Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 12091 

1 Federal Trade Commission: Rule Review; 

Request for Public Comment, 85 FR 34548 (June 5, 

2020). 2 42 U.S.C. 17301–17305. 

(n) 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 this AD specifies otherwise. 

(3) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on April 5, 2021. 

(i) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS332–01.00.85, Revision 1, 

dated September 7, 2017. 

(ii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS332–25.03.16, Revision 0, 

dated September 7, 2017. 

(iii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS332–25.03.41, Revision 0, 

dated September 7, 2017. 

(iv) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS332–25.03.42, Revision 0, 

dated September 7, 2017. 

(v) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS365–01.00.66, Revision 1, 

dated February 12, 2019. 

(vi) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS365–25.01.67, Revision 0, 

dated February 12, 2019. 

(vii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. EC155–04A013, Revision 1, 

dated February 12, 2019. 

(viii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. EC155–25A144, Revision 0, 

dated February 12, 2019. 

(ix) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. EC225–04A012, Revision 2, 

dated November 6, 2019. 

(x) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. EC225–25A179, Revision 1, 

dated November 6, 2019. 

(xi) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. EC225–25A203, Revision 0, 

dated September 7, 2017. 

(4) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on January 26, 2016 (80 FR 

79466, December 22, 2015). 

(i) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS332–01.00.85, Revision 0, 

dated August 26, 2014. 

(ii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. AS365–01.00.66, Revision 0, 

dated August 26, 2014. 

(iii) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. EC155–04A013, Revision 0, 

dated August 26, 2014. 

(iv) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin No. EC225–04A012, Revision 0, 

dated August 26, 2014. 

(5) For Airbus Helicopters service 

information identified in this AD, contact 

Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, 

Grand Prairie, TX 75052; phone: 972–641– 

0000 or 800–232–0323; fax: 972–641–3775; 

or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/ 

services/technical-support.html. 

(6) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., 

Room 6N–321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 817–222–5110. 

(7) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, 

email fedreg.legal@nara.gov, or go to: https:// 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued on January 4, 2021. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Director, Compliance & Airworthiness 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–03688 Filed 3–1–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 317 

[RIN 3084–AB57] 

Prohibition of Energy Market 

Manipulation Rule Review 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Confirmation of rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) has 

completed its regulatory review of its 

Prohibition of Energy Market 

Manipulation Rule implementing 

Section 811 of Subtitle B of Title VIII of 

the Energy Independence and Security 

Act of 2007. This regulatory review is 

part of the Commission’s periodic 

review of all its regulations and guides. 

The Commission has determined to 

retain the Rule in its present form. 

DATES: This action is effective March 2, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: Relevant portions of the 

record of this proceeding, including this 

document, are available at https://

www.ftc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter Richman (202–326–2563), 

Assistant Director, Mergers III, Bureau 

of Competition, Federal Trade 

Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The Commission reviews its rules and 

guides periodically to seek information 

about their benefits and costs, as well as 

their regulatory and economic impact. 

This information assists the 

Commission in identifying rules and 

guides that warrant modification or 

rescission. 

Pursuant to this process, on June 5, 

2020, the Commission initiated a 

regulatory rule review by publishing a 

document in the Federal Register 

requesting public comment (‘‘Request’’) 

on the Prohibition of Energy Market 

Manipulation Rule (‘‘Rule’’).1 The 

Commission sought comment on 

standard regulatory review questions 

such as whether the Rule continues to 

serve a useful purpose; the costs and 

benefits of the Rule for consumers and 

businesses; and what effects, if any, 

technological or economic changes have 

had on the Rule. In addition to generally 

requesting comments recommending 

modifications to the Rule, the 

Commission also invited comment 

regarding two specific issues. First, the 

Commission requested comment 

identifying any evidence § 317.3 of the 

Rule does not reach behavior that falls 

within the scope of acts prohibited by 

its authorizing statute, 42 U.S.C. 17301, 

and violates the antitrust or consumer 

protection laws. Second, the 

Commission invited comment with 

respect to the definition of ‘‘knowingly’’ 

in § 317.2(c) of the Rule, its possible 

limitations, and the appropriateness of a 

modification of the definition to capture 

acts, practices, or courses of business a 

person ‘‘knew or should have known’’ 

were fraudulent or deceptive. 

After considering the comments and 

evidence, the Commission has 

determined to retain the Rule without 

modification. 

II. Background 

The Rule, authorized by the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(‘‘EISA’’),2 prohibits market 

manipulation in connection with the 

purchase or sale of crude oil or 

petroleum products. The Rule prohibits 

fraudulent or deceptive conduct 

(including making false or misleading 

statements of material fact) in 

connection with wholesale purchases or 

sales of crude oil, gasoline, or petroleum 

distillates. The Rule separately bans the 

intentional failure to state a material fact 

when the omission (1) makes the 

statement misleading and (2) distorts or 

is likely to distort market conditions for 

any product covered by the Rule. The 

Commission issued the Rule on August 

6, 2009, with an effective date of 

November 4, 2009. 

III. Regulatory Review Comment and 

Analysis 

The Commission received one 

substantive comment, submitted by 

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP 

(‘‘ESUS’’). ESUS recommends the 

Commission rescind the Rule. The 

comment addresses whether there is a 

continuing need for the Rule and its 

benefits and costs, but not any of the 

other questions in the Request. This rule 

review summarizes the comment and 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
12092 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

3Comment of Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP at 

3–5 (Sep. 3, 2020), available at https://

beta.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2020-0047- 

0003. 4 Federal Trade Commission: Prohibitions on 

Market Manipulation; Final Rule, 74 FR at 40690, 

n.58 (Aug. 12, 2009) (citing Comment of Senator 

Maria Cantwell at 2); see also Comment of Senator 

Cantwell at 2 (‘‘Congress, however, specifically 

intended for the Commission to exercise this new 

authority by working cooperatively and in tandem 

with the CFTC to prevent and deter any 

manipulative activity, including in the futures 

markets, which would affect wholesale petroleum 

markets.’’). ESUS identifies the Dodd-Frank Wall 

Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 

(‘‘Dodd-Frank’’) as a source of legal authority for the 

CFTC to regulate market manipulation of wholesale 

petroleum markets. The Commission notes that 

Senator Cantwell, who sponsored the EISA 

provision authorizing the Rule, also helped lead the 

effort to pass the Dodd-Frank provision to which 

ESUS refers. Federal Trade Commission: 

Prohibitions on Market Manipulation; Final Rule, 

74 FR at 40704 (Aug. 12, 2009); Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission: Prohibition on the 

Employment, or Attempted Employment, of 

Manipulative and Deceptive Devices and 

Prohibition on Price Manipulation; Final Rule, 76 

FR at 41410 (July 14, 2011). 

5Commodity Futures Trading Commission: 

Prohibition on the Employment, or Attempted 

Employment, of Manipulative and Deceptive 

Devices and Prohibition on Price Manipulation; 

Final Rule, 76 FR at 41409 (July 14, 2011). 

6 Federal Trade Commission: Prohibitions on 

Market Manipulation; Final Rule, 74 FR at 40691 

(Aug. 12, 2009). 

7Federal Trade Commission, Memorandum of 

Understanding Between the Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission and the Federal Trade 

Commission Regarding Information Sharing in 

Areas of Common Regulatory Interest, at 1 ¶ 3 (Apr. 

12, 2011), available at https://www.ftc.gov/policy/ 

cooperation-agreements/commodity-futurestrading-commission-federal-trade-commission. 

8Comment of Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP at 

8 (Sep. 3, 2020), available at https://

beta.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2020-0047- 

0003. 

9 Id. at 9. 

10 Federal Trade Commission: Prohibitions on 

Market Manipulation; Final Rule, 74 FR at 40701 

(Aug. 12, 2009). 

11Comment of Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP at 

6, 9 (Sep. 3, 2020), available at https://

beta.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2020-0047- 

0003. 

12 Id. 

explains the Commission’s decision to 

retain the Rule in its current form. 

ESUS recommends the Commission 

rescind the Rule partly because the 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission (‘‘CFTC’’) has the legal 

authority and the ability to regulate 

market manipulation of wholesale 

petroleum markets.3 This overlap in 

regulatory authority is by design.4 It is 

intended to facilitate cooperation and 

ensure comprehensive enforcement that 

enhances regulatory certainty for 

businesses and consumers, a point the 

CFTC made in 2011 in response to a 

similar comment during the CFTC’s 

rulemaking process.5 The Commission 

stated its intent to cooperate with other 

agencies, including the CFTC, when 

adopting the Rule in 2009,6 and 

memorialized that commitment in a 

2011 Memorandum of Understanding 

with the CFTC. Under the Memorandum 

of Understanding, the Commission and 

the CFTC continue to cooperate on 

‘‘issues of common regulatory interest, 

particularly as such interest relates to 

market manipulation, [to] foster fair 

competition and promote the integrity 

of the markets, including petroleum 

markets.’’ 7

ESUS also asserts that rescinding the 

Rule eliminates the risk market 

participants will incur penalties from 

both the Commission and the CFTC for 

the same act of market manipulation.8

This risk has never materialized. 

ESUS also asserts the Rule imposes 

compliance costs on market participants 

and diverts Commission resources away 

from enforcement of consumer 

protection and antitrust laws.9 With 

respect to compliance costs on market 

participants, the Commission notes the 

Rule does not require any affirmative 

compliance efforts such as 

recordkeeping or disclosure of 

information; rather, the Rule requires 

only that market participants refrain 

from fraudulent and deceptive 

statements or behavior.10 As ESUS 

points out, the CFTC’s broader authority 

to regulate market manipulation 

includes prohibiting the conduct the 

Commission’s Rule prohibits.11

Maintaining compliance programs to 

avoid violating these substantially 

similar requirements does not lead to 

additive compliance costs. As a result, 

and given the absence of any additional 

substantiation of compliance costs 

associated with the Rule, the 

Commission concludes the Rule 

continues to impose minimal costs on 

businesses. 

Finally, after consideration, and given 

the benefits to consumers relative to the 

costs associated with Rule enforcement, 

the Commission declines to adopt 

ESUS’ position that rescinding the Rule 

‘‘would allow the FTC to rededicate 

limited internal resources to its core 

consumer protection and antitrust 

missions.’’ 12

IV. Conclusion 

After considering the comment and 

the evidence, the Commission 

concludes (1) there is a continuing need 

for the Rule; (2) the Rule benefits 

consumers and businesses; (3) the Rule 

does not impose substantial economic 

burdens; and (4) the benefits outweigh 

the minimal costs the Rule imposes. 

Accordingly, the Commission has 

determined to retain the current Rule 

and is terminating this review. 

By direction of the Commission. 

April J. Tabor, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04196 Filed 3–1–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0631; FRL–10018– 

05–Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; Tennessee; 

Nitrogen Oxides SIP Call Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

concerning nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

emissions submitted by the State of 

Tennessee, through the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC), through a letter 

dated December 19, 2019, which revises 

the Tennessee Air Pollution Control 

Rule (TAPCR) titled ‘‘NOX SIP Call 

Requirements for Stationary Boilers and 

Combustion Turbines’’ (TN 2017 NOX

SIP Call Rule) to correct the definition 

of ‘‘affected unit’’ and to clarify 

requirements related to stationary 

boilers and combustion turbines. EPA is 

also converting the conditional approval 

of the TN 2017 NOX SIP Call Rule to a 

full approval. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 1, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2018–0631. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information may not be publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials can 

either be retrieved electronically via 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Regulatory Management Section, 

Air Planning and Implementation 

Branch, Air and Radiation Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that 

if at all possible, you contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES