Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 52425 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 9.8-mile 

radius of the Mark Anton Airport, and that 

airspace within a 6-mile radius of the Point 

in Space Coordinates (lat. 35°37′34′′ N., long 

85°10′38′′ W.) serving Bledsoe County 

Hospital, Pikeville, TN. 

* * * * * 

ASO TN E5 Cleveland, TN [New] 

Cleveland Regional Jetport, TN 

(Lat. 35°12′41′′ N., long. 84°47′59′′ W.) 

Bradley Memorial Hospital, TN, Point in 

Space Coordinates 

(Lat. 35°10′52′′ N., long. 84°52′56′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 7.4-mile 

radius of Cleveland Regional Jetport, and 

within 2-miles each side of the 209° bearing 

from the airport, extending from the 7.4-mile 

radius to 12-miles southwest of the airport, 

and within a 6-mile radius of the Point in 

Space Coordinates (lat. 35°10′52′′ N., 

long.84°52′56′′ W.) serving Bradley Memorial 

Hospital. 

* * * * * 

ASO TN E5 Bradley Memorial Hospital, 

Cleveland, TN [ Removed] 

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 

16, 2013. 

Kip B. Johns, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern 

Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20499 Filed 8–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0002; Airspace 

Docket No. 12–ASO–46] 

Establishment of Class E Airspace; 

Umatilla, FL 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class 

E Airspace at Umatilla, FL, to 

accommodate the Area Navigation 

(RNAV) Global Positioning System 

(GPS) Standard Instrument Approach 

Procedures at Umatilla Municipal 

Airport. This action enhances the safety 

and airspace management of Instrument 

Flight Rules (IFR) operations within the 

National Airspace System. 

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, December 

12, 2013. The Director of the Federal 

Register approves this incorporation by 

reference action under title 1, Code of 

Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to 

the annual revision of FAA Order 

7400.9 and publication of conforming 

amendments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Fornito, Operations Support Group, 

Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation 

Administration, P.O. Box 20636, 

Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) 

305–6364. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On June 4, 2013, the FAA published 

in the Federal Register a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to 

establish Class E airspace at Umatilla, 

FL (78 FR 33265) Docket No. FAA– 

2013–0002. Interested parties were 

invited to participate in this rulemaking 

effort by submitting written comments 

on the proposal to the FAA. No 

comments were received. Class E 

airspace designations are published in 

paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9W 

dated August 8, 2012, and effective 

September 15, 2012, which is 

incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designations 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

The Rule 

This amendment to Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 

establishes Class E airspace extending 

upward from 700 feet above the surface 

within a 6.7-mile radius of the airport at 

Umatilla, FL, providing the controlled 

airspace required to accommodate the 

new RNAV (GPS) Standard Instrument 

Approach Procedures developed for 

Umatilla Municipal Airport. This action 

is necessary for the safety and 

management of IFR operations at the 

airport. 

The FAA has determined that this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current, is non-controversial and 

unlikely to result in adverse or negative 

comments. It, therefore, (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 only affects air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, does 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 United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes 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 Umatilla 

Municipal Airport, Umatilla, FL. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

action qualifies for categorical exclusion 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act in accordance with FAA 

Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental 

Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ 

paragraph 311a. This airspace action is 

not expected to cause any potentially 

significant environmental impacts, and 

no extraordinary circumstances exist 

that warrant preparation of an 

environmental assessment. 

Lists 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 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 Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9W, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 8, 2012, effective 

September 15, 2012, is amended as 

follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas 

Extending Upward from 700 feet or More 

Above the Surface of the Earth 

* * * * * 

ASO FL E5 Umatilla, FL [New] 

Umatilla Municipal Airport, FL 

(Lat. 28°55′27′′ N., long. 82°39′07′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile 

radius of Umatilla Municipal Airport. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
52426 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act of 2010, Public Law 111– 

203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010). The text of the DoddFrank 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 7 U.S.C. 2(c)(2)(D). 

5 7 U.S.C. 2(c)(2)(D)(i). 

6 7 U.S.C. 6(a) (prohibition against off-exchange 

contracts of sale of a commodity for future 

delivery). 

7 7 U.S.C. 6(b) (regulation of foreign boards of 

trade with United States participants). 

8 7 U.S.C. 6b (prohibition against fraud). 

9 7 U.S.C. 2(c)(2)(D)(iii). 

10 7 U.S.C. 2(c)(2)(D)(ii)(III)(aa). 

11The Commission has not adopted any 

regulations permitting a longer actual delivery 

period for any commodity pursuant to new CEA 

section 2(c)(2)(D)(ii)(III)(aa). Accordingly, the 28- 

day actual delivery period set forth in this provision 

remains applicable to all commodities. 

12Retail Commodity Transactions Under 

Commodity Exchange Act, 76 FR 77670 (Dec. 14, 

2011). 

13The comment file may be accessed at http://

comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/

CommentList.aspx?id=1124. 

14National Futures Association (NFA). 

15 Dillon Gage Group (DGG) and Monex Deposit 

Company and its affiliate (MDC). 

16 J.B. Grossman P.A. (JBG), Greenberg Traurig, 

LLP (GBT), and Rothgerber Johnson & Lyons LLP 

(RJL). 

17National Energy Markets Association (NEM), 

Retail Energy Supply Association (RESA), and 

Commercial Energy Working Group (CEWG). 

18Constellation NewEnergy, Inc., Green 

Mountain Energy Company, Direct Energy Services, 

LLC, Exelon Energy Company, Reliant Energy Retail 

Holdings, LLC, Liberty Power Corporation, and 

Champion Energy Services, LLC. 

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 

16, 2013. 

Kip B. Johns, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern 

Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20512 Filed 8–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 1 

RIN 3038–AD64 

Retail Commodity Transactions Under 

Commodity Exchange Act 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Interpretation. 

SUMMARY: On December 14, 2011, the 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or 

‘‘CFTC’’) issued in the Federal Register 

an interpretation (‘‘Interpretation’’) 

regarding the meaning of the term 

‘‘actual delivery,’’ as set forth in the 

Commodity Exchange Act. The 

Commission also requested public 

comment on whether the Interpretation 

accurately construed the statutory 

language. In response to the comments 

received, the Commission has 

determined to clarify its Interpretation. 

DATES: Effective August 23, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rosemary Hollinger, Regional Counsel, 

Division of Enforcement, 312–596–0538, 

rhollinger@cftc.gov, or Martin B. White, 

Assistant General Counsel, Office of the 

General Counsel, 202–418–5129, 

mwhite@cftc.gov, 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 Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act 

(‘‘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 

security-based swaps. The legislation 

was enacted to reduce risk, increase 

transparency, and promote market 

integrity within the financial system by, 

among other things: (1) Providing for the 

registration and comprehensive 

regulation of swap dealers and major 

swap participants; (2) imposing clearing 

and trade execution requirements on 

standardized derivative products; (3) 

creating robust recordkeeping and realtime reporting regimes; and (4) 

enhancing the Commission’s 

rulemaking and enforcement authorities 

with respect to, among others, all 

registered entities and intermediaries 

subject to the Commission’s oversight. 

In addition, section 742(a) of the 

Dodd-Frank Act amends section 2(c)(2) 

of the CEA to add a new subparagraph, 

section 2(c)(2)(D) of the CEA,4 entitled 

‘‘Retail Commodity Transactions.’’ New 

CEA section 2(c)(2)(D) broadly applies 

to any agreement, contract, or 

transaction in any commodity that is 

entered into with, or offered to (even if 

not entered into with), a non-eligible 

contract participant or non-eligible 

commercial entity on a leveraged or 

margined basis, or financed by the 

offeror, the counterparty, or a person 

acting in concert with the offeror or 

counterparty on a similar basis.5 New 

CEA section 2(c)(2)(D) further provides 

that such an agreement, contract, or 

transaction shall be subject to CEA 

sections 4(a),6 4(b),7 and 4b 8 as if the 

agreement, contract, or transaction was 

a contract of sale of a commodity for 

future delivery.9

New CEA section 2(c)(2)(D) excepts 

certain transactions from its application. 

In particular, new CEA section 

2(c)(2)(D)(ii)(III)(aa) 10 excepts a contract 

of sale that results in actual delivery 

within 28 days or such other longer 

period as the Commission may 

determine by rule or regulation based 

upon the typical commercial practice in 

cash or spot markets for the commodity 

involved.11

On December 14, 2011, the 

Commission issued an Interpretation 

inviting public comment on whether its 

stated interpretation of the term ‘‘actual 

delivery,’’ as used in new CEA section 

2(c)(2)(D)(ii)(III)(aa), accurately 

construes the statutory language.12 The 

Commission received several public 

comments on the Interpretation. After 

thoroughly reviewing those comments, 

the Commission has determined to 

clarify its Interpretation in response to 

the comments received. 

II. Summary of Comments 

A. Comments Generally 

The Commission received 13 

comments in response to its 

Interpretation.13 The comments 

included 11 comment letters that 

addressed the Interpretation. These 11 

comment letters were submitted by 

entities representing a broad range of 

interests, including a self-regulatory 

organization,14 precious metals dealers 

and depository companies,15 law 

firms,16 trade associations comprised of 

energy producers and suppliers,17 and 

electricity and natural gas suppliers.18

Of the 11 comment letters addressing 

the Interpretation, two voiced general 

support for the Interpretation. For 

example, NFA stated: 

NFA fully supports the Commission’s 

proposed interpretation of the term [actual 

delivery] and believes that it is consistent 

with the statutory language. 

The comment letter submitted by 

DGG expressed its appreciation of the 

Commission’s efforts to ‘‘curtail any 

fraudulent retail commodity 

transactions occurring by unscrupulous 

actors.’’ DGG further urged the 

Commission to consider delivery of 

precious metals to affiliates of the seller, 

but not to the seller itself, as 

constituting actual delivery under new 

CEA section 2(c)(2)(D)(ii)(III)(aa), stating 

that ‘‘[w]hile we understand the CFTC’s 

desire to ensure, among other things, 

that the seller actually has the 

commodity to deliver, an affiliate of one 

of the limited types of depositories 

described in Example 2 [of the 

Interpretation] are unlikely to be the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES