[Federal Register: November 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 219)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 66747-66750]
[DOCID:fr12no08-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0667; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-009-AD;
Amendment 39-15717; AD 2008-22-20]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330-200, A330-300, and
A340-300 Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    During fatigue tests (EF3) on the A340-600, damages were found
in longitudinal doubler at VTP [vertical tail plane] attachment
cutout between Frame (FR) 80 and FR86. This damage occurred between
58341 and 72891 simulated Flight Cycles (FC).
    Due to the higher Design Service Goal and different design
(e.g., doubler thickness) [of the] A330-200/-300 and A340-300
aircraft series, the damage assessment concluded [there was]
potential impact on [the airplanes specified in the] applicability.
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is crack propagation in the VTP attachment cutout,
which could reduce airplane structural integrity in the tail section.
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 17, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 17,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on June 24, 2008 (73 FR
35603). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    During fatigue tests (EF3) on the A340-600, damages were found
in longitudinal doubler at VTP [vertical tail plane] attachment
cutout between Frame (FR) 80 and FR86. This damage occurred between
58341 and 72891 simulated Flight Cycles (FC).
    Due to the higher Design Service Goal and different design
(e.g., doubler thickness) [of the] A330-200/-300 and A340-300
aircraft series, the damage assessment concluded [there was]
potential impact on [the airplanes specified in the] applicability.
    [T]o allow early detection of cracks, which could [prevent]
possible crack propagation and consequently to maintain the
structural integrity of the upper shell structure between FR80 and
FR86, this Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandates an inspection
program [for cracking] of this area using a high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) method, and a modification to improve the upper shell
structure.

The unsafe condition is crack propagation in the VTP attachment cutout,
which could reduce airplane structural integrity in the tail section.
Corrective actions include doing eddy current inspections for cracking
of certain fastener rows, and contacting Airbus for repair instructions
and repairing. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI
in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received.

Request To Allow Flight With Cracks

    Northwest Airlines (NWA) requests that we reconsider eliminating
the provision for flight with certain cracks. NWA states that the MCAI
and Airbus service bulletins (that were referenced in the NPRM as
appropriate sources of service information) provide for flight with
certain cracks if follow-on inspections are accomplished in accordance
with the service bulletin.
    We do not concur. Our policy specifies the requirement to repair
known cracks before further flight (though we may make exceptions to
this policy in certain cases of unusual need, as discussed below). This
policy is based on the fact that such damaged airplanes do not conform
to the FAA-certificated type design and, therefore, are not airworthy
until a properly approved repair is made. While recognizing that repair
deferrals might be necessary at times, our policy is intended to
minimize adverse human factors relating to the lack of reliability of
long-term repetitive inspections, which might reduce the safety of the
type-certificated design if such repair deferrals are practiced
routinely.
    As noted above, we may make an exception to this policy in certain
cases, if there is an unusual need for a temporary deferral. Unusual
needs include such circumstances as legitimate difficulty in acquiring
parts to accomplish repairs. Under such conditions, we may allow a
temporary deferral of the repair, subject to a stringent inspection
program acceptable to the FAA. We acknowledge that the manufacturer has
specified inspection intervals that are intended to allow continued
operation with known cracks, and to prevent the need for extensive
repairs. However, since we are not aware of any unusual need for repair
deferral in regard to this AD, we have not evaluated these inspection
intervals.
    Under the provisions of paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, we will
consider requests for approval of an AMOC if sufficient data are
submitted to substantiate that temporary deferral of repair with
follow-on inspections would provide an acceptable level of safety. We
have not changed the AD in this regard.

Actions Since NPRM Was Issued

    Airbus has issued revisions to two service bulletins referenced in
the NPRM as appropriate sources of service information. Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletins A330-53-3168 and A340-53-4174, both
Revision 01, both dated February 15, 2008, are essentially the same as
the original versions of those service bulletins except for
clarifications, and no additional work is required for airplanes
modified per the original issue. We have changed the references in
paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2)(i), and (h) of this AD to include Revision 01
of those service bulletins, and added paragraph (f)(4) to this AD to
give credit for actions performed according to the original issues.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a Note within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 26 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 202 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average
labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $19,020
per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs
that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the
U.S. operators to be $914,680, or $35,180 per product.

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.
    We are 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

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 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 AD:

2008-22-20 Airbus: Amendment 39-15717. Docket No. FAA-2008-0667;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-009-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective December
17, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-200, A330-300, and
A340-300 series airplanes; certificated in any category; all
certified models, all serial numbers; on which Airbus Modification
44205 has been embodied in production, except those on which Airbus
Modification 52974 or 53223 has been embodied in production.

Subject

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

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    During fatigue tests (EF3) on the A340-600, damages were found
in longitudinal doubler at VTP [vertical tail plane] attachment
cutout between Frame (FR) 80 and FR86. This damage occurred between
58341 and 72891 simulated Flight Cycles (FC).
    Due to the higher Design Service Goal and different design
(e.g., doubler thickness) [of the] A330-200/-300 and A340-300
aircraft series, the damage assessment concluded [there was]
potential impact on [the airplanes specified in the] applicability.
    [T]o allow early detection of cracks, which could [prevent]
possible crack propagation and consequently to maintain the
structural integrity of the upper shell structure between FR80 and
FR86, this Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandates an inspection
program [for cracking] of this area using a high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) method, and a modification to improve the upper shell
structure.

The unsafe condition is crack propagation in the VTP attachment
cutout, which could reduce airplane structural integrity in the tail
section. Corrective actions include doing eddy current inspections
for cracking of certain fastener rows, and contacting Airbus for
repair instructions and repairing.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For Airbus Model A330-300 and A340-300 series airplanes,
except Model A340-300 weight variant (WV) 027 airplanes: At the
applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD,
perform a HFEC inspection of the upper shell structure between FR80
and FR86, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-3168 or A340-53-4174, both
Revision 01, both dated February 15, 2008, as applicable.
    (i) If no crack is detected, repeat the inspection thereafter
within the intervals specified in paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-3168 or A340-53-4174, both
Revision 01, both dated February 15, 2008, as applicable.
    (ii) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by
this AD: Before next flight, contact Airbus for repair instructions
and do applicable repairs.
    (iii) Doing the modification of the upper shell structure in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3159 or A340-53-
4165, both dated September 19, 2007, as applicable, ends the
inspections required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
    (2) Do the actions required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD at
the later of the compliance times specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i)
and (f)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Within the compliance times specified in paragraph 1.E.(2)
of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-3168 or A340-53-4174,
both Revision 01, both dated February 15, 2008, as applicable.
    (ii) Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) At the applicable time specified in paragraphs (f)(3)(i),
(f)(3)(ii), and (f)(3)(iii) of this AD or within 3 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, modify the upper
shell structure between FR80 and FR86 (including doing eddy current
inspections for cracking of certain fastener rows and applicable
corrective actions) in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-3160,
dated July 9, 2007; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-
4172, dated July 10, 2007; as applicable. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight.
    (i) For Model A330-200 airplanes, WV 020 through WV 027: Prior
to the accumulation of 13,500 total flight cycles.
    (ii) For Model A330-200 airplanes, WV 050 through WV 055: Prior
to the accumulation of 10,700 total flight cycles or 59,300 total
flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (iii) For Model A340-300 airplanes, WV 027: Prior to the
accumulation of 14,200 total flight cycles.
    (4) Inspections accomplished before the effective date of this
AD according to Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletins A330-53-3168 and
A340-53-4174, both dated September 19, 2007, as applicable, are
considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions
specified in this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: Although the MCAI allows further flight after cracks are
found during compliance with the required action, this AD requires
that you repair the crack(s) before further flight.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested, using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2007-0284, dated November 12, 2007, and the service
bulletins specified in Table 1 of this AD, for related information.

                                          Table 1--Service Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Airbus service information                      Revision                               Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-     Original...........................  July 9, 2007.
 3160.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-     01.................................  February 15, 2008.
 3168.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-     Original...........................  July 10, 2007.
 4172.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-     01.................................  February 15, 2008.
 4174.
Service Bulletin A330-53-3159.........  Original...........................  September 19, 2007.

Service Bulletin A340-53-4165.........  Original...........................  September 19, 2007.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the service information specified in Table 2 of
this AD to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD
specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France;
telephone +33 5 61 93 33 33; Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_
federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

                                   Table 2--Material Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Airbus service information                      Revision                               Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-     Original...........................  July 9, 2007.
 3160.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-53-     01.................................  February 15, 2008.
 3168.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-     Original...........................  July 10, 2007.
 4172.
Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-     01.................................  February 15, 2008.
 4174.
Service Bulletin A330-53-3159.........  Original...........................  September 19, 2007.
Service Bulletin A340-53-4165.........  Original...........................  September 19, 2007.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 20, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-25787 Filed 11-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


North Carolina Recommendation for Catawba County The purpose of this paper is to discuss the rationale for recommending the metropolitan planning boundary in Catawba County, along with parts of Alexander, Burke, and Caldwell, rather than the entire Metropolitan Statistical Area as nonattainment for the 8 hour ozone standard.

  This area has a marginal 8 hour ozone problem, with the 2000 2002 design values being 0.086 ppm at the Lenoir site ( Caldwell County) and 0.091 ppm at the Taylorsville site. The 2001 2003 design values are 0.084 for the Lenoir site and 0.088 ppm for the Taylorsville site.   A back trajectory wind analysis suggests that these sites are impacted by transport from the west and northwest, and that pollution comes over the mountains and mixes down into the valleys where the monitors are located. There are also a number of days when both Charlotte and the Triad are having impacts on these sites. For these reasons, we recommend a smaller area than the full MSA.   Catawba County has a population of 141,685. The MPO Planning boundary captures 257,572 people, of the total 341,851 people living in the four county MSA, or 75 percent of the population represented in the MPO Planning boundary.   Catawba County has 121.62 tons per day of NOx ( state total is 2529 tons per day) and the county has 55.09 tons per day of VOC ( state total is 1842 tons per day). The majority of the NOx emissions in Catawba County are from the Marshall Steam Station, which is subject to the NOx SIP Call and the Clean Smokestacks Act. The NOx emissions from this source will be reduced from about 95 tons per day in 1997 to about 48 tons per day in 2007. In addition, the mobile emissions ( 15.48 tons per day of NOx in 1997) will be reduced by Federal and State control programs.   Based on the most recent modeling analysis, North Carolina expects this region to attain by 2007.   In conclusion, the parts of Catawba County that are not included in the proposed designation are fairly rural ( typical population density is 100 250 persons per square mile). Given the impact of transported pollutants on the MPO area, the proposed area to be designated nonattainment will benefit from pollution controls in downwind areas. Emissions sources in Catawba County will be controlled by the NOx SIP Call, Clean Smokestacks Act, Federal motor vehicle control program and the State I/ M program. Current modeling leads North Carolina to believe the entire MPO area will attain by 2007.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 120 (Friday, June 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28701-28702]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13145]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Regulations 14D and 14E, Schedule 14D-9. SEC File No. 270-114,
OMB Control No. 3235-0102.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Regulation 14D (17 CFR 240.14d-1-240.14d-11) and Regulation 14E (17
CFR 240.14e-1-240.14f-1) and related Schedule 14D-9 (17 CFR 240.14d-
101) require information important to security holders in deciding how
to respond to tender offers. This information is made available to the
public. Information provided on Schedule 14D-9 is mandatory. Schedule
14D-9 takes approximately 260.56 hours per response to prepare and is
filed by 169 companies annually. We estimate that 25% of the 260.56
hours per response (65.14 hours) is prepared by the company for an
annual reporting burden of 11,009 hours (65.14 hours per response x 169
responses).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following Web site, www.reginfo.gov .
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503,

or by sending an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Pamela
Dyson, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange
Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549 or send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be
submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: June 19, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-13145 Filed 6-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69509-69511]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27631]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70865; File No. SR-BATS-2013-057]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the BATS Competitive Liquidity Provider Program

November 13, 2013.
    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 November 12, 2013, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BATS'') 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 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Interpretation and Policy
.02 to Rule 11.8, entitled ``Competitive Liquidity Provider Program.''
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    On August 30, 2011, the Exchange received approval of rules
applicable to the qualification, listing and delisting of securities of
issuers on the Exchange.\3\ More recently, the Exchange received
approval to operate a program that is designed to incentivize certain
market makers registered with the Exchange as Competitive Liquidity
Providers (``CLPs'') to enhance liquidity on the Exchange in Exchange-
listed securities (the ``Competitive Liquidity Provider Program'' or
``CLP Program'').\4\ The Exchange subsequently adopted financial
incentives for the CLP Program\5\ and thereafter amended certain of the
financial incentives and criteria for the CLP Program.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65225 (August 30,
2011), 76 FR 55148 (September 6, 2011) (SR-BATS-2011-018).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66307 (February 2,
2012), 77 FR 6608 (February 8, 2012) (SR-BATS-2011-051).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66427 (February 21,
2012), 77 FR 11608 (February 27, 2012) (SR-BATS-2012-011).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67854 (September
13, 2012), 77 FR 58198 (September 19, 2012) (SR-BATS-2012-036) and
69190 (March 20 2013), 78 FR 18384 (March 26, 2013) (SR-BATS-2013-
005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of this filing is to modify Interpretation and Policy
.02 of Rule 11.8 regarding certain details around the implementation of
the CLP Program. Specifically, effective December 1, 2013, the Exchange
proposes to: (1) Award up to three CLPs, or more in the case of a tie,
at each size event test (``SET'') with credits (``SET Credits'') based
on their rank in aggregate size at the NBB or NBO at the time of the
SET; (2) base the allocation of daily financial rewards on the number
of SET Credits awarded to CLPs; (3) change the allocation of the daily
financial rewards to a set dollar value per CLP in each class of
security; and (4) make certain cleanup and clarifying changes to
Interpretation and Policy .02 to Rule 11.8.

Increasing Winning SETs and Awarding SET Credits

    The Exchange is proposing to award Winning Bid SETs\7\ and Winning
Offer SETs\8\ (collectively, ``Winning SETs'') along with SET Credits
to at least three CLPs each for the bid (``Bid SET Credits'') and offer
(``Offer SET Credits'') based on a CLP's rank in aggregate size at the
NBB or NBO at the time of a SET. Currently, only the CLP with the
greatest aggregate size at the NBB and the CLP with the greatest
aggregate size at the NBO at the time of a SET are considered to have a
Winning Bid SET and a Winning Offer SET, respectively.

CLPs are not currently awarded SET Credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As defined in Interpretation and Policy .02 (g)(1) to BATS
Rule 11.8.
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to amend Interpretation and Policy
.02(g)(1) to Rule 11.8 such that the three CLPs with the greatest
aggregate size at the NBB and the three CLPs with the greatest
aggregate size at the NBO at the time of each SET will be considered to
have a Winning SET. Where there is a tie, all CLPs with the same
aggregate size at the NBB (NBO) will be considered to have a Winning
Bid (Offer) SET if there are two or less CLPs that have greater
aggregate size at the NBB (NBO). Additionally, all CLPs with a Winning
SET will be awarded SET Credits based on the following: all CLPs with
the greatest aggregate size at the NBB or NBO will receive three SET
Credits; all CLPs with the second greatest aggregate size at the NBB or
NBO will receive two SET Credits; and all CLPs with the third greatest
aggregate size at the NBB will receive one SET Credit.
    For example:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           CLP                             Shares at NBB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLP1....................................................           1,000
CLP2....................................................             900
CLP3....................................................             800
CLP4....................................................             800
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here, all four CLPs will have a Winning Bid SET because CLP1 and
CLP2 are both two of the top three CLPs with the greatest aggregate
size at the NBB, while CLP3 and CLP4 are tied at 800 shares and there
are only two CLPs that have greater aggregate size at the NBB than 800
shares. CLP1 would receive three Bid SET Credits, CLP2 would receive
two Bid SET Credits, and CLP3 and CLP4 would each receive one Bid SET
Credit.
    However, if CLP3 had 900 shares at the NBB and all other CLPs
remained the same, only CLP1, CLP2, and CLP3 would have a Winning SET
because CLP2 and CLP3 would be tied and there is only one CLP that has
greater aggregate size than 900 shares (CLP1). CLP4 would have the
fourth greatest aggregate size at the NBB among CLPs and thus would not
qualify for a Winning SET. In this instance, CLP1 would receive three
Bid SET Credits, CLP2 and CLP3 would each receive two Bid SET Credits,
and CLP4 would not receive any Bid SET Credits.
    Finally, if CLP1, CLP2, CLP3, and CLP4 all had 1,000 shares at the
NBB, the four CLPs would each receive three Bid SET Credits. In this
scenario, if another CLP (``CLP5'') had 900 shares at the NBB, CLP5
would not qualify for a Winning SET and would not receive any Bid SET
Credits because more than two CLPs have greater aggregate size at the
NBB than the 900 shares posted by CLP5.
    The above examples would operate in an identical fashion for the
NBO.

Determining the Recipients of the Daily Financial Rewards

    The Exchange is also proposing to amend its Rules in order to base
the allocation of daily financial rewards associated with the CLP
Program on SET Credits instead of Winning SETs. Currently, the daily
financial reward for Tier I securities \9\ and ETPs \10\ is awarded to
the two CLPs with the most Winning Bid SETs and the two CLPs with the
most Winning Offer SETs. For Tier II securities,\11\ the daily
financial reward is awarded to the CLP with the most Winning Bid SETS
and the CLP with the most Winning Offer SETs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ As defined in BATS Rule 14.8.
    \10\ As defined in Interpretation and Policy .02(d)(2) of BATS
Rule 11.8.
    \11\ As defined in BATS Rule 14.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend Interpretation and Policy .02 (k)(1)
of BATS Rule 11.8 to provide that the daily financial reward for all
securities participating in the Program will be based on SET Credits.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes that the daily financial reward for
Tier I securities and ETPs be awarded to the two CLPs with the most Bid
SET Credits and the two CLPs with the most Offer SET Credits and for
the daily financial reward for Tier II securities to be awarded to the
CLP with the most Bid Set Credits and the CLP with the most Offer SET
Credits. The Exchange notes that it is not proposing to change the
daily quoting requirement that a CLP have Winning Bid SETs or Winning
Offer SETs equal to at least 10% of the total Bid SETs or total Offer
SETs in a security in order to be eligible for the daily financial
reward.

Allocating the Daily Financial Rewards

    The Exchange also proposes to change the allocation of the daily
financial rewards to a specified amount per CLP in each class of
security. Currently, the daily financial rewards for Tier I securities
and ETPs are allocated to the two CLPs with the most Winning Bid SETs
and the two CLPs with the most Winning Offer SETs on a pro rata basis,
based on the combined sum of the two CLPs' Winning SETs. The financial
rewards for Tier II securities are allocated to the single CLP with the
most Winning Bid SETs and the single CLP with the most Winning Offer
SETs.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Interpretation and Policy .02 (k)(1)
of BATS Rule 11.8 in order to allocate the daily financial rewards to
CLPs on a pre-determined basis rather than on a pro rata basis.
Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to allocate the daily financial
rewards as follows: (i) For the six months after initial listing on the
Exchange in Tier I securities, the CLPs with the most and second most
SET Credits will receive $150 and $100, respectively, for both the bid
and the offer; and (ii) for Tier I securities that have been listed on
the Exchange for more than six months and for ETPs, the CLPs with the
most and second most SET Credits will receive $75 and $50,
respectively, for both the bid and the offer. For Tier II securities,
the CLP with the most SET Credits will continue to receive 100% of the
daily financial reward for both the bid and the offer.

Cleanup Changes

    The Exchange also proposes to make several cleanup and clarifying
changes to Interpretation and Policy .02 of BATS Rule 11.8. These
changes include the following: (i) adding ``the time of'' between
``aggregate size at the NBB at'' and ``each SET'' to paragraph (g)(1);
(ii) adding ``the time of'' between ``aggregate size at the NBO at''
and ``each SET'' to paragraph (g)(1); (iii) adding the word ``to''
between the words ``order'' and ``meet'' in paragraph (g)(1)(A); (iv)
to capitalize the ``b'' in each instance of ``bid SET'' that is not
capitalized in paragraph (k)(1); and (v) to capitalize the ``o'' in
each instance of ``offer SET'' that is not capitalized in paragraph
(k)(1).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\12\ In particular,
the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ because
it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system. The Exchange also believes that the
combination of fixed financial rewards (rather than awarding financial
rewards on a pro rata basis) and awarding SET Credits to three CLPs per
SET for the bid and offer will promote tighter spreads and deeper
liquidity for all market participants by incentivizing multiple CLPs to
quote at the NBBO. More

specifically, the Exchange believes that implementing fixed financial
rewards will incentivize additional CLPs to continue to provide
liquidity even where one CLP is winning the majority of SETs, while
awarding three CLPs with SET Credits for each SET will incentivize
multiple CLPs to add liquidity at or inside the NBBO even if another
CLP consistently has greater liquidity at the NBBO than the other CLP.
The Exchange believes that this will foster greater competition and
participation among CLPs which, as outlined above, will enhance market
quality to the benefit of all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\14\ in that it provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges,
and is not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes are reasonable and equitably allocated because, while
the proposal does lower the potential high-end of the daily financial
reward available to the CLP with the most SET Credits, it will
incentivize additional CLPs to continue to provide liquidity even where
one CLP is winning the majority of SETs, which, as described above,
will foster greater competition among CLPs and enhance market quality
to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange also believes
that the proposal is not unfairly discriminatory because registration
as a market maker and, in turn, a CLP, is equally available to all
Members that satisfy the requirements of Rule 11.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

(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. The Exchange believes that the
proposal will merely improve the incentives and, in turn, the results,
of its CLP Program. The Exchange believes that the proposed changes
will enhance competition amongst participants in the CLP Program.

(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

    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 for 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 \15\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay so that the proposal may become operative on December
1, 2013. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest. Doing so will allow the Exchange to promptly implement the
proposed amendments to the CLP Program, which amendments the Exchange
believes will benefit both CLPs and market participants generally by
incentivizing CLPs to provide tighter spreads and deeper liquidity, as
well as by providing additional clarity around existing Exchange rules.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and
designates the proposal operative upon filing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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 proposal 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 No. SR-BATS-2013-057 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BATS-2013-057. 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 changes 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 such filing will also 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 No. SR-BATS-2013-057 and should be
submitted on or before December 10, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27631 Filed 11-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 149 (Monday, August 3, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46766-46767]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16804]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89416; File No. SR-CTA/CQ-2020-01]

Consolidated Tape Association; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of the Thirty-Fourth Substantive Amendment to the Second
Restatement of the CTA Plan and Twenty-Fifth Substantive Amendment to
the Restated CQ Plan

July 29, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 608 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 29, 2020,\3\ the Participants \4\ in the Second Restatement of
the Consolidated Tape Association (``CTA'') Plan and the Restated
Consolidated Quotation (``CQ'') Plan (``CTA/CQ Plans'' or ``Plans'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposal to amend the Plans. The amendments represent the Thirty-Fourth
Substantive Amendment to the CTA Plan and Twenty-Fifth Substantive
Amendment to the CQ Plan (``Amendments''). Under the Amendments, the
Participants propose to add MEMX LLC (``MEMX'') as a Participant to the
Plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C 78k-1(a)(3).
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ See Letter from Robert Books, Chairman, Operating Committee,
CTA/CQ Plans, to Vanessa A. Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 26, 2020.
    \4\ The Participants are: Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., Cboe BZX
Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.,
Cboe Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.,
The Investors' Exchange LLC, Long-Term Stock Exchange, Inc., MEMX
LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq PHLX, Inc., The Nasdaq
Stock Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE American LLC,
NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago, Inc., and NYSE National, Inc.
(collectively, the ``Participants'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Amendments have been filed by the Participants
pursuant to Rule 608(b)(3)(ii) under Regulation NMS \5\ as concerned
solely with the administration of the Plans and as ``Ministerial
Amendments'' under both Section IV(b) of the CTA Plan and Section IV(c)
of the CQ Plan. As a result, the Amendments become effective upon
filing and can be submitted by the Chair of the Plan's Operating
Committee. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the Amendments from interested persons. Set forth in Sections I and
II is the statement of the purpose and summary of the Amendments, along
with the information required by Rules 608(a) and 601(a) under the Act,
prepared and submitted by the Participants to the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Rule 608(a)

A. Purpose of the Amendment

    The above-captioned Amendments add MEMX as a Participant to the
Plans.

B. Governing or Constituent Documents

    Not applicable.

C. Implementation of Amendment

    Because the Amendments constitute ``Ministerial Amendments'' under
both Section IV(b) of the CTA Plan and Section IV(c) under the CQ Plan,
the Chairman of the Plan's Operating Committee may submit the
Amendments to the Commission on behalf of the Participants in the
Plans. Because the Participants designate the Amendments as concerned
solely with the administration of the Plans, the Amendments become
effective upon filing with the Commission.

D. Development and Implementation Phases

    Not applicable.

E. Analysis of Impact on Competition

    The Amendments do not impose any burden on competition because they
simply add MEMX as a Participant to the Plans. MEMX has completed the
required steps to be added to the Plans.

F. Written Understanding or Agreement Relating to Interpretation of, or
Participation in Plan

    Not applicable.

G. Approval by Sponsors in Accordance With Plan

    See Item I.C. above.

H. Description of Operation of Facility Contemplated by the Proposed
Amendment

    Not applicable.

I. Terms and Conditions of Access

    Not applicable.

J. Method of Determination and Imposition, and Amount of, Fees and
Charges

    Not applicable.

K. Method and Frequency of Processor Evaluation

    Not applicable.

L. Dispute Resolution

    Not applicable.

II. Regulation NMS Rule 601(a)

A. Equity Securities for Which Transaction Reports Shall Be Required by
the Plan

    Not applicable.

B. Reporting Requirements

    Not applicable.

C. Manner of Collecting, Processing, Sequencing, Making Available and
Disseminating Last Sale Information

    Not applicable.

D. Manner of Consolidation

    Not applicable.

E. Standards and Methods Ensuring Promptness, Accuracy and Completeness
of Transaction Reports

    Not applicable.

F. Rules and Procedures Addressed to Fraudulent or Manipulative
Dissemination

    Not applicable.

G. Terms of Access to Transaction Reports

    Not applicable.

H. Identification of Marketplace of Execution

    Not applicable.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    The Commission seeks comments on the Amendments. Interested persons
are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the
foregoing, including whether the proposed Amendments are 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-CTA/CQ-2020-01 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-CTA/CQ-2020-01. 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 website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies
of the submission, all written statements with respect to the proposed
Amendments that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed Amendments 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 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for website viewing and printing at
the principal office of the Plan. 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-CTA/CQ-2020-01 and should be submitted on or before
August 24, 2020.

    By the Commission.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-16804 Filed 7-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


ENCLOSURE 3

RECORD OF HEARING AND SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY

As required by 40 CFR 51.102(e), the complete record of the hearing, along with a list of witnesses and the text of the written presentations or summary of the oral presentations, is located at the Office of Air Regulatory Development of the Department of Environmental Quality.  The Department contact to access this information is the Director, Office of Air Regulatory Development.

The state did not receive testimony on this particular revision.

TEMPLATES\SIP-REG\REG03

SIP\NONATTN PLANS\2008\E04-SIP-3.DOC