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

TABLE 

### 4—M ETERPANEL 

### A SSEMBLY

### —N OT 

### R EPAIRED

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—M ETERPANEL 

### A SSEMBLY

### —R EPAIRED

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


### 63731 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules

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.


### 63732 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules

1 See 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.

2 Pursuant 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. 5 See 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).

6 The ‘‘ 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, especiallywith 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