Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2012 / Notices 33805 

20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

that would be rendered by the proposed 

computational methodology. 

In summary, the proposed rule 

amendments would enable the 

Exchange, for margin purposes, to 

accommodate the many types of spread 

strategies utilized in the industry today 

in a fair and efficient manner. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6(b) 20 of the Act and the rules 

and regulations under the Act, in 

general, and furthers the objectives of 

Section 6(b)(5).21 Because this rule filing 

proposes a single, universal definition 

of a spread and one spread margin 

requirement that consists of a universal 

margin requirement computation 

methodology, it promotes just and 

equitable principles of trade and fosters 

cooperation and coordination with 

persons engaged in facilitating 

transactions in securities. By adding 

clarity and consistency to margin 

requirements, it also removes 

impediments to and perfects the 

mechanisms of a free and open market 

and a national market system, and, in 

general, to protect investors and the 

public interest. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

CBOE does not believe that the 

proposed rule change will impose any 

burden on competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received from 

Members, Participants, or Others 

The Exchange neither solicited nor 

received comments on the proposed 

rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Within 45 days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register or within such longer period (i) 

as the Commission may designate up to 

90 days of such date if it finds such 

longer period to be appropriate and 

publishes its reasons for so finding or 

(ii) as to which the self-regulatory 

organization consents, the Commission 

will: 

(A) By order approve or disapprove 

such proposed rule change, or 

(B) Institute proceedings to determine 

whether the proposed rule change 

should be disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views, and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s Internet 

comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File 

Number SR–CBOE–2012–043 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–CBOE-2012–043. 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 such 

filing also will be available for 

inspection and copying at the principal 

office of the Exchange. 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–CBOE– 

2012–043 and should be submitted on 

or before June 28, 2012. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.22

Kevin M. O’Neill, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–13763 Filed 6–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Notice of Passenger Facility Charge 

(PFC) Approvals and Disapprovals 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Monthly Notice of PFC 

Approvals and Disapprovals. In May 

2012, there were three applications 

approved. This notice also includes 

information on one application, 

approved in April 2012, inadvertently 

left off the April 2012 notice. 

Additionally, four approved 

amendments to previously approved 

applications are listed. 

SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly 

notice, as appropriate, of PFC approvals 

and disapprovals under the provisions 

of the Aviation Safety and Capacity 

Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the 

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 

1990) (Pub. L. 101–508) and Part 158 of 

the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 

CFR part 158). This notice is published 

pursuant to paragraph d of § 158.29. 

PFC Applications Approved 

PUBLIC AGENCY: Tri State Airport 

Authority, Huntington, West Virginia. 

APPLICATION NUMBER: 12–07–C– 

00–HTS. 

APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use 

a PFC. 

PFC LEVEL: $4.50. 

TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED 

IN THIS DECISION: $2,369,532. 

EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE 

DATE: July 1, 2012. 

ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION 

DATE: October 1, 2017. 

CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT 

REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC’S: None. 

Brief Description of Projects Approved 

for Collection and Use 

Terminal center—phase I. 

PFC application. 

Improve airport drainage. 

Acquire snow removal equipment. 

Install perimeter fencing. 

Rehabilitate terminal building. 

Rehabilitate taxiway A (west). 

Access road repair. 

Rehabilitate taxiways g, E, C, F, and 

A (ramp edge). 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
33806 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2012 / Notices 

Terminal center—phase II. 

Environmental assessment—airfield 

development. 

Brief Description of Projects Approved 

for Collection 

Relocate taxiway A (east). 

Install airport beacon. 

Security enhancements. 

Access road and parking lot. 

Terminal center—phase III. 

Acquire runway protection zone land. 

Rehabilitate terminal building—phase 

IV. 

Reconfigure airside terminal. 

Replace airfield generators. 

Seal coat runway. 

DECISION DATE: April 30, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew DiGiulian, Beckley Airports 

Field Office, (304) 252–6217. 

PUBLIC AGENCY: Tulsa Airports 

Improvement Trust, Tulsa, Oklahoma. 

APPLICATION NUMBER: 12–08–C– 

00–TUL. 

APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use 

a PFC. 

PFC LEVEL: $4.50. 

TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED 

IN THIS DECISION: $3,430,000. 

EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE 

DATE: June 1, 2020. 

ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION 

DATE: December 1, 2020. 

CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT 

REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC’S: Air 

taxi/commercial operators filing FAA 

Form 1800–31. 

DETERMINATION: Approved. Based 

on information contained in the public 

agency’s application, the FAA has 

determined that the proposed class 

accounts for less than 1 percent of the 

total annual enplanements at Tulsa 

International Airport. 

Brief Description of Projects Approved 

for Collection and Use 

Design and enabling projects for 

concourse A rehabilitation and 

improvement. 

Passenger loading bridges. 

Security exit lane equipment. 

PFC consulting fees. 

Brief Description of Disapproved 

Project 

Electrical generators. 

DETERMINATION: Disapproved. This 

project did not meet the requirements of 

§ 158.15(b). 

DECISION DATE: May 8, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don 

Harris, Arkansas/Oklahoma Airports 

Development Office, (817) 222–5634. 

PUBLIC AGENCY: Port of Port 

Angeles, Port Angeles, Washington. 

APPLICATION NUMBER: 12–08–C– 

00–CLM. 

APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use 

a PFC. 

PFC LEVEL: $3.00. 

TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED 

IN THIS DECISION: $161,209. 

EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE 

DATE: July 1, 2012. 

ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION 

DATE: April 1, 2014. 

CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT 

REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC’S: None. 

Brief Description of Projects Approved 

for Collection and Use 

Terminal entrance road construction. 

Taxilanes construction, phase II. 

Terminal apron reconstruction. 

Runway 8/26 lighting rehabilitation. 

Taxilanes construction, phase III. 

PFC administration. 

DECISION DATE: May 8, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Trang Tran, Seattle Airports District 

Office, (425) 227–1662. 

PUBLIC AGENCY: Yuma County 

Airport Authority, Yuma, Arizona. 

APPLICATION NUMBER: 12–04–C– 

00–NYL. 

APPLICATION TYPE: Impose and use 

a PFC. 

PFC LEVEL: $4.50. 

TOTAL PFC REVENUE APPROVED 

IN THIS DECISION: $250,000. 

EARLIEST CHARGE EFFECTIVE 

DATE: July 1, 2018. 

ESTIMATED CHARGE EXPIRATION 

DATE: October 1, 2021. 

CLASS OF AIR CARRIERS NOT 

REQUIRED TO COLLECT PFC’S: 

Nonscheduled/on-demand air carriers 

filing FAA Form 1800–31. 

DETERMINATION: Approved. Based 

on information contained in the public 

agency’s application, the FAA has 

determined that the proposed class 

accounts for less than 1 percent of the 

total annual enplanements at Yuma 

Marine Corps Air Station/Yuma 

International Airport. 

Brief Description of Project Approved 

for Collection and Use 

Widen parallel taxiway Z. 

DECISION DATE: May 18, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Darlene Williams, Los Angeles Airports 

District Office, (310) 725–3625. 

AMENDMENT TO PFC APPROVALS

Amendment No. 

city, state 

Amendment 

approved date 

Original 

approved 

net PFC 

revenue 

Amended 

estimated 

net PFC 

revenue 

Original 

estimated 

charge expiration date 

Amended 

estimated 

charge expiration date 

05–05–C–07–EWR 

Newark, NJ .......................................................................... 04/06/12 $556,442,435 $566,136,035 07/1/11 09/1/11 

10–08–C–01–SAV 

Savannah, GA ...................................................................... 05/03/12 4,066,265 6,669,248 04/1/16 12/1/16 

11–17–C–02–BNA 

Nashville, TN ........................................................................ 05/04/12 2,512,500 2,797,105 03/1/17 06/1/17 

08–07–C–01–DTW 

Detroit, MI ............................................................................ 05/18/12 257,020,320 227,653,568 08/1/34 02/1/34 

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 31, 

2012. 

Joe Hebert, 

Manager, Financial Analysis and Passenger 

Facility Charge Branch. 

[FR Doc. 2012–13690 Filed 6–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2012 / Notices 33807 

1Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc., is a 

corporation registered under the laws of the state 

of Michigan. 

2Hyundai’s petition, which was filed under 49 

CFR part 556, requests an agency decision to 

exempt Hyundai as a motor vehicle manufacturer 

from the notification and recall responsibilities of 

49 CFR part 573 for the 2,764 affected vehicles. 

However, a decision on this petition will not relieve 

vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions 

on the sale, offer for sale, introduction or delivery 

for introduction into interstate commerce of the 

noncompliant vehicles under their control after 

Hyundai notified them that the subject 

noncompliance existed. 

3The citation that Hyundai referenced for rim 

size designation marking requirements in its 

petition, paragraph S4.2.2, is incorrect. The correct 

citation is paragraph S4.4.2. 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0045; Notice 1] 

Hyundai Motor Company, Receipt of 

Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Receipt of petition. 

SUMMARY: Hyundai America Technical 

Center, Inc., on behalf of Hyundai Motor 

Company (collectively referred to as 

‘‘Hyundai’’) 1 has determined that 

certain model year 2012 Hyundai 

Veracruz multipurpose passenger 

vehicles (MPV) manufactured August 9, 

2011, through January 8, 2012, that were 

equipped with 7J x 18 wheel rims, do 

not fully comply with paragraph S4.3.3 

of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire 

Selection and Rims and Motor Home/ 

Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load 

Carrying Capacity Information for Motor 

Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 

Kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. 

Hyundai has filed an appropriate report 

dated February 9, 2012, pursuant to 49 

CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 

CFR part 556), Hyundai submitted a 

petition for an exemption from the 

notification and remedy requirements of 

49 U.S.C. chapter 301 on the basis that 

this noncompliance is inconsequential 

to motor vehicle safety. 

This notice of receipt of Hyundai’s 

petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and 30120 and does not represent 

any agency decision or other exercise of 

judgment concerning the merits of the 

petition. 

Vehicles involved: Affected are 

approximately 2,764 model year 2012 

Hyundai Veracruz vehicles produced 

beginning on August 9, 2011, through 

January 8, 2012, that were equipped 

with 7J x 18 wheel rims at the assembly 

plant. 

NHTSA notes that the statutory 

provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to 

file petitions for a determination of 

inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to 

exempt manufacturers only from the 

duties found in sections 30118 and 

30120, respectively, to notify owners, 

purchasers, and dealers of a defect or 

noncompliance and to remedy the 

defect or noncompliance. Therefore, 

these provisions only apply to the 

subject 2,764 2 vehicles that Hyundai no 

longer controlled at the time it 

determined that the noncompliance 

existed. 

Noncompliance: Hyundai explains 

that the noncompliance is that the rim 

size information required by paragraph 

S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110 was omitted 

from the certification labels that it 

installed on the affected vehicles. 

Rule text: Paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS 

No. 110 requires: 

S4.3.3 Additional labeling information 

for vehicles other than passenger cars. Each 

vehicle shall show the size designation and, 

if applicable, the type designation of rims 

(not necessarily those on the vehicle) 

appropriate for the tire appropriate for use on 

that vehicle, including the tire installed as 

original equipment on the vehicle by the 

vehicle manufacturer, after each GAWR 

listed on the certification label required by 

§ 567.4 or § 567.5 of this chapter. This 

information shall be in the English language, 

lettered in block capitals and numerals not 

less than 2.4 millimeters high and in the 

following format 

Truck Example—Suitable Tire-Rim Choice 

GVWR: 2,441 kilograms (5381 pounds). 

GAWR: Front—1,299 kilograms (2,864 

pounds) with P265/70R16 tires, 16 x 8.0 

rims at 248 kPa (36 psi) cold single. 

GAWR: Rear—1,299 kilograms (2,864 

pounds) with P265/70R16 tires, 16 x 8.00 

rims, at 248 kPa (36 psi) cold single. 

Summary of Hyundai’s Analysis and 

Arguments 

Hyundai believes that the missing rim 

size information on the certification 

label is inconsequential as it relates to 

motor vehicle safety, because this 

information is readily available to the 

vehicle owner through other sources 

that are required to be furnished with 

the vehicle. The rim size is marked on 

the rims and is included in the Owner’s 

Manual, which is referenced as an 

information source by the tire placard 

which is positioned adjacent to the 

certification label on the ‘‘B’’ pillar. 

FMVSS No. 110 paragraph 4.4.2(b) 3

requires that each rim be marked with 

the rim size designation. The affected 

vehicles are equipped with rims that are 

marked with the rim size and meet the 

requirements of FMVSS No. 110 

paragraph 4.4.2. 

Additionally, the tire placard required 

by FMVSS No. 110 paragraph 4.3(d) 

requires that the tire size designation be 

provided for the tires installed at the 

time of the first purchase and FMVSS 

No. 110 paragraph S4.3(f) requires that 

the placard state ‘‘See Owner’s Manual 

for Additional Information’’. The 

affected vehicles are equipped with 

placards that meet the requirements of 

FMVSS No. 110 paragraph 4.3. 

Hyundai also stated that they are not 

aware of any notices, bulletins, or other 

communications that relate directly to 

the noncompliance sent to more than 

one manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or 

purchaser. 

Hyundai has additionally informed 

NHTSA that it has corrected the 

noncompliance so that all future 

production vehicles will comply with 

FMVSS No. 110. 

In summation, Hyundai believes that 

the described noncompliance of its 

vehicles is inconsequential to motor 

vehicle safety, and that its petition, to 

exempt from providing recall 

notification of noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 

remedying the recall noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be 

granted. 

Comments: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written data, views, 

and arguments on this petition. 

Comments must refer to the docket and 

notice number cited at the beginning of 

this notice and be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

a. By mail addressed to: U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

b. By hand delivery to: U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. The Docket Section is open 

on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

except Federal Holidays. 

c. Electronically: By logging onto the 

Federal Docket Management System 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES