63730 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 4—METERPANEL ASSEMBLY—NOT REPAIRED

Engine series Initial inspection Repetitive inspection Parts exceeding initial inspection 

cycles 

(1) RB211–524D4, –524G, and 

–524H.

Within 1,000 to 1,200 CSN .......... Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 50 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(2) RB211–524D4, –524G, and 

–524H that have not used 

RB211–524H ratings at any time.

Within 1,800 to 2,000 CSN .......... Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 50 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

Inspections of Meterpanel Assemblies— 

Repaired 

(k) For meterpanel assemblies that 

incorporate SB No. RB.211–72–7998, and 

have been repaired previously, do the 

following: 

(1) Borescope-inspect meterpanel 

assemblies that have been previously 

repaired. Use paragraphs 3.B.(1) through 

3.B.(7) of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

RR ASB No. RB.211–72–AB482, Revision 9, 

dated July 28, 2003, and the CSLR, CSLI, and 

CIS compliance thresholds in Table 5 of this 

AD. 

TABLE 5—METERPANEL ASSEMBLY—REPAIRED

Engine series Initial inspection Repetitive inspection Parts exceeding initial inspection 

cycles 

(2) RB211–524D4, –524G, and 

–524H.

Within 500 to 700 CSLR .............. Within 400 CSLI ........................... Within 50 CIS after the effective 

date of this AD. 

Reject Parts 

(l) Replace parts that exceed the acceptance 

criteria. Information about the acceptance 

criteria can be found in the Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual, 72–00–00, Inspection/ 

Check. 

Mandatory Terminating Action 

(m) Replace the front combustion liner 

assembly with a front combustion liner not 

affected by this AD at the next shop visit. 

(n) For RB211–524B02, –524B2, –524B3– 

02, –524B4–02, –524C2 and –524D4 engines, 

replacing the front combustion liner 

assembly with a front combustion liner 

assembly that incorporates the modifications 

in RR SB No. RB.211–72–9670, Original 

Issue, dated August 27, 1993; or RR SB No. 

RB.211–72–9764, Revision 3, dated January 

16, 1998, constitutes terminating action to 

the repetitive inspections in paragraphs (g), 

(h), (i), (j), and (k), of this AD. 

(o) For RB211–524G and –524H engines, 

replacing the front combustion liner 

assembly with a front combustion liner 

assembly that incorporates the modifications 

in RR SB No. RB.211–72–9764, Revision 3, 

dated January 16, 1998, constitutes 

terminating action to the repetitive 

inspections in paragraphs (g), (h), (i), (j), and 

(k) of this AD. 

Definition of Shop Visit 

(p) For the purpose of this AD, a shop visit 

is any time that the 04 module is removed 

for repair or overhaul. 

Related Information 

(q) Contact Ian Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

e-mail: ian.dargin@faa.gov; telephone (781) 

238–7178; fax (781) 238–7199, for more 

information about this AD. 

(r) Rolls-Royce ASB No. RB.211–72– 

AB482, Revision 9, dated July 28, 2003; SB 

No. RB.211–72–9764, Revision 3, dated 

January 16, 1998; and SB No. RB.211–72– 

9670, Original Issue, dated August 27, 1993, 

pertain to the subject of this AD. Contact 

Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 31, Derby, DE24 

8BJ, United Kingdom; telephone: 011–44– 

1332–242424; fax: 011–44–1332–249936, for 

a copy of this service information. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 6, 2010. 

Diane S. Romanosky, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26115 Filed 10–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0529; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–ANM–3] 

Proposed Establishment of Class E 

Airspace; Panguitch, UT 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM). 

SUMMARY: This supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking would expand 

controlled Class E airspace to include a 

portion extending upward from 1,200 

feet above the surface at Panguitch 

Municipal Airport, Panguitch, UT. In an 

NPRM published in the Federal 

Register June 28, 2010, the FAA 

proposed to establish controlled 

airspace from 700 feet above the surface. 

The FAA has reassessed the proposal to 

include Class E airspace 700 feet and 

1,200 feet above the surface to further 

the safety and management of 

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations 

at the airport. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590; 

telephone (202) 366–9826. You must 

identify FAA Docket No. FAA–2010– 

0529; Airspace Docket No. 10–ANM–3, 

at the beginning of your comments. You 

may also submit comments through the 

Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Operations Support 

Group, Western Service Center, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; 

telephone (425) 203–4537. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On June 28, 2010, the FAA published 

a NPRM to establish Class E airspace 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface, at Panguitch 

Municipal Airport, Panguitch, UT (75 

FR 36585). The comment period closed 

August 12, 2010. Two comments were 

received. 

One commenter recommended 

establishing Class E surface airspace at 

Panguitch Municipal Airport. The FAA 

does not agree. There is no ATC 

communications down to the surface at 

the airport; therefore, the airport does 

not meet the requirements of Class E 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 63731 

surface area airspace. One commenter 

recommended expanding the proposed 

Class E 700 feet airspace area to include 

1,200 feet above the surface for aircraft 

safety. The FAA agrees and has 

proposed to include a portion of Class 

E airspace upward from 1,200 feet above 

the surface, with Class E airspace 

extending upward from 700 feet above 

the surface, for Standard Instrument 

Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at 

Panguitch Municipal Airport. The FAA 

seeks comments on this SNPRM. 

Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments, as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA 

2010–0529 and Airspace Docket No. 

10–ANM–3) and be submitted in 

triplicate to the Docket Management 

System (see ADDRESSES section for 

address and phone number). You may 

also submit comments through the 

Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this action must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to FAA 

Docket No. FAA–2010–0529 and 

Airspace Docket No. 10–ANM–3’’. The 

postcard will be date/time stamped and 

returned to the commenter. 

All communications received on or 

before the specified closing date for 

comments will be considered before 

taking action on the proposed rule. The 

proposal contained in this action may 

be changed in light of comments 

received. All comments submitted will 

be available for examination in the 

public docket both before and after the 

closing date for comments. A report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerned 

with this rulemaking will be filed in the 

docket. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Recently published rulemaking 

documents can also be accessed through 

the FAA’s web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_

traffic/publications/airspace_

amendments/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see the 

ADDRESSES section for the address and 

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

federal holidays. An informal docket 

may also be examined during normal 

business hours at the Northwest 

Mountain Regional Office of the Federal 

Aviation Administration, Air Traffic 

Organization, Western Service Center, 

Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRM’s should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory 

Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking Distribution System, which 

describes the application procedure. 

The Supplemental Proposal 

The FAA is proposing an amendment 

to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations 

(14 CFR) part 71 by establishing Class E 

airspace extending upward from 1,200 

feet above the surface at Panguitch 

Municipal Airport, Panguitch UT. 

Controlled airspace extending upward 

from 700 feet and 1,200 feet above the 

surface is necessary to accommodate 

aircraft using the new RNAV (GPS) 

SIAPs at Panguitch Municipal Airport 

and would enhance the safety and 

management of IFR operations. 

Class E airspace designations are 

published in paragraph 6005, of FAA 

Order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010 

and effective September 15, 2010, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in this Order. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. 

Therefore, this proposed regulation: 

(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); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified that this proposed rule, 

when promulgated, would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 

section 106, describes the authority for 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. This rulemaking is 

promulgated under the authority 

described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart 

I, section 40103. Under that section, the 

FAA is charged with prescribing 

regulations to assign the use of the 

airspace necessary to ensure the safety 

of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority as it would 

establish controlled airspace at 

Panguitch Municipal Airport, 

Panguitch, UT. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me, the Federal 

Aviation Administration proposes to 

amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of the FAA Order 7400.9U, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 18, 2010, and 

effective September 15, 2010 is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

ANM UT E5 Panguitch, UT [New] 

Panguitch Municipal Airport, UT 

(Lat. 37°50′43′′ N., Long. 112°23′31′′ W.) 

That airspace extending from 700 feet 

above the surface within an 11.7-mile radius 

of the Panguitch Municipal Airport, and that 

airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet 

above the surface within an area bounded by 

lat. 38°25′00′′ N., long. 112°32′00′′ W., to lat. 

38°24′00′′ N., long. 112°02′00′′ W., to lat. 

37°52′00′′ N., long. 111°47′00′′ W., to lat. 

37°14′00′′ N., long. 112°20′00′′ W., to lat. 

37°14′00′′ N., long. 112°56′00′′ W., to lat. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
63732 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

1See Dodd-Frank Act, Pub. L. 111–203, 124 Stat. 

1376 (2010). The text of the Dodd-Frank Act may 

be accessed at http://www.cftc.gov./LawRegulation/ 

OTCDERIVATIVES/index.htm. 2Pursuant to Section 701 of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

Title VII may be cited as the ‘‘Wall Street 

Transparency and Accountability Act of 2010.’’ 3 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq. 4 In this release, the terms ‘‘swap dealer’’ and 

‘‘major swap participant’’ shall have the meanings 

set forth in Section 721(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 

which added Sections 1a(49) and (33) of the CEA. 

However, Section 721(c) of the Dodd-Frank Act 

directs the Commission to promulgate rules to 

further define, among other terms, ‘‘swap dealer’’ 

and ‘‘major swap participant.’’ The Commission is 

in the process of this rulemaking. See, e.g., 

http://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/ 

OTCDerivatives/OTC_2_Definitions.html. The 

Commission anticipates that such rulemaking will 

be completed by the statutory deadline of July 15, 

2011. 

5See the following colloquy between 

Representative Stephen Lynch and Representative 

Barney Frank on the language that became Section 

726 of the Dodd-Frank Act: 

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of a colloquy, I 

would like to engage with the chairman of the 

committee and the drafter of this legislation. I 

congratulate him on the great work he has done on 

this reform bill. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to call your attention to 

sections 726 and 765 of the bill. These two 

provisions require the CFTC and the SEC to 

conduct rulemakings to eliminate the conflicts of 

interest arising from the control of clearing and 

trading facilities by entities such as swap dealers 

and major swap participants. 

This problem arises because, right now, 95 

percent of all of the clearinghouses in this country 

are owned by just five banks. So, while we are 

relying on the clearinghouses to reduce systemic 

risk, we have the banks now owning the 

clearinghouses. 

The question I have is regarding the intent of the 

conferees in retaining subsection B of these 

provisions. It could be loosely construed to leave 

it up to the agencies whether or not to adopt rules. 

Mr. Chairman, do you agree that my reading of 

sections 726 and 765 affirmatively require these 

agencies to adopt strong conflict of interest rules on 

control and governance of clearing and trading 

facilities? 

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. If the gentleman 

would yield to me, he has been a leader in this 

important area, and he is a careful lawyer and 

understands that just saving a principle isn’t 

enough. You’ve got to make sure it is carried out. 

Dealing with a conflict of interest that he has been 

a leader in identifying is essential if this is going 

to work. So I completely agree with him. Yes, we 

mean both of those subsections, and it is a 

mandatory rulemaking. 

I will say to my neighbor from Massachusetts that 

we will be monitoring this carefully. They can 

expect oversight hearings because, yes, this is 

definitely a mandate to them to adopt rules to deal 

with what would be a blatant conflict of interest in 

the efficacy rules, and we intend to follow that 

closely. 

156 Cong. Rec. H5217 (2010). 

6The ‘‘enumerated entities’’ include: (i) Bank 

holding companies with over $50,000,000,000 in 

total consolidated assets; (ii) a nonbank financial 

company supervised by the Board of Governors of 

the Federal Reserve System; (iii) an affiliate of (i) 

or (ii); (iv) a swap dealer; (v) a major swap 

participant; or (vi) an associated person of (iv) or 

(v). 

37°42′30′′ N., long. 112°55′00′′ W., to lat. 

37°43′00′′ N., long. 112°43′00′′ W., thence to 

the point of beginning. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on October 

6, 2010. 

John Warner, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Western 

Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26096 Filed 10–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Parts 1, 37, 38, 39, and 40 

RIN 3038–AD01 

Requirements for Derivatives Clearing 

Organizations, Designated Contract 

Markets, and Swap Execution Facilities 

Regarding the Mitigation of Conflicts 

of Interest 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) hereby proposes rules to 

implement new statutory provisions 

enacted by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act (the ‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’). 

Specifically, the proposed rules 

contained herein impose new 

requirements on derivatives clearing 

organizations (‘‘DCOs’’), designated 

contract markets (‘‘DCMs’’), and swap 

execution facilities (‘‘SEFs’’) with 

respect to mitigation of conflicts of 

interest. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

November 17, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN number, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web Site: http:// 

www.cftc.gov. Follow the instructions 

for submitting comments on the Web 

site. 

• E-mail: 

dcodcmsefGovernance@cftc.gov. 

• Fax: 202–418–5521. 

• Mail: David A. Stawick, Secretary of 

the Commission, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette 

Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20581. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as 

mail above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nancy Liao Schnabel, Special Counsel, 

Division of Clearing and Intermediary 

Oversight (DCIO), at 202–418–5344 or 

nschnabel@cftc.gov; Lois Gregory, 

Assistant Deputy Director for Market 

Review, the Division of Market 

Oversight (DMO), at 202–418–5569 or 

lgregory@cftc.gov; Andrea Musalem, 

Special Counsel, DCIO, at 202–418– 

5167 or amusalem@cftc.gov; Jordan 

O’Regan, Attorney-Advisor, DCIO, at 

202–418–5984 or joregan@cftc.gov; 

Cody Alvarez, Attorney-Advisor, DMO, 

at 202–418–5404 or calvarez@cftc.gov; 

Dana Brown, Law Clerk, DMO, at 202– 

418–5093 or dbrown@cftc.gov; Jolanta 

Sterbenz, Counsel, Office of the General 

Counsel, at 202–418–6639 or 

jsterbenz@cftc.gov; David Reiffen, 

Senior Economist, Office of the Chief 

Economist, at 202–418–5602 or 

dreiffen@cftc.gov; or Alicia Lewis, 

Attorney-Advisor, DCIO, at 202–418– 

5862 or alewis@cftc.gov; in each case, 

also at the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20581. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On July 21, 2010, President Obama 

signed the Dodd-Frank Act.1 Title VII of 

the Dodd-Frank Act 2 amended the 

Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’) 3 to 

establish a comprehensive new 

regulatory framework for swaps and 

certain security-based swaps. The 

legislation was enacted to reduce risk, 

increase transparency, and promote 

market integrity within the financial 

system by, among other things: (i) 

Providing for the registration and 

comprehensive regulation of swap 

dealers and major swap participants; 4

(ii) imposing mandatory clearing and 

trade execution requirements on 

clearable swap contracts; (iii) creating 

robust recordkeeping and real-time 

reporting regimes; and (iv) enhancing 

the rulemaking and enforcement 

authorities of the Commission with 

respect to, among others, all registered 

entities and intermediaries subject to 

the oversight of the Commission. 

In order to ensure the proper 

implementation of the comprehensive 

new regulatory framework, especially 

with respect to (ii) above, the DoddFrank Act requires 5 the Commission to 

promulgate rules to mitigate conflicts of 

interest in the operation of certain 

DCOs, DCMs, and SEFs. First, Section 

726(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act 

specifically empowers the Commission 

to adopt ‘‘numerical limits * * * on 

control’’ or ‘‘voting rights’’ that 

enumerated entities 6 may hold with 

respect to such DCOs, DCMs, and SEFs. 

Second, Section 726(b) of the DoddFrank Act directs the Commission to 

determine the manner in which its rules 

may be deemed necessary or 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS