[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 19, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42970-42972]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15326]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0879; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00039-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Airbus SAS Model A300 B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, and B4-203
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracking of the
flight compartment aft window frame and adjacent fuselage skin. This
proposed AD would require a one-time check for previously accomplished
repairs of the window pane and adjacent fuselage panel, and applicable
corrective actions, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation by reference. The
FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by September
2, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2022-0879.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0879; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large
Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0879; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-00039-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any commentary that
the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be
placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2022-0004, dated January 11, 2022
(EASA AD 2022-0004) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A300 B2K-3C,

B2-203, B4-2C, B4-203, C4-203, and F4-203 airplanes. Model C4-203 and
F4-203 airplanes are not certificated by the FAA and are not included
on the U.S. type certificate data sheet; this proposed AD therefore
does not include those airplanes in the applicability.
    EASA AD 2022-0004 specifies that changes were made to the
inspection methods and compliance times required by paragraph 1.8 of
Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC) France AD 1990-222-
116(B) R5, dated January 8, 2000 (DGAC France AD 1990-222-116(B) R5),
and that the requirements of paragraph 1.8 of DGAC France AD 1990-222-
116(B) R5 are ``no longer valid.'' FAA AD 2000-10-01, Amendment 39-
11725 (65 FR 33441, May 24, 2000) (AD 2000-10-01) corresponds to DGAC
France AD 1990-222-116(B) R4, dated March 27, 1996. DGAC France AD
1990-222-116(B) R5 removed certain other requirements, but the
requirements of paragraph 1.8 did not change from those in DGAC France
AD 1990-222-116(B) R4, dated March 27, 1996. This proposed AD would
therefore terminate the inspections of the rear lower corner of the
flight compartment aft window at fuselage station (STA) 972/frame (FR)
10, as required by paragraphs (a)(8), (d), and (e) of AD 2000-10-01.
    This proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracking of the flight
compartment aft window frame and adjacent fuselage skin. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address cracking of the wings and fuselage, which
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. See the
MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2022-0004 specifies procedures for a one-time check for
previously accomplished repairs of the window pane and adjacent
fuselage panel, and applicable corrective actions. If no repair is
identified, the corrective actions are accomplishing repetitive
ultrasonic inspections of the window frame, and detailed inspections of
the adjacent fuselage panel for cracking, and repair of any cracking.
If any repair is identified, the corrective action is obtaining and
accomplishing further instructions.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2022-0004 described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2022-0004 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2022-0004 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading
of a particular section in EASA AD 2022-0004 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2022-
0004. Service information required by EASA AD 2022-0004 for compliance
will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0879 after the FAA final rule is
published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 1 airplane of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hours x $85 per hour = $85............................              $0              $85              $85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition inspections that would be required based on the results of
any required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition inspections:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 work-hours x $85 per hour = $255....              $0             $255
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost
estimates for the on-condition repairs or additional instructions
specified in this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2022-0879; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-
00039-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by September 2, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2000-10-01, Amendment 39-11725 (65 FR 33441,
May 24, 2000) (AD 2000-10-01).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A300 B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-
2C, and B4-203 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking of the flight
compartment aft window frame and adjacent fuselage skin. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address cracking of the wings and fuselage, which
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2022-0004, dated January 11, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-0004).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022-0004

    (1) Where EASA AD 2022-0004 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2022-0004 specifies to
``accomplish those instructions accordingly'' if any crack is
detected, for this AD if any crack is detected, the crack must be
repaired before further flight using a method approved by the
Manager, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch,
FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.
    (3) Where paragraph (6) of EASA AD 2022-0004 specifies
terminating action, replace the text ``the requirements of paragraph
1.8 of DGAC France AD 1990-222-116(B) R5 are no longer valid,'' with
``the inspections of the rear lower corner of the flight compartment
aft window at fuselage station (STA) 972/frame (FR) 10, as required
by paragraphs (a)(8), (d), and (e) of AD 2000-10-01, are
terminated.''
    (4) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2022-0004 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2022-0004
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include
the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2022-0004, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may
view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2022-0879.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

    Issued on July 8, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-15326 Filed 7-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 207)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 66055-66057]
[DOCID:fr27oc10-22]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51, 52, 72, 78, and 97

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491; FRL-9217-7]

Notice of Data Availability Supporting Federal Implementation
Plans To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and
Ozone: Revisions to Emission Inventories

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of data availability (NODA).

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

SUMMARY: EPA is providing notice that it is supplementing the record
for the Proposed Transport Rule (75 FR 45210). EPA has placed in the
docket for the Proposed Transport Rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-
0491) additional information relevant to the rulemaking, including
updated emissions inventory data for 2005, 2012 and 2014 for several
stationary and mobile source inventory components. The data revisions
reflect new approaches to calculating emissions inventories for
specific source categories and related new information and models that
have become available since the emissions data were developed and
modeled for the proposed rule. EPA is requesting comment on the new
data provided in the docket and the proposed revisions identified in
this document. These data and revisions could impact the final rule,
although such impacts have not yet been quantified by EPA.

DATES: Comments on the NODA must be received on or before November 26,
2010. Please refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional
information on submitting comments.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2009-0491, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2009-0941.
     Mail: EPA Docket Center, EPA West (Air Docket), Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460. Please include a total of 2 copies.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
West (Air Docket), 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 3334,
Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2009-0491. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material,

will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA East Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-
1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions regarding the revised
future-year emissions data, contact Rich Mason, Air Quality Assessment
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, C339-02, 109 T.W. Alexander
Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; telephone number: (919) 541-
3405; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
For all other questions on these data, contact Alison Eyth, Air Quality
Assessment Division, Environmental Protection Agency, C339-02, 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; telephone number:
(919) 541-2478; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Detailed background information describing
the proposed rulemaking may be found in a previously published
document: Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate Transport
of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Proposed Transport Rule);
Proposed Rule (75 FR 45210, August 2, 2010). The information placed in
the docket is also available for public review on the Web site for the
Transport Rule at http://www.epa.gov/airtransport/. If additional
relevant supporting information becomes available in the future, EPA
will place this information in the docket and make it available for
public review on this Web site. EPA is requesting comment only on the
data and revisions explicitly identified in this document. EPA
requested comment on all aspects of its emissions inventories in the
proposed Transport Rule. The comment period for that proposal closed on
October 1, 2010. EPA has not yet reviewed all comments received on the
proposed Transport Rule and notes that emission inventory data may be
further revised based on comments received on the proposed Transport
Rule or on additional information that becomes available before the
rule is finalized.

I. Additional Information on Submitting Comments

A. How can I help EPA ensure that my comments are reviewed quickly?

    To expedite review of your comments by Agency staff, you are
encouraged to send a separate copy of your comments, in addition to the
copy you submit to the official docket, to: Alison Eyth, Air Quality
Assessment Division, USEPA, C339-02, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
EDOCKET, http://www.regulations.gov, or e-mail. Clearly mark the part
or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information
in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA docket office specified in
the Instructions, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and
then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the
comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be
submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments.
    When submitting comments, remember to:
    i. Identify the NODA by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain your comments, why you agree or disagree; suggest
alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Web Site for Rulemaking Information

    EPA has previously established a Web site for the proposed
rulemaking at http://www.epa.gov/airtransport. The Web site includes
the proposed rulemaking actions and other related information that the
public may find useful in addition to a link to this NODA.

III. New Information Placed in the Docket

    EPA requests comment on the information described below that has
been added to the proposed Transport Rule docket: EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491.
     Revised 2012 and 2014 projected non-electric generating
units (EGU) emissions for the cement industry, including new units and
facilities and closures; and for 2014, only expected facility changes
as provided by the Industrial Sector Integrated Solutions model as
described by the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry, and
Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants, September 9, 2010
(75 FR 54969).
     Revised 2012 and 2014 projected emissions from the non-EGU
point and nonpoint emissions sectors to reflect emissions reductions
resulting from the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, August 20,
2010 (75 FR 51570).
     Revised 2012 and 2014 non-EGU point and nonpoint projected
emissions to reflect controls required by the New York State
Implementation Plan.
     Revised 2012 and 2014 nonpoint emissions to reflect
improved information on the oil and gas production sector in Texas and
Oklahoma.
     Revised spatial surrogate used to allocate county-level
oil and gas emissions into grid cells for 2005, 2012, and 2014.
     Revised temporal allocation for the nonpoint fugitive dust
emissions sector.
     Revised allocation of volatile organic compounds to the
species used by the air quality modeling for headspace vapor associated
with the nonroad mobile emissions sector.
     Expanded summary spreadsheet for point sources to add
total particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5)
emissions split into a filterable and condensable portion of
PM2.5 for each

facility. This spreadsheet does not include the other changes listed
above that affect point sources. Documentation is provided in the
spreadsheet on the location of the data used for computing the
condensable PM2.5 emissions in the 2005 point inventory.
    Additionally, EPA seeks comment on whether or not to revise
projected non-EGU emissions inventories for 2014 to reflect sulfur
dioxide (SO2) and PM2.5 reductions from the
proposed National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and
Process Heaters (75 FR 32006), hereafter referred to as the ``Major
Source Boiler Rule.'' The information included in the docket reflects
reductions that would be expected if the rule were finalized as
proposed. If the projected reductions associated with the final Major
Source Boiler Rule were to differ from the projected reductions
associated with the proposal, EPA would use the projections for the
final rule if they become available in time for use in EPA's modeling
for the final Transport Rule.
    In addition, EPA requests comment on the following modified
approaches to calculating emissions inventories that we intend to use
in the modeling for the final Transport Rule.
     EPA proposes to use the latest public release of the Motor
Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/
moves/index.htm) to estimate on-road mobile emissions data in 2005,
2012, and 2014 for all modeled pollutants and emissions processes in
all States, except California. Future-year vehicle miles traveled will
be revised from proposal to reflect the latest available data. This
approach differs from the proposal in the following significant ways:
(1) EPA will use a newer version of MOVES which has different emissions
values from the version of MOVES used for the proposal; (2) EPA will
use MOVES instead of the Mobile Source Emission Factor Model version
6.2 (MOBILE6) for diesel vehicles and motorcycles; (3) EPA will use
MOVES instead of MOBILE6 for additional pollutants, including
SO2, ammonia (NH3), and PM2.5 from
brake and tire wear; (4) the revised MOVES reflects NH3
decreases in future years that were not reflected by MOBILE6; and, (5)
EPA will use actual MOVES runs for 2012 and 2014 rather than scaling
2005 MOVES emissions. With the exception of these changes, EPA intends
to continue to apply MOVES using the same approaches described in the
Emission Inventory Technical Support Document released with the
Transport Rule proposal (http://www.epa.gov/airquality/transport/pdfs/
TR_Proposal_Emissions_TSD.pdf; Section 3.3.1). The revised approach
will be similar to the approach described in the Technical Support
Document for the proposed rule in the following key ways: (1) EPA will
allocate State-total MOVES results to counties by pollutant and process
using results from MOBILE6 and the National Mobile Inventory Model; and
(2) EPA will use MOVES defaults rather than State-specific or county-
specific MOVES inputs.
     EPA proposes to use the final projections from 2002 to
2005, 2012, and 2014 emissions for the category 3 commercial marine
sector to reflect the final category 3 commercial marine Emissions
Control Area proposal to the International Maritime Organization (EPA-
420-F-10-041, August 2010).
     EPA proposes to reduce the boundaries used to allocate
category 3 commercial marine emissions to States from 200 nautical
miles to reflect State waters (3-10 nautical miles) based on Mineral
Management Service State-federal boundary data consistent with
approaches used for the 2005 and 2008 National Emissions Inventories.
     EPA proposes to include the data revisions identified
above in the final Transport Rule, modified to address any comments
that EPA receives as part of the transport rulemaking effort. Changes
in the emissions data could impact the final rulemaking in a number of
ways including, but not limited to:
    1. Changing base year emissions and emissions projections could
impact which downwind areas have projected air quality concerns absent
this rulemaking (i.e., non-attainment or maintenance).
    2. Changing emissions projections could impact EPA assessment of
which States contribute to those problems.
    Between now and the time that EPA finalizes the Transport Rule,
additional information used to support the final transport rulemaking
may be placed in the docket. As noted above, EPA is requesting comment
only on the data and revisions explicitly identified in this document.
EPA requested comment on all aspects of its emissions inventories in
the proposed Transport Rule. The comment period for that proposal
closed on October 1, 2010. EPA has not yet reviewed all comments
received on the proposed Transport Rule and notes that emission
inventory data may be further revised based on comments received on the
proposed Transport Rule or on additional information that becomes
available before the rule is finalized.

    Dated: October 20, 2010.
Mary Henigin,
Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2010-27171 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


junk region species. orig facility species group 1 midatlantic non. RIS. forage salem non. ris. forage1 Non RIS forage 1 midatlantic non. ris. forage salem non. ris. forage1 Non RIS forage


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 112 (Friday, June 10, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37513]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13783]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0327]
RIN 1625-AA00

Special Local Regulations; Harborfest Dragon Boat Race, South
Haven, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulation on
the Black River in South Haven, Michigan for the Harborfest Dragonboat
Race on June 18 and 19, 2016. This action is necessary and intended to
ensure safety of life on navigable waters immediately prior to, during,
and after the Dragonboat race. During the aforementioned period, the
Coast Guard will enforce restrictions upon, and control movement of,
vessels in the special regulated area.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.903 will be enforced from 6 a.m.
until 7 p.m. on each day of June 18 and 19, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email CWO Mark Stevens, Prevention
Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414)
747-7188, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special
local regulation listed in 33 CFR 100.903 from 6 a.m. until 7 p.m. on
each day of June 18 and 19, 2016. This special local regulation
encompasses the waters of the Black River in South Haven, MI within the
following coordinates starting at 42[deg]24'13.6'' N., 086[deg]16'41''
W.; then southeast 42[deg]24'12.6'' N., 086[deg]16'40'' W.; then
northeast to 42[deg]24'19.2'' N., 086[deg]16'26.5'' W.; then northwest
to 42[deg]24'20.22'' N., 086[deg]16'27.4'' W.; then back to point of
origin (NAD 83). As specified in 33 CFR 100.903, no vessel may enter,
transit through, or anchor within the regulated area without the
permission of the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. Furthermore, the
regulations in Sec.  100.901 apply. Vessels desiring to transit the
regulated area may do so only with prior approval of the Patrol
Commander and when so directed by that officer. Vessels will be
operated at a no wake speed to reduce the wake to a minimum, and in a
manner which will not endanger participants in the event or any other
craft. The rules contained in the above two sentences shall not apply
to participants in the event or vessels of the patrol operating in the
performance of their assigned duties. The Patrol Commander may direct
the anchoring, mooring, or movement of any boat or vessel within the
regatta area. A succession of sharp, short signals by whistle or horn
from vessels patrolling the area under the direction of the U.S. Coast
Guard Patrol Commander shall serve as a signal to stop. Vessels so
signaled shall stop and shall comply with the orders of the Patrol
Commander. Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the area,
citation for failure to comply, or both.
    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR
165.903, Harborfest Dragon Boat Race; South Haven, MI, and 5 U.S.C.
552(a). In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide the maritime community with
advance notification for the enforcement of this regulation via
Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners. The Patrol
Commander may be contacted via Channel 16, VHF-FM.

    Dated: May 18, 2016.
A.B. Cocanour,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2016-13783 Filed 6-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 18, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 23120]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9380]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0258]

National Maritime Week Tugboat Races, Seattle, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the Special Local Regulation for
the annual National Maritime Week Tugboat Races in Elliott Bay, WA from
12 p.m. through 4:30 p.m. on May 12, 2012. This action is necessary to
ensure the safety of all participants and spectators from the inherent
dangers associated with these types of races which includes large
wakes. During the enforcement period, no person or vessel may enter or
remain in the regulated area except for participants in the event,
supporting personnel, vessels registered with the event organizer, and
personnel or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1306 will be enforced from 12 p.m.
through 4:30 p.m. on May 12, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Ensign Nathaniel P. Clinger, Sector Puget Sound Waterways
Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the Special
Local Regulation for the annual National Maritime Week Tugboat Races,
Seattle, WA in 33 CFR 100.1306 on May 12, 2012 from 12 p.m. through
4:30 p.m. This regulation can be found in the April 27, 1996 issue of
the Federal Register (61 FR 16710).
    A regulated area is established on that portion of Elliott Bay
along the Seattle waterfront in Puget Sound bounded by a line beginning
at: 47[deg]37'36'' N, 122[deg]22'42'' W; thence to 47[deg]37'24.5'' N,
122[deg]22'58.5'' W; thence to 47[deg]36'08'' N, 122[deg]20'53'' W;
thence to 47[deg]36'21'' N, 122[deg]20'31'' W; thence returning to the
origin. This regulated area resembles a rectangle measuring
approximately 3,900 yards along the shoreline between Pier 57 and Pier
89, and extending approximately 650 yards into Elliott Bay. Temporary
floating markers will be placed by the race sponsors to delineate the
regulated area. [Datum: NAD 1983]
    No person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area
except for participants in the event, supporting personnel, vessels
registered with the event organizer, and personnel or vessels
authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.
    The Coast Guard will establish a patrol consisting of active and
auxiliary Coast Guard vessels and personnel in the regulated area
described above. The patrol shall be under the direction of a Coast
Guard officer or petty officer designated by the Captain of the Port as
the Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The Patrol Commander may forbid and
control the movement of vessels in this regulated area.
    A succession of sharp, short blasts from whistle or horn from
vessels patrolling the area under the direction of the Patrol Commander
shall serve as a signal to stop. Vessels signaled shall stop and comply
with the orders of the patrol vessel. Failure to do so may result in
expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local
law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.1306 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a).
    If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need
not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, he may use
a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to enter the
regulated area.

    Dated: April 6, 2012.
S.J. Ferguson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2012-9380 Filed 4-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35367-35368]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14446]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14343-000]

Silt Water Conservancy District; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, Protests,
Recommendations, and Terms and Conditions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Conduit Exemption.
    b. Project No.: 14343-000.
    c. Date filed: January 5, 2012.
    d. Applicant: Silt Water Conservancy District.
    e. Name of Project: Harvey Gap 400 Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The proposed Harvey Gap 400 Project would be located
on the existing Grass Valley Canal irrigation pipeline in Garfield
County, Colorado. The applicant holds an easement for all land on which
the project structures will be located.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contacts: Dan Cokley, Schmueser Gordon Meyer, 118 W
6th Street, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601; Mr. Ryan Broshar, SRA
International, 12600 Colfax Ave. W., Lakewood, CO 80304, (303) 233-
1275.
    i. FERC Contact: Christopher Chaney,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Status of Environmental Analysis: This application is ready for
environmental analysis at this time, and the Commission is requesting
comments, reply comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and
prescriptions.
    k. Deadline for filing responsive documents: Due to the small size
of the proposed project, as well as the resource agency consultation
letters filed with the application, the 60-day timeframe specified in
18 CFR 4.34(b) for filing all comments, motions to intervene, protests,
recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions is shortened
to 30 days from the issuance date of this notice. All reply comments
filed in response to comments submitted by any resource agency, Indian
tribe, or person, must be filed with the Commission within 45 days from
the issuance date of this notice.
    Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. The Commission strongly
encourages electronic filings.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person on the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, it must also serve a
copy of the document on that resource agency.
    l. Description of Project: The Harvey Gap 400 Project would consist
of: (1) A proposed powerhouse containing one generating unit with an
installed capacity of between 400 and 875 kilowatts; and (2)
appurtenant facilities. The applicant estimates the project would have
an average annual generation of 2,600,000 kilowatt-hours.
    m. This filing is available for review and reproduction at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room, Room 2A, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number, P-14343, in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy
is also available for review and reproduction at the address in item h
above.
    n. Development Application--Any qualified applicant desiring to
file a competing application must submit to the Commission, on or
before the specified deadline date for the particular application, a
competing development application, or a notice of intent to file such
an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an
interested person to file the competing development application no
later than 120 days after the specified deadline date for the
particular application. Applications for preliminary permits will not
be accepted in response to this notice.
    o. Notice of Intent--A notice of intent must specify the exact
name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective
applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to
submit a competing development application. A notice of intent must be
served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice.
    p. Protests or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit a protest or
a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, and 385.214. In
determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will
consider all protests filed, but only those who file a motion to
intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party
to the proceeding. Any protests or motions to intervene must be
received on or before the specified deadline date for the particular
application.
    q. All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'', ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', ``NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE
COMPETING APPLICATION'', ``COMPETING APPLICATION'', ``COMMENTS'',
``REPLY COMMENTS,'' ``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or
``PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone

number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. Any of these documents must be
filed by providing the original and seven copies to: The Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of
Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Office of Energy Projects,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above address. A copy of
any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each
representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. A copy of all other filings in reference to this
application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    r. Waiver of Pre-filing Consultation: On August 29, 2011, the
applicant requested the agencies to support the waiver of the
Commission's consultation requirements under 18 CFR 4.38(c). On
September 1 and 23, and November 22 and 28, 2011, the Colorado Water
Quality Control Division, the Colorado Division of Water Resources, the
Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, respectively, concurred with this request. On September 15,
2011 the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) requested
additional information. The applicant provided the additional
information on November 22, 2011, and the SHPO provided additional
comments on December 6, 2011. No other comments regarding the request
for waiver were received. Therefore, we intend to accept the
consultation that has occurred on this project during the pre-filing
period and we intend to waive pre-filing consultation under section
4.38(c), which requires, among other things, conducting studies
requested by resource agencies, and distributing and consulting on a
draft exemption application.

    Dated: June 6, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-14446 Filed 6-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 62 (Tuesday, April 1, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18371-18375]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07195]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71812; File No. SR-EDGX-2014-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 12.6 To Conform to FINRA Rule 5320, BATS Rule 12.6 and BATS-Y Rule
12.6 Relating to Trading Ahead of Customer Orders

March 26, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 21, 2014, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposal to amend Rule
12.6, Customer Priority, to make it substantially similar to Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') Rule 5320, BATS
Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'') Rule 12.6 and BATS-Y Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'')
Rule 12.6. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Internet Web site at www.directedge.com, at the Exchange's
principal office, and at the Public Reference Room of the Commission.

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 self-regulatory organization
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 self-regulatory organization
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 12.6, which limits trading
ahead of customer orders by Members,\3\ to make the rule substantially
similar to FINRA Rule 5320,\4\ BATS Rule 12.6 and BYX Rule 12.6.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer, or any person associated with a registered broker or dealer,
that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange. A Member will
have the status of a ``member'' of the Exchange as that term is
defined in Section 3(a)(3) of the Act.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63895 (February 11,
2011), 76 FR 9386 (February 17, 2011) (SR-FINRA-2009-090).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70952 (November 27,
2013), 78 FR 72949 (December 4, 2013) (SR-BATS-2013-056) (order
approving proposal to amend BATS Rule 12.6); see also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 70951 (November 27, 2013), 78 FR 72944
(December 4, 2013) (SR-BYX-2013-036) (order approving proposal to
amend Rule 12.6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 31, 2014, Direct Edge Holdings LLC (``DE Holdings''),
the former parent company of the Exchange, completed its business
combination with BATS Global Markets, Inc., the parent company of BATS
and BYX.\6\ As part of its effort to reduce regulatory duplication and
relieve firms that are members of the Exchange, BATS, and BYX of
conflicting or unnecessary regulatory burdens, the Exchange is now
engaged in the process of reviewing and amending certain Exchange,
BATS, and BYX Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71449 (January 30,
2014), 79 FR 6961 (February 5, 2014) (SR-EDGX-2013-43). Upon
completion of the Combination, DE Holdings and BATS Global Markets,
Inc. each became intermediate holding companies, held under a single
new holding company. The new holding company, formerly named ``BATS
Global Markets Holdings, Inc.,'' changed its name to ``BATS Global
Markets, Inc.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act,\7\ the Exchange
and FINRA entered into an agreement to allocate regulatory
responsibility for common rules (the ``17d-2 Agreement''). The 17d-2
Agreement covers common members of the Exchange and FINRA and allocates
to FINRA regulatory responsibility, with respect to common members, for
the following: (i) examination of common members of the Exchange and
FINRA for compliance with federal securities laws, rules and
regulations and rules of the Exchange that the Exchange has certified
as identical or substantially similar to FINRA rules; (ii)
investigation of common members of EDGX and FINRA for violations of
federal securities laws, rules or regulations, or Exchange rules that
the Exchange has certified as identical or substantially identical to a
FINRA rule; and (iii) enforcement of compliance by common members with
the federal securities laws, rules and regulations, and the rules of
the Exchange that the Exchange has certified as identical or
substantially similar to FINRA rules.\8\ The 17d-2 Agreement included a
certification by the Exchange that states that the requirements
contained in certain Exchange rules are identical to, or substantially
similar to, certain FINRA rules that have been identified as
comparable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61698 (March 12,
2010), 75 FR 13151 (March 18, 2010) (approving File No. 10-196).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To conform to comparable FINRA rules for purposes of the 17d-2
Agreement, as well as BATS and BYX rules for purposes of its
harmonization efforts due to its business combination, the Exchange
proposes to amend Rule 12.6, Customer Priority, to align with FINRA
Rule 5320, BATS Rule 12.6, and BYX Rule 12.6.
    As with FINRA Rule 5320, BATS Rule 12.6 and BYX Rule 12.6, amended
Rule 12.6 would prohibit Members from trading ahead of customer orders,
subject to specified exceptions. The amended rule would include
exceptions for large orders and institutional accounts, proprietary
transactions effected by a trading unit of a Member with no knowledge
of customer orders held by another trading unit of the Member, riskless
principal transactions, intermarket sweep orders (``ISOs''), and odd
lot and bona fide error transactions, discussed in detail below.
Amended Rule 12.6 would also provide the same guidance as FINRA Rule
5320, BATS Rule 12.6 and BYX Rule 12.6, on minimum price improvement
standards, order handling procedures, and trading outside normal market
hours.
Background
    Current Rule 12.6, the customer order protection rule, generally
prohibits Members from trading on a proprietary basis ahead of, or
along with, customer orders that are executable at the same price as
the proprietary order. The rule contains several exceptions that make
it permissible for a Member to enter a proprietary order while
representing a customer order that could be executed at the same price,
including permitting transactions for the purposes of facilitating the
execution, on a riskless principal basis, of one or more customer
orders.
Proposal to Adopt Text of FINRA Rule 5320, BATS Rule 12.6 and BYX Rule
12.6
    To harmonize its rules with FINRA, BATS, and BYX, the Exchange
proposes to delete the current text of Rule 12.6 and its supplementary
material and adopt the text and supplementary material of FINRA Rule
5320, with certain technical changes, as Rule 12.6. The proposed text
of proposed Rule 12.6 would be identical to the text of BATS Rule 12.6
and BYX Rule 12.6. FINRA Rule 5320, BATS Rule 12.6, and BYX Rule 12.6
generally provide that a member that accepts and holds an order in an
equity security from its own customer, or a customer of another broker-
dealer, without immediately executing the order is prohibited from
trading that security on the same side of the market for its own
account at a price that would satisfy the customer order, unless it
immediately thereafter executes the customer order up to the size and
at the same or better price at which it traded for its own account.
Exceptions
    Amended Rule 12.6 would include exceptions to the prohibition
against trading ahead of customer orders. That is, a Member that meets
the conditions of an exception would be permitted to trade a security
on the same side of the market for its own account at a price that
would satisfy a customer order in certain circumstances. The exceptions
are set out below.
Large Orders and Institutional Accounts
    One exception would permit a Member to negotiate terms and
conditions with respect to the acceptance of certain large-sized orders
(orders of 10,000 shares or more unless such orders are less than
$100,000 in value) or orders from institutional accounts. The term
``institutional account'' will be defined in accordance with FINRA Rule
4512(c) and Interpretation and Policy .01 under both BATS and BYX Rules
12.6. That is, an institutional account will be defined as the account
of: (1) A bank, savings and loan association, insurance company or
registered investment company; (2) an investment adviser registered
either with the SEC under Section 203 of the Investment Advisers Act or
with a state securities commission (or any agency or office performing
like functions); or (3) any other person (whether a natural person,
corporation, partnership, trust or otherwise) with total assets of at
least $50 million. This exception would require the Member to provide
clear and comprehensive written disclosure to

each customer at account opening and annually thereafter that: (a)
States that the Member may trade proprietarily at prices that would
satisfy the customer order, and (b) provides the customer with a
meaningful opportunity to opt in to the Rule 12.6 protections with
respect to all or any portion of its order. If a customer does not opt
in to the protections with respect to all or any portion of its order,
the Member may reasonably conclude that such customer has consented to
the Member trading a security on the same side of the market for its
own account at a price that would satisfy the customer's order.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A customer would retain the right to withdraw consent at any
time. Therefore, a Member's reasonable conclusion that a customer
has consented to the Member trading along with such customer's order
is subject to further instruction and modification from the
customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In lieu of providing written disclosure to customers at account
opening and annually thereafter, the proposed rule would permit Members
to provide clear and comprehensive oral disclosure to, and obtain
consent from, a customer on an order-by-order basis. The Member would
be required to document who provided such consent and that such consent
evidences the customer's understanding of the terms and conditions of
the order. If a customer opted in to the Rule 12.6 protections, a
Member could still obtain consent on an order-by-order basis to trade
ahead of or along with an order from that customer, provided that the
Member documented who provided such consent and that such consent
evidenced the customer's understanding of the terms and conditions of
the order.
No-Knowledge Exception
    The Exchange is also proposing to include in Interpretation and
Policy .02 a ``no-knowledge'' exception to its customer order
protection rule. The proposed exception would allow one trading unit of
a Member to trade in a proprietary capacity and at prices that would
satisfy customer orders held by another, separate trading unit of the
Member. The No-Knowledge Exception would be applicable with respect to
NMS stocks, as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the Act.
    To avail itself of the No-Knowledge Exception, a Member would be
required to meet certain conditions. First, it would have to implement
and utilize an effective system of internal controls (such as
appropriate information barriers) that operate to prevent the
proprietary trading unit from obtaining knowledge of the customer
orders held by a separate trading unit. As proposed, Interpretation and
Policy .02 will make clear that appropriate information barriers must,
at a minimum, comply with the Exchange's existing requirements
regarding the prevention of the misuse of material, non-public
information, which are set forth in Exchange Rule 5.5. Second, the
Member would have to provide, at account opening and annually
thereafter, a written description of how it handles customer orders and
the circumstances under which it may trade proprietarily, including in
a market-making capacity, at prices that would satisfy the customer
order. A Member must maintain records indicating which orders rely on
the no-knowledge exception and produce these records to the Exchange
upon request. The onus will be on the Member to produce sufficient
documentation justifying reliance on the No-Knowledge exception for any
given trade. To ensure clarity and transparency regarding this
exception and others, the Exchange will be issuing a regulatory notice
informing Members of these proposed rule changes. The Exchange will
include in the regulatory notice the effective date for the rule as
amended, which shall be at least 30 days after the effectiveness of the
amendments to Rule 12.6 in order to allow Members to make any necessary
changes to their internal policies or processes.
Riskless Principal Exception
    Amended Rule 12.6 would not apply to a proprietary trade made by
the Member to facilitate the execution, on a riskless principal basis,
of another order from a customer (whether its own customer or the
customer of another broker-dealer). To take advantage of this
exception, the Member would have to: (a) Submit a report,
contemporaneously with the execution of the facilitated order,
identifying the trade as riskless principal to the Exchange, and (b)
have written policies and procedures to ensure that riskless principal
transactions relied upon for this exception comply with applicable
Exchange rules. At a minimum, these policies and procedures would have
to require: (1) receipt of the customer order before execution of the
offsetting principal transaction, and (2) execution of the offsetting
principal transaction at the same price as the customer order,
exclusive of any markup or markdown, commission equivalent, or other
fee and allocation to a riskless principal or customer account in a
consistent manner and within 60 seconds of execution.
    Members would have to have supervisory systems in place that
produce records that enable the Member and the Exchange to reconstruct
accurately, readily, and in a time-sequenced manner all orders on which
the Member relies in claiming this exception.
ISO Exception
    The proposed rule change would also exempt a Member from the
obligation to execute a customer order in a manner consistent with Rule
12.6 with regard to trading for its own account when the Member routed
an ISO in compliance with Rule 600(b)(30)(ii) of Regulation NMS if the
customer order is received after the Member routed the ISO. If a Member
routes an ISO to facilitate a customer order, and that customer has
consented to not receiving the better prices obtained by the ISO, the
Member would also be exempt with respect to any trading for its own
account that is the result of the ISO as it pertains to the consenting
customer's order.
Odd Lot and Bona Fide Error Exception
    The Exchange proposes to except a Member's proprietary trade that:
(1) To offset a customer order that is an amount less than a normal
unit of trading (i.e., an order less than one round lot, which is
typically 100 shares), or (2) corrects a bona fide error. With respect
to bona fide errors, the Member would be required to demonstrate and
document the basis upon which a transaction meets the bona fide error
exception. For purposes of this proposed Rule, the Exchange will adopt
the definition of ``bona fide error'' found in Regulation NMS's
exemption for error correction transactions.\10\ Thus, a bona fide
error is:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55884 (June 8, 2007),
72 FR 32926, 32927 (June 14, 2007) (Order Exempting Certain Error
Correction Transactions from Rule 611 of Regulation NMS under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934).

    (i) The inaccurate conveyance or execution of any term of an
order including, but not limited to, price, number of shares or
other unit of trading; identification of the security;
identification of the account for which securities are purchased or
sold; lost or otherwise misplaced order tickets; short sales that
were instead sold long or vice versa; or the execution of an order
on the wrong side of a market; (ii) the unauthorized or unintended
purchase sale or allocation of securities or the failure to follow
specific client instructions; (iii) the incorrect entry of data into
relevant systems, including reliance on incorrect cash positions,
withdrawals, or securities positions reflected in an account; or
(iv) a delay, outage, or failure of a communication system used to
transmit market data prices or to facilitate the delivery or
execution of an order.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.

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

Minimum Price Improvement Standards
    The proposed rule change establishes the minimum amount of price
improvement necessary for a Member to execute an order on a proprietary
basis when holding an unexecuted limit order in that same security
without being required to execute the held limit order.
    In addition, if the minimum price improvement standards set forth
in proposed Interpretation and Policy .06, paragraphs (a) through (g)
would trigger the protection of a pending customer limit order, any
better-priced customer limit order(s) must also be protected under this
Rule, even if those better-priced limit orders would not be directly
triggered under these minimum price improvement standards.
Order Handling Procedures
    The proposed rule change provides that a Member must make every
effort to execute a marketable customer order that it receives fully
and promptly. A Member holding a marketable customer order that has not
been immediately executed would have to make every effort to cross such
order with any other order received by the Member on the other side of
the market, up to the size of such order at a price that is no less
than the best bid and no greater than the best offer at the time that
the subsequent order is received by the Member and that is consistent
with the terms of the orders. If a Member were holding multiple orders
on both sides of the market that have not been executed, the Member
would have to make every effort to cross or otherwise execute such
orders in a manner reasonable and consistent with the objectives of the
proposed Rule and with the terms of the orders. A Member could satisfy
the crossing requirement by contemporaneously buying from the seller
and selling to the buyer at the same price.
Trading Outside Normal Market Hours
    Under the proposed amendments to Rule 12.6, a Member generally
could limit the life of a customer order to the period of normal market
hours of 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. However, if the customer
and Member agreed to the processing of the customer's order outside
normal market hours, the protections of amended Rule 12.6 would apply
to that customer's order at all times the customer order is executable
by the Member.
Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \13\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that
amending the rule to conform to FINRA Rule 5320, BATS Rule 12.6 and BYX
Rule 12.6 will contribute to investor protection by defining important
parameters by which Members must abide when trading proprietarily while
holding customer limit and market orders, and foster cooperation by
harmonizing requirements across self-regulatory organizations. The
Exchange also believes that including this rule will reinforce the
importance of and ensure that Members are aware of these requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Members who are also members of FINRA, BATS, or BYX are subject to
different regulatory standards when seeking to comply with applicable
rules regarding customer protection. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change will provide greater harmonization between similar
Exchange and FINRA, BATS, and BYX rules, resulting in greater
uniformity and, less burdensome and more efficient regulatory
compliance for common members. As such, the proposed rule change would
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities and would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, the Exchange
believes that the proposal enhances cooperation among markets and other
trading venues to promote fair and orderly markets and to protect the
interests of the public and of investors. Specifically, by aligning the
Exchange's customer protection rules with those of FINRA, BATS, BYX and
other exchanges,\14\ the proposed rule change will reduce the
complexity of the customer order protection rules for those Members
that are also subject to the customer order protection rules of FINRA
and other exchanges. As a result, the proposed rule will help assure
the protection of customer orders without imposing undue regulatory
costs on industry participants. In addition, the proposed rule change
is not designed to address any competitive issues but rather is
designed to provide greater harmonization among similar Exchange and
FINRA rules, resulting in less burdensome and more efficient regulatory
compliance for common members and facilitating FINRA's performance of
its regulatory functions under the 17d-2 Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64418 (May
6, 2011), 76 FR 27735 (May 12, 2011) (SR-CHX-2011-08) (notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change of
Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. to adopt customer order protection
language consistent with FINRA Rule 5320); Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 65165 (August 18, 2011), 76 FR 53009 (August 24, 2011)
(SR-NYSEAmex-2011-59) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness
of proposed rule change of NYSE Amex LLC (now known as NYSE MKT LLC)
to adopt customer order protection language that is substantially
the same as FINRA Rule 5320); and Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 65166 (August 18, 2011), 76 FR 53012 (August 24, 2011) (SR-
NYSEArca-2011-57) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of
proposed rule change of NYSE Arca, Inc. to adopt customer order
protection language that is substantially the same as FINRA Rule
5320).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

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

    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.

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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-EDGX-2014-008 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-EDGX-2014-008. 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 Web site (http://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 Web site 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
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGX-2014-008 and should be
submitted on or before April 22, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-07195 Filed 3-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P