Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 133 / Tuesday, July 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 40797 

counterparty of the retail forex 

customer’s selection. 

(b) Exceptions. The requirements of 

paragraph (a) of this section shall not 

apply to transfers: 

(1) Requested by the retail forex 

customer; 

(2) Made by the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Corporation as receiver or 

conservator under the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act; or 

(3) Otherwise authorized by 

applicable law. 

(c) Obligations of transferee FDICsupervised insured depository 

institution. An FDIC-supervised insured 

depository institution to which retail 

forex accounts or positions are assigned 

or transferred under paragraph (a) of 

this section must provide to the affected 

retail forex customers the risk disclosure 

statements and forms of 

acknowledgment required by this part 

and receive the required signed 

acknowledgments within sixty days of 

such assignments or transfers. This 

requirement shall not apply if the FDICsupervised insured depository 

institution has clear written evidence 

that the retail forex customer has 

received and acknowledged receipt of 

the required disclosure statements. 

§ 349.16 Customer dispute resolution. 

(a) Voluntary submission of claims to 

dispute or settlement procedures. No 

FDIC-supervised insured depository 

institution may enter into any 

agreement or understanding with a 

retail forex customer in which the 

customer agrees, prior to the time a 

claim or grievance arises, to submit such 

claim or grievance to any settlement 

procedure. 

(b) Election of forum. (1) Within ten 

business days after receipt of notice 

from the retail forex customer that the 

customer intends to submit a claim to 

arbitration, the FDIC-supervised insured 

depository institution must provide the 

customer with a list of persons qualified 

in dispute resolution. 

(2) The customer shall, within 45 days 

after receipt of such list, notify the 

FDIC-supervised insured depository 

institution of the person selected. The 

customer’s failure to provide such 

notice shall give the FDIC-supervised 

insured depository institution the right 

to select a person from the list. 

(c) Enforceability. A dispute 

settlement procedure may require 

parties using such procedure to agree, 

under applicable state law, submission 

agreement or otherwise, to be bound by 

an award rendered in the procedure, 

provided that the agreement to submit 

the claim or grievance to the voluntary 

procedure under paragraph (a) of this 

section or that agreement to submit the 

claim or grievance was made after the 

claim or grievance arose. Any award so 

rendered shall be enforceable in 

accordance with applicable law. 

(d) Time limits for submission of 

claims. The dispute settlement 

procedure used by the parties shall not 

include any unreasonably short 

limitation period foreclosing submission 

of a customer’s claims or grievances or 

counterclaims. 

(e) Counterclaims. A procedure for the 

settlement of a retail forex customer’s 

claims or grievances against an FDICsupervised insured depository 

institution or employee thereof may 

permit the submission of a counterclaim 

in the procedure by a person against 

whom a claim or grievance is brought. 

Such a counterclaim may be permitted 

where it arises out of the transaction or 

occurrence that is the subject of the 

customer’s claim or grievance and does 

not require for adjudication the 

presence of essential witnesses, parties, 

or third persons over which the 

settlement process lacks jurisdiction. 

Dated at Washington, DC, this 6th of July 

2011. 

By order of the Board of Directors. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Robert E. Feldman, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–17396 Filed 7–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0987; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–ANM–14] 

Establishment of Class E Airspace; 

Lincoln City, OR 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class 

E airspace at Lincoln City, OR, to 

accommodate aircraft using a new Area 

Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning 

System (GPS) standard instrument 

approach procedures at Samaritan North 

Lincoln Hospital Heliport. This action 

also corrects the name of the city were 

the Heliport is located. This improves 

the safety and management of 

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) 

operations. 

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, 

October 20, 2011. The Director of the 

Federal Register approves this 

incorporation by reference action under 

1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual 

revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and 

publication of conforming amendments. 

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 April 15, 2011, the FAA published 

in the Federal Register a notice of 

proposed rulemaking to establish 

controlled airspace at Lincoln City, OR 

(76 FR 21268). Interested parties were 

invited to participate in this rulemaking 

effort by submitting written comments 

on the proposal to the FAA. No 

comments were received. Subsequent to 

publication, the FAA found the name of 

the town was listed incorrectly. This 

action makes that correction. With the 

exception of editorial changes, and the 

changes described above, this rule is the 

same as that proposed in the NPRM. 

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 designations 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in that Order. 

The Rule 

This action amends Title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by 

establishing Class E airspace extending 

upward from 700 feet above the surface, 

at Samaritan North Lincoln Hospital 

Heliport, Lincoln City, OR, to 

accommodate IFR aircraft executing 

new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument 

approach procedures at the heliport. 

This action is necessary for the safety 

and management of IFR operations. This 

action also makes a correction in the 

town name, from Lincoln, OR, to 

Lincoln City, OR. 

The FAA has determined this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. Therefore, this 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 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
40798 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 133 / Tuesday, July 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

is certified this rule, when promulgated, 

will 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 

discusses the authority of 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 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 establishes 

controlled airspace at Samaritan North 

Lincoln Hospital Heliport, Lincoln City, 

OR. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

Adoption of the Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 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 Federal Aviation 

Administration 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 OR E5 Lincoln City, OR [New] 

Samaritan North Lincoln Hospital Heliport, 

OR 

(Lat. 44°59′11′′ N., long. 123°59′39′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within 3-mile radius of 

Samaritan North Lincoln Hospital Heliport. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 30, 

2011. 

Christine Mellon, 

Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, 

Western Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2011–17202 Filed 7–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 121 

[Docket No.: FAA–2002–11301; Amendment 

No. 121–315] 

RIN 2120–AH14 

Antidrug and Alcohol Misuse 

Prevention Programs for Personnel 

Engaged in Specified Aviation 

Activities; Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Determination 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: On January 10, 2006, the FAA 

issued a final rule to require that each 

person who performs a safety-sensitive 

aviation function directly for an 

employer, including contractors and 

subcontractors, is subject to drug and 

alcohol testing. This document 

announces the completion and 

availability of the final regulatory 

flexibility certification for this final rule. 

The rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

DATES: Effective July 7, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicole Nance, Office of Aviation Policy 

and Plans, APO–300, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3311; e-mail 

nicole.nance@faa.gov. For legal 

questions concerning this document, 

contact Anne Bechdolt, Regulations 

Division, AGC–220, Office of the Chief 

Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–7230; e-mail 

anne.bechdolt@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 28, 2002, the FAA issued 

a notice of proposed rulemaking seeking 

to revise the drug and alcohol testing 

regulations by amending the definition 

of employee (67 FR 9366, 9377, Feb. 28, 

2002). The FAA action addressed those 

individuals performing safety-sensitive 

functions under contract who may not 

have been subject to testing under the 

drug and alcohol testing regulations 

established in 1988 and 1994, 

respectively. Upon review of comments, 

the FAA, in 2004, issued a 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking to seek comment regarding 

how small entities would be impacted 

by this rule (69 FR 27980, May 17, 

2004). From the comments received the 

FAA certified under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 

the rule would not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

On January 10, 2006, the FAA issued 

the final rule (71 FR 1666). This rule 

requires that each person who performs 

a safety-sensitive aviation function 

directly for an employer is subject to 

testing and that each person who 

performs a safety-sensitive function at 

any tier of a contract for that employer 

is also subject to testing. This 

requirement includes contractors and 

subcontractors. Contracting companies 

have two testing options: Option one is 

for the contracting company to obtain 

and implement its own FAA drug and 

alcohol (D&A) testing programs. Under 

this option, the company would subject 

the individuals to testing. The other 

option is for the regulated employer to 

maintain its own testing programs and 

subject the individual to testing under 

these programs. To establish a D&A 

program a company would need to 

develop and maintain testing, training, 

and annual reporting requirements. 

To comply with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (RFA), and to 

evaluate the impact on small businesses, 

the FAA described and estimated the 

number of affected businesses and 

estimated the economic impact. In the 

certification for the final rule the FAA 

estimated that the costs were minimal, 

and that contractors would absorb some 

of these costs. In order to estimate the 

maximum impact of this regulation on 

regulated entities, the FAA assumed 

that all of the additional cost would be 

passed along to regulated employers. 

Since costs were minimal, the FAA 

again certified that the rule would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

71 FR 1666, 1674 (Jan. 10, 2006) 

The Aeronautical Repair Station 

Association, Inc., (ARSA) and other 

affected businesses challenged the final 

rule on several grounds, including the 

FAA’s compliance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. The entities argued that 

contractors and subcontractors were 

directly affected by the final rule, and in 

failing to consider them as part of the 

basis for the certification, the FAA 

failed to comply with the RFA. Upon 

review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES