[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 9, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62081-62088]
[FR Doc No: 2021-24411]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 214 / Tuesday, November 9, 2021 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 61

[Docket No.: FAA-2018-1050; Amdt. No. 61-149]
RIN 2120-AL23

Removal of Training Requirements for an Airline Transport Pilot
Certificate Issued Concurrently With a Single-Engine Airplane Type
Rating

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This final rule removes a multiengine training requirement for
pilots seeking to obtain an initial airline transport pilot (ATP)
certificate concurrently with a single-engine airplane type rating. The
final rule also removes a 2014 compliance date because it is no longer
necessary.

DATES: This final rule is effective on December 9, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking
documents and other information related to this final rule, see ``How
to Obtain Additional Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Adams, Air Transportation
Division, Training and Simulation Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for the
safety of flight in the U.S. and for the safety of U.S. civil
operators, U.S. registered civil aircraft, and U.S. certificated
airmen. Sections 106(f) and (g) of title 49, U.S. Code, subtitle I
establish the FAA Administrator's authority to issue rules on aviation
safety. Subtitle VII of title 49, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority.
    The FAA is promulgating this rulemaking under the authority
described in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), which establishes the authority of the
Administrator to promulgate regulations and rules; 49 U.S.C.
44701(a)(5), which requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations
and minimum standards for other practices, methods, and procedures
necessary for safety in air commerce and national security; and 49
U.S.C. 44703(a), which requires the Administrator to prescribe
regulations for the issuance of airman certificates when the
Administrator finds, after investigation, that an individual is
qualified for, and physically able to perform the duties related to,
the position authorized by the certificate. This rulemaking is within
the scope of the FAA's authority because it amends the eligibility
requirements for the issuance of a single-engine airplane ATP
certificate.

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Frequently Used in This Document

ATP Airline Transport Pilot
ATP CTP Airline Transport Pilot Certification Training Program
FSTD Flight Simulation Training Device
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
PIC Pilot in Command
SOE Supervised operating experience

Table of Contents

I. Overview of Final Rule
II. Background
    A. Statement of the Problem
    B. History
    C. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
    A. Regulatory Evaluation
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
    C. International Trade Impact Assessment
    D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act
    F. International Compatibility
    G. Environmental Analysis
V. Executive Order Determinations
    A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    C. Executive Order 13609, International Cooperation
VI. How To Obtain Additional Information
    A. Electronic Access and Filing
    B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

I. Overview of Final Rule

    This rule removes an unnecessary multiengine training requirement
for pilots seeking to obtain an initial ATP certificate concurrently
with a single-engine airplane type rating. It also revises several
provisions of the pilot certification regulations by removing from the
text the July 31, 2014, date, which served as the compliance date for
the multiengine ATP training requirements, because the date is no
longer necessary.

II. Background

A. Statement of the Problem

    Current regulations require a pilot seeking an ATP certificate
concurrently with an airplane type rating to complete training in an
FAA approved course from an authorized training provider. This training
is commonly referred to as the ATP Certification Training Program (ATP
CTP) and includes both ground training and flight simulation training
device (FSTD) training in a device that represents a multiengine
airplane.\1\ The FAA intended this training requirement to apply to
pilots seeking an ATP certificate in a multiengine airplane. However,
because the regulations do not specify ``multiengine'' type rating, the
requirement applies to single-engine airplanes for which a type rating
is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 14 CFR 61.156.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the training requirement became effective in 2014, there were
no single-engine airplanes that required the pilot to obtain a type
rating prior to serving as pilot in command (PIC). With the
certification of the Cirrus Vision Jet in 2016, there is now a single-
engine airplane that requires the pilot to obtain a type rating prior
to serving as PIC. Under the current regulations, if a pilot seeks a
type rating in the Cirrus Vision Jet concurrently with the initial
issuance of the ATP certificate in the airplane category with a single-
engine class rating, that pilot would be required to complete the ATP
CTP to be eligible for the practical test. This final rule removes the
ATP CTP requirement for pilots seeking an ATP certificate concurrently
with a single-engine type rating.

B. History

    The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension
Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-216) (the Act) was signed into law in August
2010 and included provisions to improve airline safety and pilot
certification and training. In response to the Act, the FAA modified
the eligibility requirements for an ATP certificate with an airplane
category multiengine class rating in the Pilot Certification and
Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations Final Rule (2013
Final Rule).\2\ Section 216 of the Act specifically required all pilots
of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 121 operations to have an
ATP certificate and an appropriate amount of multiengine time. Section
217 of the Act established minimum qualifications for an ATP
certificate that were focused on air carrier pilots and multiengine
airplane experience. The statute did not address single-engine
airplanes. Additionally, part 121 prohibits the use of single-engine
airplanes.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 78 FR 42324 (July 15, 2013).
    \3\ 14 CFR 121.159.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address the ATP requirements set forth in the Act, the FAA
established a requirement for a pilot to complete an FAA approved ATP
CTP. The ATP CTP includes ground training and flight training in a
multiengine FSTD. Pilots must complete the ATP CTP and present the
graduation certificate to be eligible for the ATP multiengine knowledge
test.\4\ Applicants for an ATP certificate with an airplane category
multiengine class rating or ATP certificate obtained concurrently with
an airplane type rating must then present the graduation certificate
for the ATP CTP and the passing knowledge test results when applying
for the practical test.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 14 CFR 61.35, 61.153, 61.159.
    \5\ 14 CFR 61.39 and 61.156.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon review of the regulatory requirements for an ATP certificate,
the FAA found that some of the requirements do not distinguish between
a pilot seeking a single-engine airplane rating and a multiengine
airplane rating. For example, as noted, pilots seeking an ``airline
transport pilot certificate obtained concurrently with an airplane type
rating'' are required to complete the ATP CTP specified in Sec.  61.156
and receive a graduation certificate from an authorized training
provider. With that express language, pilots seeking an ATP certificate
concurrently with a single-engine airplane type rating must complete
multiengine airplane training to obtain an ATP certificate in a single-
engine airplane.
    At the time the 2013 Final Rule published, there were no single-
engine airplanes that required a type rating to serve as PIC. However,
since the 2013 Final Rule published, Cirrus Aircraft received type
certification for its single-engine Vision Jet (SF50),\6\ and a pilot
is required to hold a type rating for that airplane to serve as PIC.
Because the 2013 Final Rule did not specify that the ATP CTP was
required only when a pilot was seeking an ATP certificate concurrently
with a multiengine type rating, a pilot cannot complete a practical
test for an initial ATP certificate with the SF50 type rating unless
the pilot completes the ATP CTP. Alternatively, to avoid the training
requirement, a pilot could use a different single-engine airplane
(i.e., one that does not require a type rating) to obtain the initial
ATP certificate and then complete a second practical test in the SF50
to add the type rating to the ATP certificate.\7\ Or, a pilot could add
the type rating to his or her commercial pilot certificate first and
then complete an ATP practical test in a different single-engine
airplane and the SF50 type rating would be carried forward to the ATP
certificate. In either case, the pilot would be taking an additional
practical test to avoid completing the multiengine training in the ATP
CTP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Cirrus Aircraft received type certification of the SF50
Vision Jet in October 2016.
    \7\ 14 CFR 61.157(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several sections in part 61 apply to a pilot seeking an ATP
certificate with a multiengine airplane rating or an ATP certificate
concurrently with an ``airplane type rating.'' Prior to certification
of the SF50, there was no need for regulatory requirements to delineate
the class rating because all type-rated airplanes were multiengine. In
the current environment, without the delineation of a class rating, the
type rating training requirements that were intended to apply to pilots
seeking an ATP certificate concurrently with a multiengine airplane
type rating are being applied to pilots seeking an ATP certificate
concurrently with a single-engine type rating. As a consequence, under
the previous regulations, pilots seeking an ATP certificate
concurrently with a single-engine type rating were subject to
unnecessary and burdensome training requirements.

C. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On December 20, 2018, the FAA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled Removal of Training Requirements for an
Airline Transport Pilot Certificate Issued Concurrently With a Single-
Engine Airplane Type Rating.\8\ In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to revise
Sec. Sec.  61.39(d), 61.153(e), 61.156, and 61.165(f) to reflect that
the ground training and FSTD training in a multiengine airplane, which
is specified in Sec.  61.156, applies to pilots seeking an ATP
certificate with a multiengine airplane rating or an ATP certificate
obtained concurrently with a multiengine airplane type rating.
Additionally, because Sec. Sec.  61.39(b), 61.155(c)(14), and 61.160
contain the same problematic language that fails to specify
``multiengine'' airplane type rating, the FAA proposed to make similar
revisions to Sec. Sec.  61.39(b), 61.155(c)(14),\9\ and 61.160 to
reflect the FAA's original intent. The FAA explained that these
amendments are necessary to ensure a pilot seeking an ATP certificate
concurrently with a single-engine airplane type rating will not be
required to comply with training requirements that were intended for
applicants seeking an ATP certificate in a multiengine airplane.
Consistent with the Act's direction to enhance multiengine experience
requirements, the NPRM did not propose any changes for what is
currently required for a pilot seeking a multiengine airplane ATP
certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 83 FR 65316.
    \9\ The proposed language of Sec.  61.155(c)(14) has been
revised in the final rule for consistency with the language in the
other sections. This change results in no substantive change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA noted that, while the multiengine training requirement of
Sec.  61.156 would be removed for a pilot seeking an ATP certificate
concurrently with a single-engine airplane type rating, there would be
no reduction in safety because a pilot is still required to obtain
specific training and testing that is appropriate to the single-engine
airplane type rating the pilot is seeking.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ To add a single-engine airplane type rating to an ATP
certificate or obtain a single-engine type rating concurrently with
an ATP certificate, a pilot must: (1) Receive and log ground and
flight training from an authorized instructor; (2) receive an
endorsement from an authorized instructor that the training was
completed; and (3) perform a practical test in accordance with the
requirements in Sec.  61.157(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the amendments previously discussed, the FAA
proposed to amend several sections in part 61 by removing the July 31,
2014 date, which served as the compliance date for the multiengine
training requirement. This date is no longer necessary in the following
regulations: Sec. Sec.  61.35(a)(2) and (a)(3)(iii)(C); 61.153(e);
61.155(c)(14); the introductory text of 61.156; and

61.165(c)(2) and (f)(2). The FAA also proposed to remove Sec.
61.35(a)(3)(iii)(B) because it contained a prerequisite for applicants
seeking issuance of an ATP certificate prior to August 1, 2014, which
is now unnecessary. As a result, the FAA proposed to redesignate Sec.
61.35(a)(3)(iii)(C) as Sec.  61.35(a)(3)(iii)(B).
    Furthermore, the FAA concluded that Sec.  61.155(d) is no longer
necessary. This section required an applicant who successfully
completed the ATP knowledge test prior to August 1, 2014, to
successfully complete the practical test within 24 months from the
month in which the knowledge test was successfully completed. Because
more than 24 months has elapsed since August 1, 2014, it is impossible
for an applicant to successfully complete an ATP practical test within
24 months of taking a knowledge test prior to that date. The FAA
proposed to remove Sec.  61.155(d) from part 61. For the same reasons,
the FAA proposed to remove language from Sec.  61.165(f)(2) that allows
a pilot to present valid ATP knowledge test results from a test taken
prior to August 1, 2014.
    The NPRM provided for a 60-day comment period, which ended on
February 19, 2019.

III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule

    The FAA received three comments to the NPRM, two from individuals
and one from a training center. One individual recommended an amendment
to the supervised operating experience (SOE) limitations defined in
Sec.  61.64(f)(2). The individual recommended that an airman who holds
an unrestricted multiengine turbojet airplane type rating be eligible
for an unrestricted single-engine type rating upon successful
completion of a single-engine type rating practical test conducted in a
flight simulator. The individual suggested this allowance would be
based on the airman's existing operational experience in turbojet
aircraft.
    The FAA has considered the recommendation and determined it is
outside the scope of this rulemaking. The commenter sought to allow
multiengine turbine-powered airplane experience to count towards
single-engine turbine-powered airplane experience. In accordance with
the definition in 14 CFR part 1, a class as used with respect to the
certification, ratings, privileges, and limitations of airmen, is
established within a category of aircraft for aircraft having similar
operating characteristics. Examples include ``single engine'' and
``multiengine'' for the airplane category. This distinction is
necessary because the differences in operating characteristics between
the two classes of airplane are significant, particularly with regard
to handling an engine failure. Section 61.64 allows a Level C or higher
full flight simulator to be used for a practical test for the issuance
of an airman certificate or rating provided that simulator represents
the category, class, and type for the rating sought. Because the
practical test is administered in a simulator and not the airplane, a
pilot is issued a SOE limitation unless the pilot meets prescribed
experience requirements. Requiring 25 hours of supervised experience in
the airplane following a successful practical test in a simulator is an
important safety mitigation when the pilot does not otherwise have the
requisite experience in an aircraft.
    To allow experience in one class of airplane to count for another
class of airplane to avoid an SOE requirement would require a more
comprehensive review of the existing requirements in Sec.  61.64 and
the safety implications for making such a change, followed by a
subsequent notice and comment period. In addition, because there is
only one single-engine airplane that requires a type rating, there is a
small number of pilots that could potentially benefit from such a
change; therefore, the FAA will not pursue a review at this time.
    The same individual noted that the Sec.  61.159(a)(3) requirement
of 50 hours of time in class for an ATP certificate is burdensome. The
FAA has determined the comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking
because the NPRM did not propose a change to Sec.  61.159(a)(3). The
FAA notes that it conducted a rulemaking proposing this requirement in
2012 in response to Public Law 111-216. It addressed the comments in
the 2013 final rule and determined 50 hours of time in class for an ATP
certificate was appropriate for all airplane classes, not just the
airplane multiengine land class rating, and permitted up to 25 hours to
be completed in a simulator if part of an approved training
program.\11\ No changes to the final rule will be made as a result of
this comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 78 FR 42332.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An additional individual commenter requested an update to Sec.
61.159(d)(2) to allow flight time credit towards an ATP certificate for
navigators in the U.S. Armed Forces similar to the credit permitted for
flight engineers. The FAA has determined the comment is outside the
scope of this rulemaking because the NPRM did not propose a change to
Sec.  61.159(d)(2).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The FAA has denied several petitions for exemption from
individuals seeking to credit time as a military-trained navigator
toward requirements for an ATP certificate. The FAA concluded that
the training, proficiency, and decision-making skills are
significantly different from those of a pilot-in-command and that
such an exemption would not provide an equivalent level of safety to
that provided in the regulation. See Exemption No. 17785 (FAA-2017-
0160); Exemption No. 17866 (FAA-2017-1198).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final comment came from CAE, Inc. (CAE). CAE contends that
there are training tasks and learning objectives identified in the
training course required in Sec.  61.156 that are applicable to single-
engine type rating candidates. CAE recommended the FAA task a committee
to ``carefully study the requirements and make recommendations as to
which tasks and elements should be applied to ATP single-engine type
rating candidates.''
    The FAA has considered CAE's recommendation and determined that it
is not necessary to task a committee to review and recommend tasks that
should be applied to ATP single-engine type rating candidates. The FAA
established these multiengine ATP certification requirements in
response to Public Law 111-216. The statute was specific to modifying
the multiengine ATP certificate requirements to incorporate the content
now codified in Sec.  61.156. The FAA recognizes some of the subject
matter would be applicable to candidates for a single-engine type
rating. However, there is no statutory or regulatory requirement for
single-engine ATP applicants to receive such training. Training
providers can review the existing guidance in Advisory Circular 61-138,
Airline Transport Pilot Certification Program, and determine which
topic areas are applicable should they want to offer such training
voluntarily. In addition, the FAA published the ATP-Airplane Airman
Certification Standards in June 2019, which further captures what a
pilot of a single-engine airplane needs to know at the ATP level, and
what a pilot of a single-engine airplane type rating needs to know,
pursuant to FAA regulatory requirements. The FAA encourages training
providers to use the available information and incorporate the
applicable content in their single-engine type rating training
programs.
    The FAA received no other comments on the proposal. Accordingly,
for the reasons stated in the NPRM and reiterated in section II.C of
this document, the FAA is finalizing the proposed amendments without
change. The FAA notes that, with the corrections to Sec.  61.160(a)
through (d),

the FAA is also amending paragraph (f) to achieve parallel construction
of the multiengine airplane phrasing. The FAA is also making a
clarifying amendment to Sec.  61.160(e) by adding a cross-reference
that was inadvertently omitted in the Pilot Certification and
Qualification Requirements for Air Carrier Operations final rule.\13\
As evident from the preamble to that final rule, Sec.  61.160(e) was
intended to ``reduce the cross-country flight time required for all
applicants for an R-ATP [airline transport pilot certificate with
restricted privileges] certificate to 200 hours.'' \14\ However, the
express language of the rule provided relief only to those categories
of applicants listed in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c). Because the
relief in Sec.  61.160(e) was intended for all eligible applicants,\15\
including persons eligible under Sec.  61.160(d), the FAA is amending
Sec.  61.160 by adding a cross-reference to paragraph (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 78 FR 42324.
    \14\ 78 FR 42348-49.
    \15\ This point was also summarized in the differences between
the NPRM and the final rule stating ``[m]inimum cross country time
for all eligible pilots is 200 hours''. 78 FR 42330.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade Agreements Act requires agencies
to consider international standards and, where appropriate, that they
be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this final
rule.
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this
final rule: (1) Has cost savings with no additional costs; (2) is not a
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866; (3)
does not require an analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act; (4)
will not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States; and (5) will not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector by exceeding the
threshold identified above. These analyses are summarized below.

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    This final rule does not make any changes to the requirements for a
pilot seeking a multiengine airplane ATP certificate. Rather, this
final rule simply removes an unintended and unnecessary training
requirement in multiengine airplanes for a pilot seeking a single-
engine airplane ATP certificate concurrently with a single-engine
airplane type rating, with no reduction in safety because a pilot will
still be required to obtain specific training and be tested to receive
the single-engine airplane type rating.
    This final rule will relieve costs for a pilot seeking an ATP
certificate concurrently with a single-engine airplane type rating.
Current regulations require a person seeking both an ATP and a single-
engine type rating concurrently to complete the ATP CTP.
    In order to estimate cost savings of this final rule, the FAA based
its regulatory evaluation on the following assumptions, factors, and
data. These are similar to those used for the regulatory evaluation of
the proposed rule. The FAA received no comments on the regulatory
evaluation of the proposed rule.
     The FAA uses a five-year period of analysis based on the
most current data available at the time.
     The FAA uses a seven and three percent discount rate for
estimating present values of cost savings as prescribed by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) in Circular A-4.
     Monetized estimates for the final rule are in 2020 dollars
by adjusting proposed rule values with the GDP deflator for 2020. OMB
Circular A-4 recommends using the GDP deflator to adjust monetized
effects to a constant dollar year.
     The FAA estimates costs of an ATP CTP to an applicant to
be $5,105.
     The FAA estimates that the cost of renting a newer, all
glass display, single-engine airplane to be approximately $179 per hour
wet (rounded from $178.60). An airplane rented wet includes
maintenance, insurance, fuel, airport fees, any other duties, and
taxes.
     The FAA estimates that for an ATP practical test, a
single-engine airplane has to be rented for three hours to practice for
the test and two hours for the test.
     In addition to renting an airplane, a designee is
required. The FAA estimates that the designee will cost the applicant
$511.
     Based on data from Airlines for America (A4A), the FAA
estimates that the average domestic round-trip fare and fees will be
about $347.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ https://airlines.org/dataset/annual-round-trip-fares-and-fees-domestic/ Accessed October 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Based on data from the General Services Administration
website, for 2017, the average cost of a hotel in the continental U.S.
is $93 per day and the average cost of the per diem, including meals
and incidental expenses, is $51 per day.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem-rates/per-diem-files-archived.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As previously discussed, there were no single-engine airplanes that
required a type rating until the certification of the Cirrus Vision Jet
(SF50) in 2016. From October 2016 through June 2021, 493 pilots
received SF50 type ratings. Of these 493 pilots, the FAA estimates that
40 percent could have upgraded their certificate if they had completed
the ATP CTP, but opted to just add the SF50 type rating to their
commercial certificate to avoid the ATP CTP training costs. Since there
are 57 months from October 2016 through June 2021, the FAA estimates
that there will be an average of about 9 pilots per month that will
receive a single-engine type certificate (493 pilots divided by 57
months), or about 108 pilots per year (9 pilots multiplied by 12
months). The FAA then estimates that 40 percent of 108 pilots per year,
or 43 pilots (0.4 multiplied by 108) per year, will receive savings by
avoiding the costs of the ATP CTP.
    In order to estimate the savings for an applicant, the FAA
estimated the avoided costs of the ATP CTP based on two options for an
applicant. For the first option, the applicant has to complete a five
to seven day ATP CTP provided by an FAA-authorized training provider.
The FAA estimates the course takes an average of six days ((5 + 7)/2).
The applicant also incurs the expense to travel to the training
provider to take the course, get a hotel for six days, and pay a per
diem for meals. In the case above, an ATP CTP costs $5,105, round trip
airfare costs about $347, a hotel costs $93 a day, and meals and
incidental expenses cost $51 a day. Using these costs, the FAA
estimates the relief provided in this final rule saves an

applicant about $6,651 under this option. The following table shows the
cost savings estimates of the first option over the five-year period of
analysis.

                                                            Option 1--Potential Cost Savings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Class         Fare        Hotel      Per diem   Avg days   #Pilots      Total cost savings         Present value
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                                                                                (A + B + ((C + D) x E)) x
                                       A            B            C           D          E          F                 F                  7%         3%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................       $5,105         $347          $93        $51          6        43                   $271,588   $253,821   $263,678
2...............................        5,105          347           93         51          6        43                    271,588    237,215    255,998
3...............................        5,105          347           93         51          6        43                    271,588    221,697    248,541
4...............................        5,105          347           93         51          6        43                    271,588    207,193    241,302
5...............................        5,105          347           93         51          6        43                    271,588    193,638    234,274
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total (Adjusted with 2020 GDP deflator 2020:2017 = 5.3%)...........................................                  1,429,911  1,172,583  1,309,715
    Savings per pilot (2020 dollars)...................................................................                      6,651      5,454      6,092
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding.

    For the second option, the applicant has to rent a single-engine
airplane and hire a designee (check pilot) for the practical test. The
FAA estimates that for an ATP practical test, the applicant will rent a
single-engine airplane for five hours (three hours to practice for the
test and two hours for the test). Using the assumptions above, the rent
of a single-engine airplane costs approximately $178.6 per hour. The
FAA estimates the airplane rental costs a total of approximately $893
to rent ($178.6 multiplied by 5 total hours). The applicant also incurs
expenses to travel to a private plane rental company, hire a designee,
get a hotel for one day, and pay a per diem for meals. In the
assumptions above, round trip airfare costs about $347, a designee
would cost $511, a hotel would cost $93 a day, and meals and incidental
expenses would cost $51 a day. Using these costs, the FAA estimates
that in this situation the relief provided in this final rule will save
an applicant about $1,895 under this option. The following table shows
the cost savings estimates of the second option over the five-year
period of analysis.

                                                            Option 2--Potential Cost Savings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Fare      A/C rental    Designee     Hotel     Per diem   #Pilots          Total cost             Present value
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                                                                                (A + B + ((C + D) x E)) x
                                       A            B            C           D          E          F                 F                  7%         3%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................         $347         $893         $511        $93        $51        43                    $81,485    $76,154    $79,112
2...............................          347          893          511         93         51        43                     81,485     71,172     76,807
3...............................          347          893          511         93         51        43                     81,485     66,516     74,570
4...............................          347          893          511         93         51        43                     81,485     62,165     72,398
5...............................          347          893          511         93         51        43                     81,485     58,098     70,290
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total (Adjusted with 2020 GDP deflator 2020:2017 = 5.3%)...........................................                    407,425    334,105    373,177
    Savings per pilot (2020 dollars)...................................................................                      1,895      1,554      1,736
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding.

    Using the analysis from both options, the FAA estimates that this
final rule has present value cost savings from $334 thousand to $1.2
million at a seven percent discount rate over the five-year period of
analysis. At a three percent discount rate, this final rule has present
value cost savings from $373 thousand to $1.3 million over the five-
year period of analysis. While this final rule results in small total
cost savings with no additional costs, it will provide substantial cost
savings to affected pilots ranging from $1,895 to $6,651 per pilot.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals
are given serious consideration. The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rulemaking
would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the agency may so
certify, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    This final rule does not make any changes to the requirements for a
pilot seeking a multiengine airplane ATP certificate. Rather, this
final rule will simply remove an unintended and unnecessary training
requirement in multiengine airplanes for a pilot seeking a single-
engine airplane ATP certificate concurrently with a single-engine
airplane type rating, with no reduction in safety because a pilot will
still be required to obtain specific training and be tested to receive
the single-engine airplane type rating. This final rule relieves costs
for a pilot seeking an ATP certificate concurrently with a single-
engine airplane type rating. This rule directly affects individual
pilots and not small entities.
    Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA
certifies that this final rule does not result in a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule and
determined that it has only a domestic impact and therefore no effect
on international trade.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a final agency rule
that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more (in 1995
dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be
a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently uses an
inflation-adjusted value of $155.0 million in lieu of $100 million.
This final rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. According to the 1995
amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi)), an
agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor
may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays
a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    The FAA has determined that there will be no new requirement for
information collection associated with this final rule. The FAA has
also determined it is not necessary to amend any existing collection.
The current paperwork filing that established the ATP CTP imposes a
requirement for a training provider to submit a training program to the
FAA for approval. In the original filing, it was determined there was
no paperwork burden on a person taking the ATP CTP; therefore, this
final rule will have no impact on that filing. The FAA also evaluated
the paperwork filing for the Airman Certificate and/or Rating
Application. If an applicant is seeking a multiengine airplane ATP
certificate, submitting the ATP CTP graduation certificate is required
as part of that collection. This final rule does not change that
requirement; therefore, no amendment is needed.

F. International Compatibility

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
that correspond to these regulations.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.6 and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has
determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect
on the States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, and, therefore, will not have
Federalism implications.

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
will not be a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order
and will not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation

    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of
Executive Order 13609, and has determined that this final rule has no
effect on international regulatory cooperation.

VI. How To Obtain Additional Information

A. Electronic Access and Filing

    A copy of the notice of proposed rulemaking, all comments received,
this final rule, and all background material may be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov using the docket number listed above. A
copy of this rule will be placed in the docket. Electronic retrieval
help and guidelines are available on the website. It is available 24
hours each day, 365 days each year. An electronic copy of this document
may also be downloaded from the Office of the Federal Register's
website at https://www.federalregister.gov and the Government
Publishing Office's website at https://www.govinfo.gov. A copy may also
be found at the FAA's Regulations and Policies website at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
    All documents the FAA considered in developing this rule, including
economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in the
electronic docket for this rulemaking.

B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires the FAA to comply with small entity requests for
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations
within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding

this document, may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed
under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of
the preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the internet, visit
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 61

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 61--CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND
INSTRUCTORS

0
1. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707,
44709-44711, 44729, 44903, 45102-45103, 45301-45302, Sec. 2307 Pub.
L. 114-190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 U.S.C. 44703 note).

0
2. Amend Sec.  61.35 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3)(iii)(A);
0
b. Removing paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(B);
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(C) as paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(B);
and
0
d. Revising newly-redesignated paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(B).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  61.35  Knowledge test: Prerequisites and passing grades.

    (a) * * *
    (2) For the knowledge test for an airline transport pilot
certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating, a
graduation certificate for the airline transport pilot certification
training program specified in Sec.  61.156; and
    (3) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (A) For issuance of certificates other than the ATP certificate
with an airplane category multiengine class rating, the applicant meets
or will meet the age requirements of this part for the certificate
sought before the expiration date of the airman knowledge test report;
and
    (B) For issuance of an ATP certificate with an airplane category
multiengine class rating obtained under the aeronautical experience
requirements of Sec.  61.159 or Sec.  61.160, the applicant is at least
18 years of age at the time of the knowledge test;
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  61.39 by revising paragraph (b) introductory text and
paragraph (d) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  61.39  Prerequisites for practical tests.

* * * * *
    (b) An applicant for an airline transport pilot certificate with an
airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline transport
pilot certificate obtained concurrently with a multiengine airplane
type rating may take the practical test with an expired knowledge test
only if the applicant passed the knowledge test after July 31, 2014,
and is employed:
* * * * *
    (d) In addition to the requirements in paragraph (a) of this
section, to be eligible for a practical test for an airline transport
pilot certificate with an airplane category multiengine class rating or
airline transport pilot certificate obtained concurrently with a
multiengine airplane type rating, an applicant must:
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  61.153 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.153  Eligibility requirements: General.

* * * * *
    (e) For an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane
category multiengine class rating or an airline transport pilot
certificate obtained concurrently with a multiengine airplane type
rating, receive a graduation certificate from an authorized training
provider certifying completion of the airline transport pilot
certification training program specified in Sec.  61.156 before
applying for the knowledge test required by paragraph (g) of this
section;
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  61.155 by revising paragraph (c)(14) and removing
paragraph (d).
    The revision reads as follows:

Sec.  61.155  Aeronautical knowledge.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (14) For an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane
category multiengine class rating or an airline transport pilot
certificate obtained concurrently with a multiengine airplane type
rating, the content of the airline transport pilot certification
training program in Sec.  61.156.

0
6. Amend Sec.  61.156 by revising the section heading and introductory
text to read as follows:

Sec.  61.156  Training requirements: Airplane category--multiengine
class or multiengine airplane type rating concurrently with an airline
transport pilot certificate.

    A person who applies for the knowledge test for an airline
transport pilot certificate with an airplane category multiengine class
rating must present a graduation certificate from an authorized
training provider under part 121, 135, 141, or 142 of this chapter
certifying the applicant has completed the following training in a
course approved by the Administrator.
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  61.160 by revising paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b)
introductory text, (c) introductory text, and paragraphs (d), (e), and
(f) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.160  Aeronautical experience--airplane category restricted
privileges.

    (a) Except for a person who has been removed from flying status for
lack of proficiency or because of a disciplinary action involving
aircraft operations, a U.S. military pilot or former U.S. military
pilot may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate with an
airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline transport
pilot certificate concurrently with a multiengine airplane type rating
with a minimum of 750 hours of total time as a pilot if the pilot
presents:
* * * * *
    (b) A person may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate
with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline
transport pilot certificate concurrently with a multiengine airplane
type rating with a minimum of 1,000 hours of total time as a pilot if
the person:
* * * * *
    (c) A person may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate
with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline
transport pilot certificate concurrently with a multiengine airplane
type rating with a minimum of 1,250 hours of total time as a pilot if
the person:
* * * * *
    (d) A graduate of an institution of higher education who completes
fewer than 60 semester credit hours but at least 30 credit hours and
otherwise satisfies the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section
may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane
category multiengine class rating or an airline transport pilot
certificate concurrently with a multiengine airplane type rating with a
minimum of 1,250 hours of total time as a pilot.

    (e) A person who applies for an airline transport pilot certificate
under the total flight times listed in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and
(d) of this section must otherwise meet the aeronautical experience
requirements of Sec.  61.159, except that the person may apply for an
airline transport pilot certificate with 200 hours of cross-country
flight time.
    (f) A person may apply for an airline transport pilot certificate
with an airplane category multiengine class rating or an airline
transport pilot certificate concurrently with a multiengine airplane
type rating if the person has 1,500 hours total time as a pilot, 200
hours of cross-country flight time, and otherwise meets the
aeronautical experience requirements of Sec.  61.159.
* * * * *

0
8. Amend Sec.  61.165 by revising paragraphs (c)(2), (f) introductory
text, and (f)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.165  Additional aircraft category and class ratings.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Successfully complete the airline transport pilot certification
training program specified in Sec.  61.156;
* * * * *
    (f) Adding a multiengine class rating to an airline transport pilot
certificate with a single engine class rating. A person applying to add
a multiengine class rating, or a multiengine class rating concurrently
with a multiengine airplane type rating, to an airline transport pilot
certificate with an airplane category single engine class rating must--
* * * * *
    (2) Pass a required knowledge test on the aeronautical knowledge
areas of Sec.  61.155(c), as applicable to multiengine airplanes;
* * * * *

    Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a),
and 44703 in Washington, DC, on or about November 3, 2021.
Steve Dickson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-24411 Filed 11-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 153 (Thursday, August 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54373-54375]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17109]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98063; File No. SR-IEX-2023-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Pursuant to
IEX Rule 15.110 To Amend IEX's Fee Schedule

August 4, 2023.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on July 25, 2023, Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    Pursuant to the provisions of section 19(b)(1) under the Act,\4\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\5\ IEX is filing with the Commission a
proposed rule change to amend the Exchange's fee schedule applicable to
Members \6\ (the ``Fee Schedule'') pursuant to IEX Rule 15.110(a) and
(c), to modify the fees applicable to executions of and with displayed
orders for securities priced at or above $1.00 per share. Changes to
the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are effective upon
filing,\7\ and will be operative on September 1, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \6\ See IEX Rule 1.160(s).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.iextrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify its Fee Schedule, pursuant to IEX
Rule 15.110(a) and (c), to modify the fees applicable to executions of
and with displayed orders with an execution price at or above $1.00 per
share. The Exchange currently does not charge Members a fee for an
execution at or above $1.00 per share that provides displayed liquidity
and charges Members $0.0009 per share for an execution at or above
$1.00 per share that removes displayed liquidity.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Investors Exchange Fee Schedule, available at https://www.iexexchange.io/resources/trading/fee-schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, for executions at or above $1.00 per share, Members
that enter displayed orders that provide liquidity will receive a
rebate of $0.0004 per share and Members that enter orders that remove
displayed liquidity will be charged a fee of $0.0010 per share, unless
a lower fee applies.\9\ The proposed fee change would also apply to
executions when the adding and removing orders originated from the same
Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ As discussed infra, if a Retail order removes displayed
liquidity, the Retail order would not be charged a fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange provides the following Fee Codes on execution reports
to Members for executions of and with displayed liquidity: ``ML'' for
orders that provide displayed liquidity, ``MLS'' for orders that
provide displayed liquidity that executes against an order that
originated from the same Member, ``TL'' for orders that remove
displayed liquidity, and ``TLS'' for orders that remove displayed
liquidity added by the same Member.\10\ These existing Fee Codes will
continue to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to make the following
changes to its Fee Schedule:
     Replace the words ``Effective January 2, 2023'' at the top
of the Fee Schedule with the words ``Effective July 25, 2023'' and on
the line immediately after, add ``New underlined text and deletions in
brackets will be operative on September 1, 2023'' (to indicate the date
the fees in this proposal will be operative).
     Modify the first bullet point under the ``Transaction
Fees'' header to specify that all fees identify the cost ``or rebate''
per share executed. And add a sentence stating that ``Rebates are
indicated by parentheses ().''
     In the ``Base Rates'' table, change the fee for executions
at or above $1.00 per share for Fee Code ML from ``FREE'' to
``($0.0004)''.
     In the ``Base Rates'' table, change the fee for executions
at or above $1.00 per share for Fee Code TL from ``$0.0009'' to
``$0.0010''.
     In the ``Fee Code Combinations and Associated Fees''
table, change the fee for executions at or above $1.00 per share for
Fee Code ML from ``FREE'' to ``($0.0004)''.
     In the ``Fee Code Combinations and Associated Fees''
table, change the fee for executions at or above $1.00 per share for
Fee Code TL from ``$0.0009'' to ``$0.0010''.
     In the ``Fee Code Combinations and Associated Fees''
table, change the fee for executions at or above $1.00 per share for
Fee Code MLS from ``FREE'' to ``($0.0004)''.
     In the ``Fee Code Combinations and Associated Fees''
table, change the fee for executions at or above $1.00 per share for
Fee Code TLS from ``$0.0009'' to ``$0.0010''.
    The Exchange is not proposing to change the fees applicable to
executions of and with displayed orders with an execution price below
$1.00 per share, which would remain free for such orders that provide
displayed liquidity and 0.09% of the total dollar volume of the
execution for orders that take displayed liquidity. IEX is also not
proposing to make any changes to the fees applicable to the execution
of

Retail \11\ orders that remove displayed liquidity, which will continue
to execute for free.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current fees for orders that provide or take displayed
liquidity were adopted in 2021 and designed to attract displayed order
flow to the Exchange by offering a fee-based incentive to provide
displayed liquidity.\12\ The Exchange periodically assesses its fee
structure and based upon a recent assessment, the Exchange believes
that the proposed pricing change would further incentivize Members to
submit displayed orders in securities priced at or above $1.00 per
share. The proposed fee change is designed to incentivize posting
displayed liquidity on IEX in securities priced at or above $1.00 per
share in order to address competitive factors (as discussed more
thoroughly in the Statutory Basis section) and facilitate price
discovery and price formation, which the Exchange believes benefits all
Members and market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91443 (March 30,
2021), 86 FR 17654 (April 5, 2021) (SR-IEX-2021-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    IEX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of section 6(b) \13\ of the Act in general, and furthers the
objectives of sections 6(b)(4) \14\ of the Act, in particular, in that
it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using
its facilities. The Exchange believes that the proposed fee change is
reasonable, fair and equitable, and non-discriminatory. The Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants
can readily direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee
levels at a particular venue to be excessive. The Exchange believes
that the proposed fee structure will attract and incentivize displayed
order flow as well as order flow seeking to trade with displayed order
flow. Moreover, increases in displayed liquidity would contribute to
the public price discovery process which would benefit all market
participants and protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee structure for providing
and removing displayed liquidity is reasonable and consistent with the
Act. Specifically, the Exchange believes that for securities that trade
at or above $1.00 per share, it is reasonable to provide a $0.0004 per
share rebate for providing displayed liquidity and to modestly increase
the fee for removing displayed liquidity to $0.0010 per share. As noted
above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues
if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive. Within
that context, charging $0.0010 per share for orders that remove
displayed liquidity (coupled with a $0.0004 per share rebate for orders
that add displayed liquidity) is designed to keep IEX's displayed
trading prices competitive with those of other exchanges. In this
regard, IEX notes that while many competing exchanges pay rebates to
provide displayed liquidity that are substantially higher than those
proposed, others charge fees to provide displayed liquidity for
securities that trade at or above $1.00 per share.\15\ Further, IEX
notes that for securities that trade at or above $1.00 per share, many
competing exchanges charge substantially higher fees to remove
displayed liquidity than those charged by IEX.\16\ Consequently, IEX
believes that the proposed fee structure for providing and removing
displayed liquidity is within the range charged by competing exchanges
and does not raise any new or novel issues not already considered by
the Commission in the context of other exchanges' fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See e.g., Nasdaq BX Equity 7 Section 118(a) (up to $0.0030
fee per share to add displayed liquidity), available at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/bx/rules/BX%20Equity%207; Cboe BYX
Equities Fee Schedule (up to $0.0020 fee per share to add displayed
liquidity, available at https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/; Cboe EDGA Equities Fee Schedule (up to $0.0030
fee per share to add displayed liquidity, available at https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edga/.
    \16\ See e.g., Cboe BZX Equities Fee Schedule (up to $0.0030 fee
per share to remove displayed liquidity), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/; MIAX
Pearl Equities Exchange Fee Schedule (up to $0.00295 fee per share
for liquidity removing executions), available at https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/MIAX_Pearl_Equities_Fee_Schedule_07112023.pdf; MEMX Fee Schedule (up
to $0.0030 fee per share for liquidity removing executions),
available at https://info.memxtrading.com/fee-schedule/; Nasdaq
Equity 7 Section 118(a) (up to $0.0030 fee per share for any
liquidity removing executions), available at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rules/nasdaq-equity-7; New
York Stock Exchange Price List 2023 (up to $0.0030 per share for
liquidity removing executions), available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Price_List.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, IEX believes that it is reasonable and consistent with
the Act to apply the proposed fees to executions when the adding and
removing order originated from the same Member. IEX believes that the
same factors that support the proposed fees overall, are also
applicable to such executions. Specifically, IEX believes that the
incentives to send displayed orders to IEX (and orders seeking to
execute against displayed orders) will similarly provide an incentive
to Members to send orders to IEX that might otherwise be internalized
off-exchange, which may increase order interaction on IEX.
Internalization on IEX is not guaranteed, and the additional orders
that do not internalize are available to trade by all Members.
    The Exchange also believes that it is reasonable and consistent
with the Act not to modify its displayed fees for sub-dollar executions
to synchronize those fees with the proposed fees for executions at or
above $1.00 per share. The Exchange believes that the existing fee
structure for such executions continues to be reasonably designed to
incentivize displayed order flow (and orders seeking to trade with
displayed order flow) in such securities.
    Further, IEX believes that it is reasonable and consistent with the
Act not to change the fees applicable to the execution of Retail orders
that remove liquidity, which will continue to execute for free. In this
regard, the Exchange believes that the existing fee structure continues
to be reasonably designed to incentivize the entry of Retail orders,
and notes that the Commission, in approving IEX's Retail Price
Improvement Program, acknowledged the value of exchanges' offering
incentives to attract both retail investor orders and orders
specifically designated to execute only with retail orders.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86619 (August 9,
2019), 84 FR 41769, 41771 (August 15, 2019) (SR-IEX-2019-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes that the proposed fee change is
consistent with the Act's requirement that the Exchange provide for an
equitable allocation of fees that is also not unfairly discriminatory.
    First, the fees for adding and removing displayed liquidity will
apply on a per share basis in an equal and nondiscriminatory manner to
all Members, without regard to the volume of orders submitted by a
Member or other factors.
    Second, because the fees would apply on a flat, per share basis--
like IEX's existing fees--they will continue to be fully deterministic,
in that a Member will be able to determine the Exchange fees for each
execution. IEX believes this aspect of its fee proposal will assist all
Members in making decisions about routing of orders without the
uncertainties associated with volume tiers or other requirements that
cannot

be determined at the time of the trade. IEX notes that applying fees in
this way is consistent with the purpose of the Commission's proposal to
require that exchange fees be set in a manner such that the amount of a
fee or rebate related to each trade is determinable at the time of the
trade.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 96494 (December 14,
2022), 87 FR 80266, 80292-93 (December 29, 2022) (File No. S7-30-
22).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange believes that it is reasonable to modify
the first bullet under ``Transaction Fees'' to include a reference to
rebates and to specify that rebates are indicated by parentheses.
Updating this bullet point will avoid any potential confusion as to the
applicable fees and rebates for each execution.
    Finally, to the extent the proposed change is successful in
incentivizing the entry and execution of displayed orders on IEX, such
greater liquidity will benefit all market participants by increasing
price discovery and price formation as well as market quality and
execution opportunities.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    IEX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues
if fee schedules at other venues are viewed as more favorable.
Consequently, the Exchange believes that the degree to which IEX fees
could impose any burden on competition is extremely limited, and does
not believe that such fees would burden competition between Members or
competing venues. Moreover, as noted in the Statutory Basis section,
the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes raise any new
or novel issues not already considered by the Commission.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, while
different fees are assessed in some circumstances, these different fees
are not based on the type of Member entering the orders that match or
on the volume of orders submitted by a Member but on the type of order
entered, and all Members can submit any type of order and will be
subject to the same fee for that type of order. IEX believes that
applying a flat, per share fee or rebate for each type of order avoids
imposing a burden on competition by ensuring that individual Members do
not gain a competitive advantage over other Members based solely on
their size or volume of orders they are able to submit to the Exchange.
Further, the proposed fee changes continue to be intended to encourage
market participants to bring increased order flow to the Exchange,
which benefits all market participants.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A) \19\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \20\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
section 19(b)(2)(B) \21\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-IEX-2023-08 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to file number SR-IEX-2023-08. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-IEX-2023-08 and should be
submitted on or before August 31, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-17109 Filed 8-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                     U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                            Washington, D.C. 20460
                        									            OFFICE OF
                                                         PREVENTION, PESTICIDES
                                                           AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

Date: 		September 2, 2014
PC Code: 	124002
DP Barcode: 	418740

MEMORANDUM

Subject:	Drinking Water Assessment in Support of IR-4 New and Revised Uses of Novaluron (RIMON[(R)] 0.83 EC) on Avocado; Beans, Berries (Low-Growing), Bushberries, Carrot; Cotton, Cucurbit Vegetables, Fruiting Vegetables, Head and Stem Brassica, Leafy Brassica Greens, Ornamentals (Container Grown Ornamentals in Greenhouses, Shadehouses, Outdoor Nurseries), Peanuts, Pears, Pome Fruits, Potatoes / Sweet Potatoes, Sorghum, Soybeans, Stonefruits, Sweet Corn, Sugarcane, Swiss Chard, and Turnip Greens

To:	Julie L. VanAlstine, Environmental Health Scientist
	Charles (Billy) Smith, Branch Chief
	Risk Assessment Branch 1
      Health Effects Division (7509P)

      Sydney Jackson, Risk Manager Reviewer
      Barbara Madden, Minor Use Team Leader
      Risk Integration Minor Use, and Emergency Response Branch
      Registration Division (7505P)

      Jennifer Gaines, Risk Manager Reviewer
      Reuben Baris, Product Manager Team 7
      Insecticide-Rodenticide Branch
      Registration Division (7505P)

From:		He Zhong, Ph.D., Biologist,
	Sujatha Sankula, Ph.D., Branch Chief
	Meghan Radtke, Ph.D., Acting RAPL
		Environmental Risk Branch 1
            Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) has completed the drinking water assessment in support of IR-4 new and revised uses registration of the insecticide, novaluron, ((RS)-1-[3-Chloro-4 (1,1,2-trifluoromethoxyethoxy)phenyl]-3-(2,6-difluorobenzoy1)urea, on Avocado; Beans, Berries (Low-Growing), Bushberries, Carrot; Cotton, Cucurbit Vegetables, Fruiting Vegetables, Head and Stem Brassica, Leafy Brassica Greens, Ornamentals (Container Grown Ornamentals in Greenhouses, Shadehouses, Outdoor Nurseries), Peanuts, Pears, Pome Fruits, Potatoes / Sweet Potatoes, Sorghum, Soybeans, Stonefruits, Sweet Corn, Sugarcane, Swiss Chard, and Turnip Greens (Table 1).  Based on a review of the product label for the crops listed above, the maximum annual application rates for the proposed IR-4 new and revised uses ranged from 0.16 to 0.97 lb ai/A (Table 1).  The proposed upper rate is equal to the previous rate for pome and stone fruits (0.972 lb ai/A) (USEPA 2009, D363989), and much lower than the previous application rate for poultry litter applications (14.82 lb ai/A) (USEPA 2013, D412441).

Table 1.  Novaluron application rates for the proposed new and revised uses.

Crop
(Subgroup)
                          Maximum Application Rate[1]
                                  (lb a.i./A)
                    Maximum Number of Applications Per Year
                     Minimum Interval Between Applications
                                    (Days)
                           Method of Application[1]

                                    Single
                                    Annual

                           RIMON 0.83 EC (9.3% a.i.)
Avocado
                                     0.13
                                     0.38
                                       3
                                      14
                                    GA, AA
Bean
                                     0.077
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                     GA,AA
Low-Growing Berries
                                     0.077
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Bushberries
                                     0.193
                                     0.58
                                       3
                                      10
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Carrot
                                     0.08
                                     0.24
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Cotton
                                     0.09
                                     0.27
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Cucurbit Vegetables
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                      14
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Fruiting Vegetables
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Head and Stem Brassica
                                     0.08

                                     0.16

                                       2
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Leafy Brassica Greens
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Ornamentals
                                     0.17
                                     0.34
                                       2
                                      30
                                      GA
Peanuts
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Group 11-10 Pear
                                     0.21
                                     0.62
                                       3
                                      10
                                      OS
Group 11-10 Pome
                                     0.323
                                     0.97
                                       3
                                      10
                                      OS
Potatoes / Sweet Potatoes
                                     0.08
                                     0.16
                                       2
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Grain Sorghum
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Soybeans
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                      10
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Stone Fruit
                                     0.323
                                     0.97
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Strawberry
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Sugarcane
                                     0.08
                                     0.39
                                       5
                                      14
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Sweet Corn
                                     0.08
                                     0.39
                                       5
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Swiss Chard
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
Turnip Greens
                                     0.08
                                     0.23
                                       3
                                       7
                                  GA,AA, CHEM
1  -  It shows only the maximum application rate and minimum reapplication intervals for novaluron proposed uses, -- OS: Orchard Spraying,; GA: Ground Application; BA: Band Application (in Cotton only); AA: Aerial Application; CHEM: Chemigation; CHEM-PW: Chemigation system connected to public water systems; S-CHEM: Sprinkler Chemigation,

The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWC) of novaluron and its degradates (chlorophenyl urea and chloroaniline) from the new proposed and revised uses are not expected to exceed those from previous registered uses on PA apples (0.972 lbs ai/A/year) and poultry litter (14.82 lb ai/A/year).  Therefore, EFED continues to recommend the previous surface water upper bound EDWCs (Table 2).

Table 2. The upper bound EDWCs for novaluron, chlorophenyl urea and chloroaniline

                                     Acute
                                    (μg/L)
                          Non-cancer Chronic (μg/L)
                            Cancer Chronic (μg/L)
Novaluron
(PA Apples)
                                      3*
                                     0.76
                                     0.62
Chlorophenyl Urea
(Poultry litter use)
                                     8.77
                                     6.01
                                     3.21
Chloroaniline
(Poultry litter use)
                                     12,59
                                     10.05
                                     6.05
* Novaluron solubility limit

In addition, EFED continues to recommend the previously estimated concentrations of novaluron and two degradates modeled by SCI-GROW and PRZM-GW in shallow ground water sources with the peak EDWCs not to exceed 8.72 x 10[-2] μg/L (SCI-GROW), 0.43 μg/L and 84.2 μg/L (PRZM-GW) for novaluron, chlorophenyl urea, and chloroaniline, respectively.

                                  References
UPEPA 2009.  Novaluron and Novaluron Degradates (Chlorophenyl urea and Chloroaniline) Drinking Water Assessment in Support of New Use Registration Action for Sorghum, Fruiting Vegetables (Group 8, D364309), Cucurbit Vegetables (Group 9), Low-growing Berry Subgroup (13-07G), Snap and Dry Bean, and Swiss Chard.  D363989 and D364309.  4pp.

USEPA 2013.   Drinking Water Assessment in Support of the New Indoor and Outdoor non-food Use of Novaluron for Pest Control.  DP Barcode: 412441 28pp.