[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39468-39472]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16726]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75353; File No. SR-NYSE-2015-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Price List To
Revise: (i) The Non-Tier Adding Credit; (ii) Certain Fees for
Executions at the Close; (iii) Credits Applicable to Designated Market
Makers; (iv) Credits Applicable to Supplemental Liquidity Providers;
and (v) Pricing Related to the Retail Liquidity Program Under Rule 107C
as it Relates to Designated Market Maker Transactions, and To Make Non-
Substantive Changes to the Price List

July 2, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on June 26, 2015, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its price list to revise: (i) The
non-tier adding credit; (ii) certain fees for executions at the close;
(iii) credits applicable to designated market makers; (iv) credits
applicable to supplemental liquidity providers; and (v) pricing related
to the retail liquidity program under rule 107c as it relates to
designated market maker transactions, and to make non-substantive
changes to the price list. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.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 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 those 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List to revise (i) the
Non-Tier Adding Credit; (ii) certain fees for executions at the close;
(iii) credits applicable to Designated Market Makers (``DMMs''); (iv)
credits applicable to Supplemental Liquidity Providers (``SLPs''); and
(v) pricing related to the Retail Liquidity Program under Rule 107C as
it relates to DMM transactions, and to make non-substantive changes to
the Price List. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change
effective July 1, 2015.
Member Organization Non-Tier Adding Credit
    Member organizations are currently eligible for the Non-Tier Adding
Credit for all orders in securities priced $1.00 or more, other than
Midpoint Passive Liquidity (``MPL'') \4\ and Non-Display Reserve
orders, that add liquidity to the NYSE unless a higher credit applies.
The applicable rate for the Non-Tier Adding Credit is $0.0015 per
share. The Exchange proposes to lower this credit to $0.0014 per share.
The credits applicable to MPL orders and Non-Display Reserve orders
would be unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An MPL Order is an undisplayed limit order that
automatically executes at the mid-point of the best protected bid
(``PBB'') or best protected offer (``PBO''), as such terms are
defined in Regulation NMS Rule 600(b)(57) (together, ``PBBO''). See
Rule 13. See also 17 CFR 242.600(b)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Executions at the Close
    The Exchange currently charges member organizations $0.00095 per
share for market-at-the-close (``MOC'') and limit-at-the-close
(``LOC'') orders, unless a member organization meets specified
thresholds set forth in the Price List for MOC and LOC activity. The
Exchange proposes to increase this fee by $0.00005 to $0.0010 per share
and to identify this pricing tier in the Price List as Non-Tier MOC/
LOC.
    The Exchange currently charges $0.00065 per share for all MOC and
LOC orders from any member organization executing (i) an ADV of MOC and
LOC activity on the Exchange in the month of at least 0.375% of
consolidated ADV (``CADV'') in NYSE-listed securities during the
billing month (``NYSE CADV''); or (ii) an ADV of MOC and LOC activity
on the Exchange in that month of at least 0.30% of NYSE CADV plus an
ADV of total close activity (i.e., MOC and LOC and other executions at
the close) on the Exchange in that month of at least 0.475% of NYSE
CADV. The Exchange proposes to increase this fee to $0.00070 per share
and to identify this pricing tier in the Price List as MOC/LOC Tier 2.
    The Exchange does not propose to change the fee of $0.0006 per
share applicable to MOC and LOC orders from any member organization
executing an ADV of MOC and LOC activity on the NYSE in that month of
at least 0.575% of NYSE CADV. The Exchange proposes to identify this
tier in the Price List as MOC/LOC Tier 1.

DMMs
    DMMs are currently eligible for a per share credit of $0.0025 when
adding liquidity in shares of each More Active Security \5\ if the More
Active Security has a stock price of $1.00 or more and the DMM quotes
at the National Best Bid or Offer (``NBBO'') in the applicable security
at least 10% of the time in the applicable month (``More Active
Securities Quoting Requirement''). The Exchange proposes to raise this
credit to $0.0027 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A ``More Active Security'' is a security with an average
daily consolidated volume in the previous month equal to or greater
than one million shares. See Price List.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DMMs are currently eligible for a per share credit when adding
liquidity in shares of each More Active Security if (a) the More Active
Security has a stock price of $1.00 or more, (b) the DMM meets the More
Active Securities Quoting Requirement, (c) the DMM Quoted Size for an
applicable month is at least 15% of the NYSE Quoted Size (defined in
the Price List as the ``More Active Securities Quoted Size Ratio
Requirement''), and (d) the DMM's providing liquidity meets certain
thresholds, as follows:
     $0.0029 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is 15%
or less of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each such
security for that month; \6\ or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The NYSE total intraday adding liquidity is totaled monthly
and includes all NYSE adding liquidity, excluding NYSE open and NYSE
close volume, by all NYSE participants, including SLPs, customers,
Floor brokers and DMMs. See Price List.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     $0.0032 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is more
than 15% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each such
security for that month.
    The ``NYSE Quoted Size'' is calculated by multiplying the average
number of shares quoted on the NYSE at the NBBO by the percentage of
time the NYSE had a quote posted at the NBBO. The ``DMM Quoted Size''
is calculated by multiplying the average number of shares of the
applicable security quoted at the NBBO by the DMM by the percentage of
time during which the DMM quoted at the NBBO.
    The Exchange proposes to make the following changes to these
credits:
    The Exchange proposes to raise the $0.0029 per share credit to
$0.0031 per share when the DMM has a DMM Quoted Size for an applicable
month that is at least 10% of the NYSE Quoted Size, reduced from the
current requirement of 15% of the NYSE Quoted Size. In addition, the
requirement that a DMM provide liquidity of 15% or less of the NYSE's
total intraday adding liquidity to receive this credit would no longer
apply.
    The Exchange proposes to raise the $0.0032 per share credit when
adding liquidity to $0.0034 per share. The requirements for this credit
would remain unchanged, including the requirement to provide liquidity
of more than 15% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each
such security for that month.
    The Exchange proposes to delete the defined term, ``More Active
Securities Quoted Size Ratio Requirement,'' as currently set forth in
the Price List, as part of the changes to these credits.
    In any month in which a DMM quotes at the NBBO at least 20% of the
time in a security with a Security CADV \7\ of less than 1,000,000
shares per month (``Less Active Securities''), such DMM receives all of
the market data quote revenue (the ``Quoting Share'') received by the
Exchange from the Consolidated Tape Association under the Revenue
Allocation Formula of Regulation NMS (regardless of whether the stock
price exceeds $1.00). If the DMM quotes at the NBBO in a Less Active
Security \8\ at least 15% of the time, but quotes less than 20% of the
time in an applicable month, the DMM receives 50% of the Quoting Share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Security CADV'' is defined in the Price List as the
average daily consolidated volume of a security.
    \8\ ``Less Active Securities'' are defined in the Price List as
securities that have a Security CADV of less than 1,000,000 shares
per month in the previous month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to raise the threshold for the Security CADV
of securities with respect to which DMMs would receive the Quoting
Share from less than 1,000,000 shares to less than 1,500,000 shares in
the previous month. A DMM would receive 50% of the Quoting Share if it
quotes at the NBBO in a security that has a Security CADV of less than
1,500,000 shares in the previous month at least 15% of the time, but
less than 20% of the time in an applicable month.
SLPs
    SLPs are eligible for certain credits when adding liquidity to the
Exchange. The amount of the credit is currently determined by the
``tier'' for which the SLP qualifies, which is based on the SLP's level
of quoting and the ADV of liquidity added by the SLP in assigned
securities.
    Currently, SLP Tier 3 provides that when adding liquidity to the
NYSE in securities with a share price of $1.00 or more, an SLP is
eligible for a credit of $0.0023 per share traded if the SLP (1) meets
the 10% average or more quoting requirement in assigned securities
pursuant to Rule 107B and (2) adds liquidity for assigned SLP
securities in the aggregate \9\ of an ADV \10\ of more than 0.20% of
NYSE CADV,\11\ or with respect to an SLP that is also a DMM and subject
to Rule 107B(i)(2)(a),\12\ more than 0.15% of NYSE CADV. The SLP Tier 3
credit in the case of Non-Displayed Reserve Orders is $0.0008. For less
active SLP securities (i.e., securities with an ADV in the previous
month of 500,000 share or less per month (``Less Active SLP
Securities'')), under SLP Tier 3, the SLP is eligible for a per share
credit of $0.0028; $0.0013 if a Non-Displayed Reserve Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Under Rule 107B, an SLP can be either a proprietary trading
unit of a member organization (``SLP-Prop'') or a registered market
maker at the Exchange (``SLMM''). For purposes of the 10% average or
more quoting requirement in assigned securities pursuant to Rule
107B, quotes of an SLP-Prop and an SLMM of the same member
organization are not aggregated. However, for purposes of adding
liquidity for assigned SLP securities in the aggregate, shares of
both an SLP-Prop and an SLMM of the same member organization are
included.
    \10\ The defined term, ``ADV,'' used here as defined in footnote
2 to the Price List.
    \11\ NYSE CADV is defined in the Price List as the consolidated
average daily volume of NYSE-listed securities.
    \12\ Rule 107B(i)(2)(A) prohibits a DMM from acting as a SLP in
the same securities in which it is a DMM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, SLP Tier 2 provides that an SLP adding liquidity in
securities with a per share price of $1.00 or more is eligible for a
per share credit of $0.0026 if the SLP: (1) Meets the 10% average or
more quoting requirement in an assigned security pursuant to Rule 107B;
and (2) adds liquidity for all assigned SLP securities in the aggregate
of an ADV of more than 0.45% of NYSE CADV, or with respect to an SLP
that is also a DMM and subject to Rule 107B(i)(2)(a), more than 0.40%
of NYSE CADV.\13\ The SLP Tier 2 credit in the case of Non-Displayed
Reserve Orders is $0.0011. For Less Active SLP Securities, under SLP
Tier 2, the SLP is eligible for a per share credit of $0.0031;
[$]0.0016 if a Non-Displayed Reserve Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ In determining whether an SLP meets the requirement to add
liquidity in the aggregate of an ADV of more than 0.35% or 0.30%
depending on whether the SLP is also a DMM, the SLP may include
shares of both an SLP-Prop and an SLMM of the same member
organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SLP Tier 1 provides that an SLP adding liquidity in securities with
a per share price of $1.00 or more is eligible for a per share credit
of $0.0029 if the SLP: (1) Meets the 10% average or more quoting
requirement in an assigned security pursuant to Rule 107B; and (2) adds
liquidity for all for assigned SLP securities in the aggregate of an
ADV of more than 0.90% of NYSE CADV, or with respect to an SLP that is
also a

DMM and subject to Rule 107B(i)(2)(a), more than 0.85% of NYSE CADV.
The SLP Tier 1 credit in the case of Non-Displayed Reserve Orders is
$0.0014. For Less Active SLP Securities, the SLP is eligible for a per
share credit of $0.0034; $0.0019 if a Non-Displayed Reserve Order.
    Finally, the SLP Non-Tier provides that an SLP adding liquidity in
securities with a per share price of $1.00 or more that does not
qualify for the credits described above is eligible for the applicable
rate for the base SLP tier, which would be the rate that applies to the
non-SLP activity of the member organization, i.e., the non-Tier Adding
Credit, Tier 3 Adding Credit, Tier 2 Adding Credit or Tier 1 Adding
Credit (``SLP Non-Tier''). In the case of Non-Displayed Reserve Orders,
there is no credit under the SLP Non-Tier.
    For SLP Tier 3, SLP Tier 2, and SLP Tier 1, the Exchange proposes
to eliminate the higher credits that currently apply to Less Active
Securities. Accordingly, regardless of the ADV of a security, SLPs
would receive a per share credit of $0.0023, $0.0026, and $0.0029 for
SLP Tier 3, SLP Tier 2, and SLP Tier 1, respectively and $.0008,
$0.0011, and $0.0014 for Non-Displayed Reserve Orders for SLP Tier 3,
SLP Tier 2, and SLP Tier 1, respectively.
    In addition, for SLP Tier 1 and SLP Tier 2, the Exchange proposes
to lower the ADV percentage requirement for credits for SLPs that are
also DMMs and subject to Rule 107B(i)(2)(A). The ADV percentage
requirement for SLPs that are also DMMs and subject to Rule
107B(i)(2)(A) for SLP Tier 1 and SLP Tier 2 would decrease from 0.85%
to 0.65% and 0.40% to [0.30%], respectively. The Exchange does not
propose to change the ADV percentage requirement for SLP Tier 3, nor
does the Exchange propose any changes to the SLP Non-Tier.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to raise the per share credits for
Non-Displayed Reserve Orders for SLP Tier 3, from $0.0008 to $0.0009,
for SLP Tier 2, from $0.0011 to $0.0012, and for SLP Tier 1, from
$0.0014 to $0.0015.
Retail Liquidity Program
    The Retail Liquidity Program is a pilot program that is designed to
attract additional retail order flow to the Exchange for NYSE-listed
securities while also providing the potential for price improvement to
such order flow.\14\ Retail order flow is submitted through the Retail
Liquidity Program as a distinct order type called a ``Retail Order,''
which is defined in Rule 107C(a)(3) as an agency order or a riskless
principal order that meets the criteria of Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. Rule 5320.03 that originates from a natural
person and is submitted to the Exchange by a Retail Member Organization
(``RMO''), provided that no change is made to the terms of the order
with respect to price or side of market and the order does not
originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized
methodology.\15\ In addition to RMOs, Retail Liquidity Providers
(``RLPs'') were created as an additional class of market participant
under the Retail Liquidity Program. RLPs are required to provide
potential price improvement for Retail Orders in the form of ``RPIs,''
which are non-displayed interest that is better than the PBBO.\16\
Member organizations other than RLPs are also permitted, but not
required, to submit RPIs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Rule 107C. See also Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 67347 (July 3, 2012), 77 FR 40673 (July 10, 2012) (SR-NYSE-
2011-55) (establishing the Retail Liquidity Program pilot) and 74454
(March 6, 2015), 80 FR 13054 (March 12, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-10)
(extending the pilot period to September 30, 2015).
    \15\ RMO is defined in Rule 107C(a)(2) as a member organization
(or a division thereof) that has been approved by the Exchange under
Rule 107C to submit Retail Orders.
    \16\ RLP is defined in Rule 107C(a)(1) as a member organization
that is approved by the Exchange to act as such and that is required
to submit RPIs in accordance with Rule 107C. RPI is defined in Rule
107C(a)(4) and consists of non-displayed interest in NYSE-listed
securities that is priced better than the PBBO by at least $0.001
and that is identified as such.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RLP executions of RPIs against Retail Orders are currently provided
with a credit of $0.0003 per share if the RLP satisfies the applicable
percentage requirement of Rule 107C. RPIs of an RLP that does not
satisfy the applicable percentage requirement of Rule 107C are subject
to a fee of $0.0003 per share.
    A fee of $0.0003 per share also currently applies to non-RLP member
organization executions of RPIs against Retail Orders, unless the non-
RLP member organization executes an ADV during the month of at least
500,000 shares of RPIs, in which case a credit of $0.0003 per share
applies.
    For executions of Retail Orders if executed against RPIs or MPL
Orders, RMOs are not currently charged or provided with a credit (i.e.,
they are free).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Retail Orders are otherwise charged according to standard
fees applicable to non-Retail Orders if executed against the Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes a credit of $0.0020 per share for executions
of an RPI by a DMM that is not an RLP against a Retail Order. The
Exchange also proposes to exclude DMMs from the other rates applicable
to non-RLP Member organizations in connection with the executions of
RPIs against Retail Orders.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to make non-substantive changes to
the Price List. Effective June 1, 2015, the Exchange eliminated the
credit of $0.0010 per share for executions of Non-Displayed Reserve
Orders for market participants, other than SLPs, that provide
liquidity.\18\ The Exchange proposes to add a line item to the Price
List for Non-Displayed Reserve Orders, and to add a comma to the
description of the Non-Tier Adding Credit, to make it clear in the
Price List that there is no charge with respect to executions of Non-
Displayed Reserve Orders for market participants, other than SLPs, that
provide liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75139 (June 10,
2015), 80 FR 34475 (June 16, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The above proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address
any other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that
members and member organizations would have in complying with the
proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\19\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and
other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Member Organization Non-Tier Adding Credit
    The Exchange believes that the change to the Member Organization
Non-Tier Adding Credit for executions of orders in securities with a
per share price of $1.00 or more is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it is intended to incentivize member
organizations to submit additional amounts of liquidity to the Exchange
to be eligible to receive the higher credits available from the Tier 1
Adding Credit, the Tier 2 Adding Credit and the Tier 3 Adding Credit.
The Exchange believes that the proposed lower credit for the Member
Organization Non-Tier Adding Credit is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it would apply equally to all member
organizations.

Executions at the Close
    The Exchange believes that increasing the MOC/LOC Non-Tier fee to
$0.0010 is reasonable because this rate would be lower than the non-
tier rate, Tier F, for market-on-close and limit-on-close orders on the
NASDAQ Stock Market (``NASDAQ''), of $0.0015 per executed share.\21\
Similarly, the Exchange believes that increasing the MOC/LOC Tier 2 fee
to $0.0007 per share is reasonable because it would be lower than the
lowest fee for market-on-close and limit-on-close orders on NASDAQ, of
$0.0008 per executed share. The Exchange notes that it is not changing
the fee of $0.0006 for MOC/LOC Tier 1. The Exchange believes that
maintaining the lowest fee for the highest liquidity requirements would
incentivize member organizations to send in more closing auction volume
to the primary market, thereby deepening the Exchange's liquidity pool
and supporting the quality of price discovery. The Exchange believes
that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to charge lower
fees to member organizations that make significant contributions to
market quality by providing higher volumes of liquidity, which benefits
all market participants. The Exchange believes the proposed fees are
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all similarly
situated member organizations would be subject to the same fee
structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See NASDAQ Rule 7018(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to add defined terms to the
Price List for the MOC/LOC fee tiers is reasonable because the change
would make the Price List clearer and easier to understand.
DMMs
    The Exchange believes that the proposed higher credits would
increase the incentive to DMMs to provide additional liquidity on the
Exchange to meet the quoting and quoted size requirements for the
higher credits. Moreover, the requirement is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it would apply equally to all DMM firms.
    The Exchange believes that the $0.0031 rebate for DMMs when adding
liquidity with orders, other than MPL orders, in a More Active Security
if the More Active Security has a stock price of $1.00 or more and the
DMM meets the More Active Securities Quoting Requirement and has a DMM
Quoted Size for an applicable month that is at least 10% of the NYSE
Quoted Size is reasonable because the requirement for DMM Quoted Size
would be reduced from 15% to 10% of the NYSE Quote Size, the DMM would
still need to meet the More Active Securities Quoting Requirement of
10%, and the requirement for providing liquidity of 15% or less of the
NYSE's total intraday adding in liquidity in each such security would
no longer apply. The Exchange believes that maintaining the requirement
for DMM Quoted Size at 15% of the NYSE Quote Size for the $0.0034
credit is reasonable as the credit for meeting that requirement would
be higher than the $0.0031 credit for meeting the lower requirement of
at least 10% of NYSE Quoted Size. Moreover, the requirements are
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they would apply
equally to all DMMs.
    The Exchange believes that expanding the number of securities that
can make a DMM eligible to receive the market data quote revenue is
reasonable as it would encourage greater quoting in an expanded
universe of less actives securities where there may be fewer liquidity
providers. Moreover, the requirement is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it would apply equally to all DMMs.
SLPs
    The Exchange believes that removing the higher credits for SLPs
that apply to providing liquidity in Less Active Securities is
reasonable and would not impose a burden on competition because the
credits would be removed in their entirety and generally have not
encouraged liquidity on the Exchange, as intended.
    The Exchange believes that lowering the ADV percentage requirements
for the SLP Tier 1 and SLP Tier 2 credits for SLPs that are also DMMs
and subject to Rule 107B(i)(2)(A) is reasonable because lowering the
requirements would increase the incentives to add liquidity and more
closely compares to the requirements for SLP Tier 3. Moreover, the
requirement is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it
would apply equally to all SLPs.
    The Exchange believes that increasing the credits for SLPs for Non-
Displayed Reserve Orders for SLP Tier 3, SLP Tier 2 and SLP Tier 1 is
reasonable because the added incentive created by the availability of
the higher credit is reasonably related to an SLP's liquidity
obligations on the Exchange and the value to the Exchange's market
quality associated with higher volumes. The proposed changes also are
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all similarly
situated SLPs would be eligible to qualify for the rates by satisfying
the related thresholds, where applicable.
Retail Liquidity Program
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to the rates under
the Retail Liquidity Program is reasonable. The Exchange originally
introduced the existing rates approximately three years ago.\22\ At
that time, the Exchange stated that, because the Retail Liquidity
Program was a pilot program, the Exchange anticipated that it would
periodically review applicable pricing to seek to ensure that it
contributes to the goal of the Retail Liquidity Program, which is
designed to attract additional retail order flow to the Exchange for
NYSE-listed securities while also providing the potential for price
improvement to such order flow. The proposed new rate is a result of
this review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67529 (July 27,
2012), 77 FR 46137 (August 2, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-30).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed new rate would be set at a level that would reasonably
incentivize DMMs to contribute to RPI liquidity being available for
interaction with Retail Orders which would encourage more Retail Orders
being submitted to the Exchange. Together, this would increase the pool
of robust liquidity available on the Exchange, thereby contributing to
the quality of the Exchange's market and to the Exchange's status as a
premier destination for liquidity and order execution. The Exchange
believes that, because Retail Orders are likely to reflect long-term
investment intentions, they promote price discovery and dampen
volatility. Accordingly, the presence of Retail Orders on the Exchange
has the potential to benefit all market participants. In addition, the
Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
to allocate higher or additional credits to DMMs compared to other
market participants because the higher credit is reasonably related to
a DMM's affirmative obligations on the Exchange.\23\ The Exchange also
believes the proposed credit is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it will apply equally to all DMMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Under Rule 104(a), DMMs registered in one or more
securities traded on the Exchange have obligations with respect to
the quality of the markets in securities to which they are assigned,
such as engaging in a course of dealings for their own account to
provide a continuous two-sided quote with reasonable size,
maintaining fair and orderly markets and facilitating openings,
reopenings, and the close of trading in assigned securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the non-substantive clarifying changes
to the

Price List are reasonable because they are designed to provide greater
transparency with regard to how the Exchange assesses fees and provides
rebates. The Exchange notes that the proposed non-substantive
clarifying changes are not designed to amend any fee or rebate, nor to
change how the Exchange assesses fees or calculates credits. In
particular, the proposed changes are reasonable and equitable because
they do not modify the fees or credits applicable to Non-Displayed
Reserve Orders for market participants, other than SLPs, that provide
liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that it is subject to significant competitive
forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement regarding the
burden on competition.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\24\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change would contribute to the Exchange's market quality by promoting
price discovery and ultimately increased competition. For the same
reasons, the proposed change also would not impose any burden on
competition among market participants. Pricing for executions at the
opening would remain at the same relatively low levels and would
continue to reflect the benefit that market participants receive
through the ability to have their orders interact with other liquidity
at the opening.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more
favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust
its fees and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges and
with alternative trading systems that have been exempted from
compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges.
Because competitors are free to modify their own fees and credits in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited. As a result of all of these considerations, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the
ability of member organizations or competing order execution venues to
maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \25\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \26\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \27\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2015-30 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2015-30. 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 will also be available
for inspection and copying at the NYSE's principal office and on its
Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. 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-NYSE-2015-30 and should be submitted on or before July
30, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-16726 Filed 7-8-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26106-26109]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09238]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0338; Directorate Identifier 2014-CE-010-AD;
Amendment 39-18495; AD 2016-08-18]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Piper Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA-31-350 airplanes. This AD was prompted by
a report of an engine fire caused by a leak in the fuel pump inlet
hose. This AD requires inspecting the fuel hose assembly and the
turbocharger support assembly for proper clearance between them,
inspecting each assembly for any sign of damage, and making any
necessary repairs or replacements. We are issuing this AD to correct
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 6, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of June 6,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida
32960; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
www.piper.com/home/pages/Publications.cfm. You may view this referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on
the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0338.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0338; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Wechsler, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue,
College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (404) 474-
5606; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Piper
Aircraft, Inc. Model PA-31-350 airplanes. The SNPRM published in the
Federal Register on January 26, 2016 (81 FR 4214). We preceded the
SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the
Federal Register on June 3, 2014 (79 FR 31888). The NPRM proposed to
require inspecting the fuel hose assembly and the turbocharger support
assembly for proper clearance between them, inspecting each assembly
for any sign of damage, and making any necessary repairs or
replacements. The NPRM was prompted by a report of an engine fire on a
Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) Model PA-31-350 airplane. Investigation
revealed that the fire was caused by a leak in the fuel pump inlet hose
that resulted from repeated contact with an adjacent turbocharger
support assembly caused by inadequate clearance between the two
assemblies. The SNPRM proposed to require the same actions as proposed
in the NPRM using revised service information issued by the
manufacturer to clarify which engines are part of the airplane
applicability and to revise the instructions for accomplishing the
proposed actions.
    This condition, if not corrected, could result in damage to the
fuel inlet hose assembly, which could cause the fuel pump inlet hose to
fail and leak fuel in the engine compartment. This condition could also
cause damage to the turbocharger support assembly, which could require
the turbocharger support assembly to be repaired or replaced.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the SNPRM (81 FR 4214, January 26,
2016) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM (81 FR 4214, January 26, 2016) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM (81 FR 4214, January 26, 2016).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257A, dated
August 4, 2015. The service information describes procedures for the
following. This service information 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.

--Inspecting for a minimum \3/16\-inch clearance between the fuel hose
assembly and the turbocharger support assembly and making any necessary
adjustments.
--Inspecting the fuel hose assembly for any signs of damage and, if
necessary, replacing with a serviceable part.
--Inspecting the turbocharger support assembly for any signs of damage
and, if necessary, repairing or replacing with a serviceable part.
--Performing an engine run-up to check for any leaks.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    There are differences between the compliance times for the
corrective actions in this AD and those in the related service
information.
    We based the compliance times in this AD on risk analysis and cost
impact to operators. There has only been one event of the reported
incident in the operational history of Piper Model PA-31-350 airplanes.
Cost was also a strong consideration due to the age of the fleet and
the number of airplanes still in service.
    The one-time inspection required in this AD is very inexpensive and
requires minimal time to accomplish. It is expected that almost all
airplanes in service can be cleared with a single inspection, and no
additional actions or costs would be incurred by the vast majority of
the fleet.
    We determined that a single inspection with any necessary
corrective actions is an adequate terminating action for the unsafe
condition. The risk related to future maintenance on the fuel line
would be mitigated by the related service information and awareness
from this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 773 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on
                   Action                              Labor cost             Parts cost   Cost per      U.S.
                                                                                product    operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspect for proper clearance between the     .5 work-hour x $85 per hour =          N/A       $42.50  $32,852.50
 fuel hose assembly and the turbocharger      $85.
 support assembly.
Inspect the fuel hose assembly for evidence  .5 work-hour x $85 per hour =          N/A        42.50   32,852.50
 of leaking, cracking, chafing, and any       $42.50.
 other sign of damage.
Inspect the turbocharger support assembly    .5 work-hour x $85 per hour =          N/A        42.50   32,852.50
 for evidence of chafing and any other sign   $42.50.
 of damage.
Engine run-up/leak check...................  1 work-hour x $85 = $85 (.5            N/A           85      65,705
                                              work hour per engine).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary follow-on
actions that will be required based on the results of the inspection.
We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need
these corrective actions.

                           On-Condition Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Cost per
            Action                 Labor cost     Parts cost    product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjust routing of fuel hose     5.5 work-hours x         N/A     $467.50
 assembly for proper clearance   $85 per hour =
 between the fuel hose           $467.50.
 assembly and the turbocharger
 support assembly.
Replace Piper fuel pump inlet   1 work-hour x          1,068       1,153
 hose assembly, part number      $85 per hour =
 39995-34 (2 per airplane).      $85.
Replace Lycoming turbocharger   24 work-hours x       12,874      14,914
 support assembly, part number   $85 per hour =
 LW-18302 (2 per airplane).      $2,040.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    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 airworthiness
directive (AD):

2016-08-18 Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Amendment 39-18495; Docket No. FAA-
2014-0338; Directorate Identifier 2014-CE-010-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective June 6, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA-31-350
airplanes, serial numbers 31-5001 through 31-5004, 31-7305005
through 31-8452024, and 31-8253001 through 31-8553002, certificated
in any category, that are equipped with the following engines and
fuel pump hose assemblies:

              Table 1 to Paragraph (c) of This AD--Applicable Engines and Fuel Pump Hose Assemblies
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Manufacturer's hose      Manufacturer's part
                Engine                           name                 number (P/N)           Hose description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIO-540-J2B (right wing).............  Hose Assembly--Fuel....  Piper 39995-034........  Inlet fuel hose to
                                                                                engine fuel pump.
LTIO-540-J2B (left wing).............  Hose, Fuel pump to       Lycoming LW-12877-6S142  Exit fuel hose from
                                        Injector.                                         engine fuel pump.
TIO540-J2BD (right wing).............  Hose, Fuel pump to       Lycoming LW-12877-6S142  Exit fuel hose from
                                        Injector.                                         engine fuel pump.
LTIO-540-J2BD (left wing)............  Hose Assembly--Fuel....  Piper 39995-034........  Inlet fuel hose to
                                                                                engine fuel pump.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 73: Engine Fuel and Control.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of an engine fire caused by a
leak in the fuel pump inlet hose. We are issuing this AD to correct
the unsafe condition on these products.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (j)(2) of this AD, unless already done.

(g) Ensure Proper Clearance Between the Fuel Hose Assembly and the
Turbocharger Support Assembly

    (1) Within the next 60 hours time-in-service (TIS) after June 6,
2016 (the effective date of this AD) or within the next 6 months
after June 6, 2016 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs
first, inspect to determine the clearance between the inlet and exit
fuel hose assemblies listed in table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD,
and each turbocharger support assembly, Lycoming P/N LW-18302. There
should be a minimum \3/16\-inch clearance. Do the inspection
following the INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service
Bulletin No. 1257A, dated August 4, 2015.
    (2) Before further flight after the inspection required in
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, if the measured clearance is less than
\3/16\-inch, make all necessary adjustments to make the clearance a
minimum of \3/16\-inch between the inlet and exit fuel hose
assemblies listed in table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD and each
turbocharger support assembly, Lycoming P/N LW-18302, following the
INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No.
1257A, dated August 4, 2015.

(h) Visually Inspect the Fuel Hose Assembly and Replace if Necessary

    (1) Within the next 60 hours TIS after June 6, 2016 (the
effective date of this AD) or within the next 6 months after June 6,
2016 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first,
visually inspect the inlet and exit fuel hose assemblies listed in
table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD for evidence of leaking,
cracking, chafing, and any other sign of damage. Do the inspection
following the INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service
Bulletin No. 1257A, dated August 4, 2015.
    (2) Before further flight after the inspection required in
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, if any evidence of leaking, cracking,
chafing, or any other sign of damage is found in any inlet or exit
fuel host assembly listed in table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD,
replace the fuel hose assembly with a serviceable part. Do the
replacement following the INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft,
Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257A, dated August 4, 2015.

(i) Visually Inspect the Turbocharger Support Assembly and Replace if
Necessary

    (1) Within the next 60 hours TIS after June 6, 2016 (the
effective date of this AD) or within the next 6 months after June 6,
2016 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first,
visually inspect each turbocharger support assembly, Lycoming P/N
LW-18302, for evidence of chafing and any other signs of damage. Do
the inspection following the INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft,
Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257A, dated August 4, 2015.
    (2) Before further flight after the inspection required in
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, if any evidence of chafing or any other
sign of damage is found on any turbocharger support assembly,
replace Lycoming P/N LW-18302 with a serviceable part. Do the
replacement following the INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft,
Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257A, dated August 4, 2015.

(j) Engine Run-Up

    (1) If any fuel line component was adjusted or replaced during
any actions required in paragraphs (g)(1) through (i)(2) of this AD,
before further flight, perform an engine run-up on the ground to
check for leaks. Do the engine run-up following the INSTRUCTIONS
section of Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257A, dated
August 4, 2015.
    (2) If any leaks found during the engine run-up required in
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD emanate from any fuel line component
adjusted, repaired, or replaced during any actions required in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (i)(2) of this AD, before further flight,
take all necessary corrective actions following the INSTRUCTIONS
section of Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257A, dated
August 4, 2015.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
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 local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD.
    (2) 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.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Gary Wechsler,
Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta ACO, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College
Park, Georgia 30337; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257A, dated
August 4, 2015.
    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For Piper Aircraft, Inc. service information identified in
this AD, contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., 926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach,
Florida 32960; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Internet: www.piper.com/home/pages/Publications.cfm.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 14, 2016.
Robert P. Busto,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-09238 Filed 4-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 5474]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01993]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-496-000.
    Applicants: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 2022 Tariff Filing Removing
North Bakken Expansion Service Agreement to be effective 2/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 1/25/22.
    Accession Number: 20220125-5120.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/22.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 26, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-01993 Filed 1-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16016-16017]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05906]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4639-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2022-0001]

Hawaii; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major

disaster for the State of Hawaii (FEMA-4639-DR), dated February 15,
2022, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued February 15, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated February 15, 2022, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Hawaii resulting from severe storms, flooding, and landslides
during the period of December 5 to December 10, 2021, is of
sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster
declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in
the State of Hawaii.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Benigno Bern Ruiz, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Hawaii have been designated as
adversely affected by this major disaster:

    City and County of Honolulu and Maui County for Public
Assistance.
    All areas within the State of Hawaii are eligible for assistance
under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-05906 Filed 3-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 46 (Monday, March 10, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13201-13204]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04570]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0554; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-009-AD;
Amendment 39-17774; AD 2014-05-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter) Model EC135P1, EC135P2,
EC135P2+, EC135T1, EC135T2, and EC135T2+ helicopters. This AD requires
analyzing the main gearbox (MGB) oil for indications of metal chips or
pieces, reviewing the MGB log or equivalent record, and inspecting
certain teeth in the MGB after two chip indications. This AD was
prompted by a partial tooth rupture found in an MGB that was returned
to the manufacturer for repairs. The actions of this AD are intended to
detect wear in the MGB that could lead to a gear tooth rupture, failure
of the MGB, loss of power to the main rotor, and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective April 14, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of April 14, 2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. You may review the referenced
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas
76137.

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 this AD, the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD, any incorporated-by-reference service information,
the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations Office,
M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rao Edupuganti, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On July 3, 2013, at 78 FR 40053, the Federal Register published our
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Eurocopter Model EC135 P1,
EC135 P2, EC135 P2+, EC135 T1, EC135 T2, and EC135 T2+ helicopters with
an MGB, part number (P/N) 4649 010 003, 4649 010 005, 4649 010 006,
4649 010 006X, 4649 010 008, 4649 010 008X, 4649 001 007, 4649 010 010,
or 4649 010 013 installed. The NPRM proposed to require analyzing the
MGB oil for indications of metal chips or pieces, reviewing the MGB log
or equivalent record, and inspecting certain teeth in the MGB after two
chip indications. The proposed requirements were intended to detect
wear in the MGB that could lead to a gear tooth rupture, failure of the
MGB, loss of power to the main rotor, and subsequent loss of control of
the helicopter.
    The Required Actions section of the NPRM had a typographical error
in some references to Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) EC135-
63A-012, Revision 5, dated September 6, 2011. That error has been
corrected in this AD.
    The NPRM was prompted by AD No. 2009-0106R1, dated November 3,
2011, issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member
States of the European Union. EASA advises that an MGB was returned to
the manufacturer for repair after ``several chip indications.''
According to EASA, a partial tooth rupture was detected after
disassembly of the gearbox and removal of a drive pinion. EASA states
the tooth rupture was determined to have been caused by wear. EASA AD
No. 2009-0106R1 includes requirements and timetables for oil sampling
and analysis; checking the gearbox log card for chip indications; and
corrective measures for chip indications. It also states that a
prescribed modification to the MGB would be terminating action for the
AD.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we received no comments on the NPRM (78 FR 40053, July 3,
2013).

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Germany and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with Germany, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same
type designs and that air safety and the public interest require
adopting the AD requirements as proposed except for correcting the
references to Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin EC135-63A-012, Revision
5, dated September 6, 2011, in paragraphs (e)(2)(ii)(A), (e)(3),
(e)(4)(i), and (e)(4)(ii). These corrections are consistent with the
intent of the proposals in the NPRM (78 FR 40053, July 3, 2013) and
will not increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the
scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD applies to military EC635 helicopters. This AD does not
apply to EC635 helicopters because they are not type certificated in
the United States.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter issued ASB EC135-63A-012 on August 8, 2007, which was
followed by five revisions, the most recent of which was issued
September 6, 2011. The ASBs prescribe procedures to monitor and detect
wear in time to prevent MGB tooth ruptures in main transmissions for
EC135 and EC635 model helicopters. Revision 5 of the ASB prescribes
procedures for taking and analyzing scheduled oil samples, identifying
and addressing chip indications, and inspecting certain teeth in
gearboxes.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 242 helicopters of U.S. Registry
and that labor costs average $85 per work-hour. Based on these
estimates, we expect the following costs:
     Taking oil samples will take 1 work-hour. Assuming 2
samples per aircraft per year, we estimate a total cost of $170. No
parts are needed, so the total cost for the U.S. fleet is $41,140.
     A laboratory analysis of 2 oil samples cost $200 per
helicopter for labor and equipment, for a total fleet cost of $48,400.
     Inspecting the oil filter element for a chip requires
about a half-hour of labor for a cost per helicopter of about $43. No
parts are needed.
     Inspecting certain teeth in the gearbox, performing a
ground run, and inspecting for leaking oil takes 8 work-hours for a
labor cost of $680. Parts cost $196, for a total cost per helicopter of
$876.
     If the oil sample analysis indicates metal chips,
recording the results on the aircraft log card takes a half-hour for a
labor cost of about $43 per helicopter.
     The cost of examining the log card for any previously
recorded chip indications is minimal.
     Inspecting the chip detector for deposits requires about 5
minutes of labor for a labor cost of about $7.
     Replacing the MGB with an airworthy MGB requires 8 work-
hours for a labor cost of $680. Parts cost $145,000 for total cost per
helicopter of $145,680.

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 helicopters identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) 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 an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    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 airworthiness
directive (AD):

2014-05-01 Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter): Amendment 39-
17774; Docket No. FAA-2013-0554; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-009-
AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model EC135P1, EC135P2, EC135P2+, EC135T1,
EC135T2, and EC135T2+ helicopters with a main gearbox (MGB), part
number (P/N) 4649 010 003, 4649 010 005, 4649 010 006, 4649 010
006X, 4649 010 008, 4649 010 008X, 4649 001 007, 4649 010 010, or
4649 010 013 installed, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a tooth rupture in the
MGB. This condition could result in failure of the MGB, loss of
power to the main rotor, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective April 14, 2014.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS), and thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 100 hours or 12 months, whichever occurs
first, take an oil sample in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions, Part 1, of Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin EC135-
63A-012, Revision 5, dated September 6, 2011 (ASB EC135-63A-012).
    (2) Within 25 hours TIS after taking the oil sample in paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD, analyze the oil sample in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions, Part 2.A. through Part 2.C. of ASB
EC135-63A-012, except that you are not required to contact
Eurocopter.
    (i) If the analysis indicates Stage II as specified by the
Accomplishment Instructions, Part 2.B., of ASB EC135-63A-012, within
25 hours TIS, remove and inspect the oil filter element for a chip,
defined as any solid piece of metal but not metallic fuzz or fine
particles.
    (A) If there are no chips, clean the oil filter element and chip
detector, inspect the drive stage toothing, perform a ground run,
and inspect for leaking oil in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions, Part 4.A through 4.G, of ASB EC135-63A-012. Change the
oil.
    (B) If there is a chip, replace the MGB with an airworthy MGB
before further flight.
    (ii) If the analysis indicates Stage III as specified by the
Accomplishment Instructions, Part 2.B., of ASB EC135-63A-012 and if
the water content is between 0.1 and 0.5 percent, within 10 hours
TIS, remove and inspect the oil filter element for a chip.
    (A) If there are no chips, clean the oil filter element and chip
detector, inspect the drive stage toothing, perform a ground run,
and inspect for leaking oil in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions, Part 4.A through 4.G, of ASB EC135-63A-012. Change the
oil.
    (B) If there is a chip, replace the MGB with an airworthy MGB
before further flight.
    (3) Before the MGB has accumulated 300 hours TIS, determine
whether two or more chip indications have occurred. If two or more
chip indications have occurred, inspect the drive stage toothing,
perform a ground run, and inspect for leaking oil in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions, Part 4.A through 4.G, of ASB EC135-
63A-012.
    (4) Any time there is a chip indication, remove and inspect the
chip detector for deposits (fine particles or metallic fuzz) or
chips, and remove and inspect the oil filter element for a chip.
    (i) If there are no chips and a minimal amount of particles or
metallic fuzz, corresponding to Figure 5, Stage A of ASB EC135-63A-
012, clean the chip detector and the oil filter element and enter
the chip indication on the MGB log card before further flight.
    (ii) If there are no chips and some particles or metallic fuzz,
corresponding to Figure 5, Stage B of ASB EC135-63A-012, clean the
chip detector and the oil filter element and enter the chip
indication on the MGB log card before further flight, and within 10
hours TIS inspect the drive stage toothing, perform a ground run,
and inspect for leaking oil in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions, Part 4.A through 4.G, of ASB EC135-63A-012. Perform a
ground run for 15 minutes at the flight-idle power setting, and then
re-inspect the chip detector for a chip, particles, and metallic
fuzz.
    (iii) If there is a chip, replace the MGB with an airworthy MGB.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Rao Edupuganti, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone (817) 222-
5110; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2009-0106R1, dated November 3, 2011. You
may view the EASA AD on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
in Docket No. FAA-2013-0554.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6320, Main Rotor
Gearbox.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin EC135-63A-012, Revision 5,
dated September 6, 2011.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Eurocopter service information identified in this AD,
contact American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(972) 641-3775; or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February 24, 2014.
Bruce E. Cain,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-04570 Filed 3-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P