controlling
interest'' test was modified to become a ``control'' test under IFRS
10, as described above with respect to the Dutch foundation. As a
result of the initial public offering of Euronext, ICE has established
that it no longer controls Euronext within the meaning of IFRS 10, and
the provisions of the constituent documents of ICE, ICE Holdings and
NYSE Holdings have automatically and without further action become void
and are of no further force and effect.
    Termination of the Delaware trust would be implemented through a
unanimous written consent of all parties to, or otherwise bound by, the
Trust Agreement.\13\ The proposed rule changes and exhibits thereto
contain modifications to the corporate governance documents of NYSE
Holdings, NYSE Group, the Exchange, NYSE MKT, NYSE Market and NYSE
Regulation that delete references to the Delaware trust and make
related conforming changes thereto.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ A form of unanimous written consent of all parties to, or
otherwise bound by, the Trust Agreement resolving that the Delaware
trust be terminated is attached to the Notices as Exhibit 5B.
    \14\ In particular, the NYSE Exchanges propose to amend: (1) The
Fifth Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of
NYSE Holdings to eliminate the definition of the term ``Trust'' in
Section 1.1 and the references to the Delaware trust in Section 7.2;
(2) the Third Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of
NYSE Group to eliminate references to the Delaware trust in Article
IV, Section 4(a) and (b); (3) the Sixth Amended and Restated
Operating Agreement of the Exchange to eliminate references to the
Delaware trust in Section 3.03; (4) the Fifth Amended and Restated
Operating Agreement of NYSE MKT to eliminate references to the
Delaware trust in Section 3.03; (5) the Second Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation of NYSE Market to eliminate references
to the Delaware trust in Article IV, Section 2; and (6) the Restated
Certificate of Incorporation of NYSE Regulation to eliminate
references to the Delaware trust in Article V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
changes are consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act
\15\ and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\16\ The Commission finds that the proposed rule
changes are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\17\ which
requires, among other things, that the exchanges' rules 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \16\ Additionally, in approving these proposed rule changes, the
Commission has considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE Exchanges believe that the regulatory considerations that
led to the implementation of the Trust Agreement in 2007 have been
mooted by the sale of Euronext in June 2014, the automatic revocation
of corporate governance provisions applicable to ICE, ICE Holdings and
NYSE Holdings that occurred upon such sale, and the NYSE Exchanges'
representation that the Dutch foundation which functioned as a European
analog to the Delaware trust, ceased to have any authority over ICE and
its subsidiaries upon the closing of the sale of Euronext. In addition,
the NYSE Exchanges represent that continuance of the Trust Agreement
imposes administrative burdens and costs upon the exchanges and their
affiliates that create impediments to a free and open market, and may
cause investor uncertainty. In particular, according to the NYSE
Exchanges, the Trust Agreement imposes administrative burdens on ICE
and the nominating and governance committee of its board of directors,
such as the need to periodically consider and vote on trustees; the
need to consider whether any proposed action requires approval under
the Trust Agreement and, if so, the obligation to prepare materials for
consideration and vote by the Trustees; and the need to consider
whether any proposed action requires an amendment to the Trust
Agreement and, if so, the additional obligation to submit such
amendment to the Commission for approval under Rule 19b-4.\18\
According to the NYSE Exchanges, the Trust Agreement also results in
out-of-pocket costs to the exchanges and their affiliates including the
fees of the individual Trustees and the Delaware Trustee as well as
fees of counsel incurred in connection with review of proposed
amendments and assistance with the Commission approval process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the NYSE Exchanges' proposal to
terminate the Trust Agreement is consistent with the requirements of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \19\ because the proposed rule changes would
be consistent with and facilitate a corporate governance

structure for the NYSE Exchanges that is 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.
Furthermore, the termination of the Delaware trust may remove
impediments to the operation of the NYSE exchanges by eliminating
certain expenses and administrative burdens as well as the potential
for uncertainty among analysts and investors as to the practical
implications of the Delaware trust on the exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\20\ that the proposed rule changes (SR-NYSE-2014-53; SR-NYSEMKT-
2014-83; SR-NYSEArca-2014-112), as modified by Amendment No. 1, be, and
hereby are, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28878 Filed 12-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


December 4, 2003 Mr. Pat Cummins Western Regional Air Partnership 1515 Cleveland Place, Suite 200 Denver, Colorado 80202 Dear Mr. Cummins:

I am writing to update you on the status of our work to repropose the best available retrofit technology ( BART) provisions of the Regional Haze Rule, to outline the planned schedule, and to reiterate my request that you continue your work with the States and Tribes on regional haze planning. I also want to thank you for the work you have done to this point, especially gathering and submitting preliminary data on the BART source population.

As you know, on May 24, 2002, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit issued a decision in American Corn Growers et al. v. EPA 291 F. 3d 1 ( D. C. Cir. 2002) that invalidated part of our Regional Haze Rule. As a result, we are reproposing both that portion of the Regional Haze Rule and the proposed guidelines for BART determinations ( Proposed Guidelines for Best Available Retrofit Technology Determinations Under the Regional Haze Regulations, 66 FR 38108, July 20, 2001).

Our rulemaking effort will address concerns that the Court raised about the cumulative nature of the air quality analysis necessary both to determine which of a State's or Tribe's BARTeligible sources should be subject to a BART review and to evaluate the degree of visibility improvement from individual sources that potential BART controls would provide. It will also address the Court's concern that we did not include a mechanism by which States or Tribes could exempt individual sources from BART determinations.

As we indicated in our letter of March 13, 2003, the Court did not remand any portion of the process for determining which sources are BART eligible. Therefore, we do not intend to change the source identification process laid out in Section II ( How to Identify BART Eligible Sources) of the proposed BART guidelines. Therefore, States and Tribes, where appropriate, should continue to work on the important step of identifying BART eligible sources. In addition, once they have identified BART eligible sources, States and Tribes should begin both the process of determining which BART eligible sources will be subject to BART, as well as the process of identifying available retrofit control measures and their costs. 2 As you know, we have recently published a proposed consent decree establishing a schedule for action on the BART rule provisions and guidelines. If finalized, the consent decree would require us to publish a proposed rulemaking package addressing these issues in the Federal Register by April 15, 2004. The proposal will include issues in the Regional Haze Rule and the BART guidelines. We intend to publish the final rulemaking package in the Federal Register by April 2005. We have accelerated the schedule for this rulemaking as much as possible.

I am also writing to the State Air Directors, as well as Tribal contacts, to explain the BART process and to encourage them to move forward with planning for BART implementation. We will forward a copy of this letter to you.

Thank you for your interest in this important matter, and for all the good work that you have done. If you have any further questions, please contact Kathy Kaufman at 919 541 0102 or Todd Hawes at ( 919) 541 5591.

Sincerely,

Lydia N. Wegman Director Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division 3 LETTERS WERE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING:

Mr. Chris Recchia Mid Atlantic/ Northeast Visibility Union 444 N. Capitol St. NW, Suite 638 Washington, DC 20001 Mr. John Hornback Visibility Improvement  State and Tribal Association of the Southeast 526 Forest Parkway, Suite F Forest Park, Georgia 30297 6140 Mr. Mike Koerber Midwest Regional Planning Organization 2250 East Devon Ave, Suite 216 Des Plaines, Illinois 60018 Mr. Chuck Layman Central States Regional Air Planning Organization 10015 S. Pennsylvania, Suite A Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73159 Mr. Pat Cummins Western Regional Air Partnership 1515 Cleveland Place, Suite 200 Denver, Colorado 80202 Mr. Bob Gruenig Western Regional Air Partnership 2501 Rio Grande Blvd., Suite A Albuquerque, NM 87104


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 240 (Thursday, December 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 74179]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30064]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP13-20-000]

Stingray Pipeline Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on November 26, 2012, Stingray Pipeline Company,
L.L.C. (Stingray), 1100 Louisiana, Suite 3300, Houston, Texas 77002,
filed in the above referenced docket an abbreviated application
pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act for authorization to
abandon its 12-inch and 20-inch Vermilion Lateral (VR Lateral) located
in federal waters offshore Louisiana. Stingray requests authority to
abandon portions of the VR Lateral by sales to Chevron U.S.A Inc.,
Dynamic Offshore Resources, LLC, Hall-Houston Exploration III, L.P.,
GOM-H Exploration, LLC, and Callon Petroleum Operating Company
(collectively referred to as the Affected Producers), and to abandon
the remaining portion in place. Stingray also requests a determination
that the segments of the VR Lateral that will remain in service
following abandonment by sale to the Affected Producers will be
gathering facilities not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction
pursuant to section 1(b) of the NGA, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site web
at 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. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to
Cynthia Hornstein Roney, Manager--Regulatory Affairs, Stingray Pipeline
Company, L.L.C., 1100 Louisiana, Suite 3300, Houston, Texas 77002,
telephone no.<PHONE_NUMBER> and email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 7 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission
and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 28, 2012.

    Dated: December 7, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-30064 Filed 12-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P