65658 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 225 / Friday, November 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

1Under the Acceptable Practices, the definition of 

‘‘public director’’ is also relevant to members of 

DCM regulatory oversight committees (all of whom 

must be public directors) and to members of DCM 

disciplinary panels (panelists need not be directors, 

but must include at least one member who meets 

certain elements of the definition of public 

director). 

21, 2005, except as provided by paragraph (j) 

of this AD. Do the initial and repetitive Stage 

2 inspections at the applicable times 

specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

the service bulletin. Any applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions must be 

done before further flight. Accomplishment 

of the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the 

repetitive Stage 1 inspections. 

Exception to Corrective Action Instructions 

(j) If any discrepancy; including but not 

limited to cracking, or broken, loose, or 

missing fasteners; is found during any 

inspection required by this AD, and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated 

April 21, 2005, specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action: Before further flight, 

repair the discrepancy using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (l) of this AD. 

Reporting Requirement 

(k) At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD, submit 

a report of the findings (both positive and 

negative) of each Stage 1 inspection required 

by this AD to Boeing Commercial Airplanes; 

Attention: Manager, Airline Support; P.O. 

Box 3707 MC 04–ER; Seattle, Washington 

98124–2207; fax (425) 266–5562. The report 

must include the inspection results, a 

description of any discrepancies found, the 

inspections performed, the airplane serial 

number, and the number of total 

accumulated flight cycles on the airplane. 

Under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements contained in this AD and has 

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. 

(1) For any inspection done after the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the inspection. 

(2) For any inspection done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(l)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD, if it is approved by an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 

make those findings. For a repair method to 

be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) AMOCs approved previously for repairs 

for compliance with AD 2006–06–11 are 

approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 

provisions of this AD provided that the 

repaired areas are inspected at the times 

specified in this AD, and the inspections are 

done in accordance with this AD. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(m) You must use Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, 

to perform the actions that are required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

The Director of the Federal Register approved 

the incorporation by reference of this 

document on April 26, 2006 (71 FR 14367, 

March 22, 2006). Contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207, for a copy of this 

service information. You may review copies 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington; or at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go 

to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/ 

cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

November 15, 2007. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 07–5794 Filed 11–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 38 

RIN 3038–AC28 

Conflicts of Interest in Self-Regulation 

and Self-Regulatory Organizations 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) 

ACTION: Final rule; notice of stay. 

SUMMARY: On January 31, 2007, the 

Commission adopted Acceptable 

Practices for Section 5(d)(15) (‘‘Core 

Principle 15’’) of the Commodity 

Exchange Act. The new Acceptable 

Practices were published in the Federal 

Register on February 14, 2007, and 

became effective on March 16, 2007. On 

March 26, 2007, the Commission 

published certain proposed 

amendments to the Acceptable Practices 

in an effort to clarify the definition of 

‘‘public director’’ contained therein.1

The Commission has yet to act upon the 

proposed amendments, which are 

central to every element of the 

Acceptable Practices. Accordingly, the 

Commission hereby notifies all 

designated contract markets (‘‘DCMs’’) 

that, until further notice, the Acceptable 

Practices contained in paragraph (b) of 

Core Principle 15 in Appendix B to 17 

CFR part 38 are stayed indefinitely. 

DATES: Effective November 23, 2007, 

paragraph (b) of Core Principle 15 in 

Appendix B to 17 CFR part 38 is stayed 

indefinitely. The Commission will 

publish a new Federal Register 

document lifting the stay on a future 

date. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rachel F. Berdansky, Acting Deputy 

Director for Market Compliance, 202–

418–5429, or Sebastian Pujol Schott, 

Special Counsel, 202–418–5641, 

Division of Market Oversight, 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, Washington, DC 20581. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 31, 2007 the Commission 

adopted its first Acceptable Practices for 

Core Principle 15. The Acceptable 

Practices are structured in four parts, 

including three operational provisions. 

The operational provisions include: (1) 

DCM boards of directors composed of at 

least 35% public directors; (2) boardlevel regulatory oversight committees 

(‘‘ROC’’) consisting exclusively of 

public directors; and (3) disciplinary 

panels including at least one public 

person. The Acceptable Practices also 

include an important fourth provision 

which defines ‘‘public director’’ and 

also impacts ROC members and 

disciplinary panel members. All three 

operational provisions of the Acceptable 

Practices are dependent upon the 

definition of public director. 

The Acceptable Practices were 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 14, 2007, with an effective 

date of March 16, 2007. The 

Commission stated at that time that it 

would survey all DCMs within six 

months to evaluate their plans for 

compliance with Core Principle 15. The 

Commission further stated that all 

DCMs would be granted the lesser of 

two years or two regularly scheduled 

board elections to fully implement the 

new Acceptable Practices or otherwise 

demonstrate full compliance with Core 

Principle 15. 

On March 26, 2007, the Commission 

published proposed amendments to the 

definition of DCM ‘‘public director,’’

which, as noted above, also impacts 

ROC and disciplinary panel members. 

The comment period for the proposed 

amendments ended on April 25, 2007. 


ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 225 / Friday, November 23, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 65659 

2 7 U.S.C. 19(a). 

3 Fishermen’s Dock Co-op., Inc. v. Brown, 75 F.3d 

164 (4th Cir. 1996); Center for Auto Safety v. Peck, 

751 F.2d 1336 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (agency has 

discretion to weigh factors in undertaking costsbenefits analyses). 

4 72 FR 6936 (February 14, 2007). 

5See Policy Statement and Establishment of 

Definitions of ‘‘Small Entities’’ for Purposes of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 47 FR 18618, 18619 

(Apr. 30, 1982). 

Six comment letters were received, 

including letters from the National 

Futures Association; the Futures 

Industry Association; the CBOE Futures 

Exchange; the Chicago Board of Trade; 

the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and 

Kansas City Board of Trade writing 

jointly; and Mr. Dennis Gartman. The 

comments received were studied 

carefully and are under advisement by 

the Commission. However, the 

Commission has yet to take final action 

on the proposed amendments. 

Until such time as the definition of 

‘‘public director’’ is finalized, the 

operational provisions of the Acceptable 

Practices, which are dependent on the 

definition, cannot be properly applied 

by DCMs or enforced by the 

Commission. Recognizing this fact, and 

in order to carefully consider its next 

steps, the Commission has determined 

to stay the Acceptable Practices for Core 

Principle 15 adopted on January 31, 

2007. Accordingly, the two-year 

compliance period is also stayed. 

Related Matters 

A. Cost-Benefit Analysis 

Section 15(a) of the Act requires the 

Commission to consider the costs and 

benefits of its actions in advance of 

issuing any new regulation or order.2

More specifically, Section 15(a) states 

that the costs and benefits of a proposed 

rule or order shall be evaluated with 

regard to five broad areas of market and 

public concern: (1) Protection of market 

participants and the public; (2) 

efficiency, competitiveness, and 

financial integrity of futures markets; (3) 

price discovery; (4) sound risk 

management practices; and (5) other 

public interest considerations. In 

conducting its analysis, the Commission 

may give greater weight to any one of 

the five enumerated areas of market and 

public concern and determine, 

notwithstanding potential costs, that the 

implementation of a particular rule or 

order is necessary or appropriate to 

protect the public’s interest or to 

effectuate or accomplish any of the 

provisions or purposes of the Act.3

On February 14, 2007, the 

Commission published its first 

Acceptable Practices for Core Principle 

15. The four-part Acceptable Practices, 

described above, were designed to 

facilitate the reduction of conflicts of 

interest in DCMs’ decision making 

processes.4 Although the Acceptable 

Practices became effective on March 16, 

2007, the Commission established a 

phase-in period for DCMs to implement 

the Acceptable Practices or to otherwise 

come into full compliance with Core 

Principle 15. The phase-in period 

extended well beyond the date of 

effectiveness and consisted of the lesser 

of two years or two regularly scheduled 

board elections. 

On March 26, 2007, the Commission 

published proposed amendments to one 

element of the new Acceptable 

Practices—the definition of ‘‘public 

director.’’ To date, the Commission has 

yet to act upon the proposed 

amendments. The Commission 

recognizes that the operational 

provisions of Acceptable Practices 

cannot be properly applied by DCMs 

until the definition of ‘‘public director’’

is resolved. Accordingly, the 

Commission has determined, for the 

purpose of regulatory clarity, to stay the 

Acceptable Practices for Core Principle 

15 and thereby lift any potential 

compliance costs associated with those 

Acceptable Practices. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

The stay of the effective date of the 

Acceptable Practices for Core Principle 

15 reduces the information collection 

burden to levels previously approved by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). The OMB control number for 

this collection is 3038–0052. The 

Commission has submitted the required 

Paperwork Reduction Act Change 

Worksheet (OMB–83C) to OMB to 

reflect the change. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires federal 

agencies, in promulgating rules, to 

consider the impact of those rules on 

small entities. The stay of the effective 

date for the Acceptable Practices for 

Core Principle 15 affects DCMs. The 

Commission has previously determined 

that DCMs are not small entities for 

purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act.5 Accordingly, the acting Chairman, 

on behalf of the Commission, hereby 

certifies pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 

the stay of the Acceptable Practices will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Therefore, paragraph (b) of Core 

Principle 15 in Appendix B to 17 CFR 

part 38 is stayed indefinitely. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 

16, 2007, by the Commission. 

David Stawick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E7–22878 Filed 11–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Parts 375 and 385 

[Docket No. RM07–16–000; Order No. 703] 

Filing Via the Internet 

Issued November 15, 2007. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is revising 

its regulations to provide that all 

documents will be eligible for filing by 

means of the Commission’s eFiling 

system, with exceptions to be posted by 

the Secretary of the Commission on the 

Commissions Web site. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will 

become effective December 24, 2007. 

Changes made by this rule to the 

Commission’s eFiling system will be 

implemented at a later date, to be 

announced by the Secretary of the 

Commission. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wilbur Miller, Office of General 

Counsel, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8953. 

wilbur.miller@ferc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, 

Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc Spitzer, 

Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff. 

I. Background 

1. On July 23, 2007, the Commission 

issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NOPR) seeking comments on proposed 

revisions to its regulations that will 

enable the implementation of the next 

version of its system for filing 

documents via the Internet, eFiling 7.0. 

Filing Via the Internet, 72 FR 42330 

(July 23, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 32,621 (2007). The NOPR proposed to 

allow the option of filing all documents 

in Commission proceedings through the 

eFiling interface except for specified 

exceptions. The NOPR also sought 

comments on the possibility of shifting 

its deadline for filings through the 

eFiling system from close of business to 

midnight, and of utilizing online forms 

to allow ‘‘documentless’’ interventions 

in all filings and quick comments in P 


ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with RULES