[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14210-14212]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05906]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0368; FMCSA-2011-0381; FMCSA-2013-0192; FMCSA-
2013-0193]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions of 99
individuals from its rule prohibiting persons with insulin-treated
diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs) in interstate commerce. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt
individuals from this rule if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these CMV drivers.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions are effective from the dates
stated in the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before
April 15, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0368; FMCSA-
2011-0381; FMCSA-2013-0192; FMCSA-2013-0193, using any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 2-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The statute also allows the Agency to renew
exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 99 individuals listed
in this notice have recently become eligible for a renewed exemption
from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce. The drivers remain in good
standing with the Agency, have maintained their required medical
monitoring and have not exhibited any medical issues that would
compromise their ability to safely operate a CMV during the previous 2-
year exemption period.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 99 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. These 99 drivers
remain in good standing with the Agency, have maintained their required
medical monitoring and have not exhibited any medical issues that would
compromise their ability to safely operate a CMV during the previous 2-
year exemption period. Therefore, FMCSA has decided to extend each
exemption for a renewable two-year period. Each individual is
identified according to the renewal date.
    The exemptions are renewed subject to the following conditions: (1)
That each individual submit a quarterly monitoring checklist completed
by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual checklist with a
comprehensive

medical evaluation; (2) that each individual reports within 2 business
days of occurrence, all episodes of severe hypoglycemia, significant
complications, or inability to manage diabetes; also, any involvement
in an accident or any other adverse event in a CMV or personal vehicle,
whether or not it is related to an episode of hypoglycemia; (3) that
each individual submit an annual ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report; and (4) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification
file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of
the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement official.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. The following groups of
drivers received renewed exemptions in March, 2016 and are discussed
below.
    As of March 5, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following 41 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (78 FR 79062; 79 FR
12567):

David E. Ames (IL)
Michael R. Boland (IL)
Christopher D. Burks (MA)
Larry D. Burton (IL)
Anthony D. Chrisley (CA)
Henry Collins (MO)
John B. Conway Jr. (NC)
James V. Davidson Jr. (UT)
Michael A. De La Torree (CA)
Corrado DePalma (NJ)
Douglas E. Emey (IN)
William C. Flom (IA)
Brian A. Griep (IA)
George E. Hagey (IL)
Ronnie Harrington (MS)
Andrew P. Hines (OH)
Arlyn D. Holtrop (IA)
Stephan P. Hyre (OH)
Aaron C. Kaplan (CA)
Sigmund E. Keller (NY)
Derl T. Martin (MO)
Waymond E. Mayfield (MO)
Senad Mehmedovic (KY)
Ronald E. Mullard (AL)
Justin C. Orr (CA)
Kevin L. Otto (OH)
Larry H. Painter (PA)
Robert K. Patterson (IA)
Albert M. Purdy (PA)
Adam Razny (MO)
Thomas F. Scanlon (NJ)
Harrison G. Simmons (MO)
Scott A. Stout (FL)
Walter D. Strang, IV (CT)
Mark A. Torres (MA)
Eric A. Vernon (IA)
Marvin L. Vonk (IA)
Kelly J. Walstad (MN)
John R. Wappes (OH)
Ray C. Williams (CT)
Rickey A. Wulf (IA)

    The drivers were included in Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0193. Their
exemptions are effective as of March 5, 2016 and will expire on March
5, 2018.
    As of March 7, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following 45 individuals, have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (77 FR 3549; 77 FR
13685; 78 FR 78479; 79 FR 13086):

Chad E. Anger (WI)
Willie V. Apodaca (NM)
Edward Blake (GA)
Dorin D. Blodgett (IN)
Jerry A. Campbell (OH)
Brian M. Chase (VA)
Phillip Covel (NE)
Nicholas P. Dube (RI)
James W. Dusing (MN)
Manuel Elizondo (TX)
Michael K. Farris (IN)
Menino Fernandes (IL)
Craig J. Gadley, Sr. (NY)
Daniel C. Grove Jr. (PA)
Mary F. Guilfoy (IN)
Jeffrey M. Halida (WI)
James M. Hatcher (MS)
Matthew E. Hay (TX)
Edward S. Ionescu (IL)
Jeffrey P. James (AR)
Tracy N. Jenkins (DE)
Gregory A. King (NC)
Matthew R. Linehan (NY)
Cory A. Meadows (OH)
Ashun R. Merritt (GA)
Herbert A. Morton (CA)
Colby A. Nutter (VA)
Jayrome B. Rimolde (MN)
Gale Roland (PA)
Larry A. Sanders (MD)
John L. Scherette (WA)
Kelly T. Scholl (MN)
James P. Shurkus (NH)
Gregory G. Sisco (IA)
Travers L. Stephens (GA)
Brittany K. Tomasko (CA)
Joel L. Topping (NV)
Daren Warren (NY)
Alan T. Whalen (NY)
Thomas L. Whitley (IN)
Randall S. Williams (PA)
Charles J. Wirth (WI)
Tomme J. Wirth (IA)
Joshua C. Wyse (OH)
Rowland P. Yee (HI)

    The drivers were included in Docket Nos. FMCSA-2011-0368; FMCSA-
2013-0192. Their exemptions are effective as of March 7, 2016 and will
expire on March 7, 2018.
    As of March 23, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following 13 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (77 FR 5870; 77 FR
17116):

Roger L. Arcand, Jr. (MA)
Marsha M. Colberg (WA)
Robert D. Crissinger (MN)
Scott W. Forsyth, Jr. (CO)
Fritz D. Gregory (UT)
Anthony P. Kesselring (FL)
Don R. Kivi (ND)
Vincent Ligotti (NY)
Michael R. Miller (PA)
Jack L. Phippen (WI)
Richard A. Purk (CA)
Bryan E. Quick (VA)
Jack A. Tidey (AR)

    The drivers were included in Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0381. Their
exemptions are effective as of March 23, 2016 and will expire on March
23, 2018.
    Each of the 99 drivers in the aforementioned groups qualifies for a
renewal of the exemption. They have maintained their required medical
monitoring and have not exhibited any medical issues that would
compromise their ability to safely operate a CMV during the previous 2-
year exemption period.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each of the
99 drivers for a period of two years is likely to achieve a level of
safety equal to that existing without the exemption. The drivers were
included in docket numbers FMCSA-2011-0368; FMCSA-2011-0381; FMCSA-
2013-0192; FMCSA-2013-0193.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by April 15, 2016.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an

exemption under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by
initially granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if
needed, subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As
indicated above, the Agency previously published notices of final
disposition announcing its decision to exempt these 99 individuals from
rule prohibiting persons with ITDM from operating CMVs in interstate
commerce in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the medical condition of each applicant for an exemption from
rule prohibiting persons with ITDM from operating CMVs in interstate
commerce. That information is available by consulting the above cited
Federal Register publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket numbers FMCSA-2011-0368; FMCSA-
2011-0381; FMCSA-2013-0192; FMCSA-2013-0193 and click the search
button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue ``Comment Now!''
button on the right hand side of the page. On the new page, enter
information required including the specific section of this document to
which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination at any time after
the close of the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert
the docket number FMCSA-2011-0368; FMCSA-2011-0381; FMCSA-2013-0192;
FMCSA-2013-0193 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to this
notice.

    Issued on: March 10, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-05906 Filed 3-15-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 72)]
[Notices]
[Page 20079-20080]
[DOCID:fr14ap08-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57632; File No. SR-ISE-2008-29]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Price
Improvement Mechanism

April 8, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 20, 2008, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially
prepared by the ISE. 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 ISE is proposing to allow members to enter orders into the
Price Improvement Mechanism (``PIM'') at a price that matches the
national best bid or offer (``NBBO'') when the ISE market is inferior
to the NBBO. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
ISE's Web site (http://www.iseoptions.com), at the principal office of
the ISE, 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 ISE 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 ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Several options exchanges have adopted a fee structure in which
firms

receive a rebate for the execution of orders resting on the limit order
book (i.e., posting liquidity) and pay a fee for the execution of
orders that trade against liquidity resting on the limit order book
(i.e., taking liquidity). The taker fees currently range up to $0.50
per contract, and this fee is charged without consideration of the
client category, thus applying to the execution of public customer
orders. In contrast, ISE does not charge a fee for the execution of
public customer orders.
    The effective price paid by a customer who is purchasing an option
can be considerably higher on an exchange that charges a taker fee. For
example, a customer that enters a marketable limit order to buy 10
contracts for $0.10 will pay $100 on the ISE, whereas the cost of the
same transaction will be $105 if executed on an exchange with a $.50
taker fee. This represents an effective 5% increase for the customer.
Because public customer orders cannot be executed at prices that are
inferior to the NBBO, members are effectively forced to pay taker fees
when an exchange with a taker fee structure is at the NBBO. This is
because they either route their public customer orders directly to such
exchange or the taker fee is passed through when another exchange
accesses the NBBO on behalf of their customer through linkage.
    In order to provide broker-dealers with an alternative method of
achieving an execution at the NBBO for their customers without having
to pay taker fees, the Exchange proposes to expand the applicability of
its PIM.\3\ The PIM currently allows members to enter two-sided orders
for execution at a price that improves upon the NBBO. The customer side
of these orders is then exposed to all market participants to give them
an opportunity to participate in the trade at the proposed cross price
or better. This provides an opportunity for the customer order to
receive additional price improvement. The Exchanges proposes to extend
the application of the PIM to permit a member to enter an order into
the PIM at a price that is equal to the NBBO when the ISE's best bid or
offer (``ISE BBO'') is inferior to the NBBO. This will allow members to
guarantee execution of their customer orders on the ISE at a price that
is at least as good as the NBBO, thus providing customers with an
opportunity for price improvement over the NBBO while also allowing
members to avoid paying taker fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50819 (December 8,
2004), 69 Fr 75093 (December 15, 2004) (approving rules implmenting
the PIM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the basis under the Act for this
proposed rule change is found in Section 6(b)(5),\4\ in that the
proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms
of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general,
to protect investors and the public interest. Allowing members to
guarantee their customers an execution at the NBBO on an exchange that
does not charge a taker fee will lower the cost of trading and promote
a more efficient marketplace for public customer orders. In addition,
using the PIM to guarantee the price of the execution on the ISE will
give public customer orders an opportunity to receive price improvement
over the NBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    (a) By order approve such proposed rule change or
    (b) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-ISE-2008-29 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-29. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. 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-ISE-2008-29 and should be
submitted on or before May 5, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-7826 Filed 4-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 134 (Friday, July 12, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41851-41852]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16655]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0223; FRL-9831-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans for Georgia:
Partial Withdrawal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; partial withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: Due to comments received, EPA is publishing a partial
withdrawal of the direct final approval of revisions to the Georgia
State Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA stated in the direct final rule
that if EPA received adverse comments by June 17, 2013, the rule would
be withdrawn and not take effect.

DATES: The partial withdrawal is effective July 15, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Waterson, Air Planning Branch,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 16, 2013 (78 FR 28744), EPA published
a direct final rulemaking to approve portions of Georgia's September
15, 2008, August 30, 2010 (two submittals), and December 11, 2011, SIP
submissions that update the Georgia SIP to incorporate EPA's current
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for the sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, and particulate matter (PM) NAAQS. The
SIP submissions contain amendments to Georgia Rules 391-3-1.-02(4)(b),
(c), (e), (f), and (g) reflecting EPA's current NAAQS for the
aforementioned criteria pollutants. On May 16, 2013, EPA also published
an accompanying proposed rulemaking to approve the SIP revisions in the
event that EPA received adverse comments on the direct final
rulemaking. See 78 FR 28776.
    In the direct final rulemaking, EPA explained that the Agency was
publishing the rule without prior proposal because the Agency viewed
the submittals as non-controversial SIP amendments and anticipated no
adverse comments. Further, EPA explained that the Agency was
simultaneously publishing a separate document in the proposed rules
section of the Federal Register to serve as the proposal to approve the
SIP revisions should an adverse comment be filed. EPA also noted that
the rule would be effective on July 15, 2013, without further notice
unless the Agency received adverse comment by June 17, 2013. EPA
explained that if the Agency received such comments, then EPA would
publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public
that the rule would not take effect. It was also explained that all
public comments received would then be addressed in a subsequent final
rule based on the proposed rule, and that EPA would not institute a
second comment period on these actions. The public was advised that if
no comments were received that the rule would be effective on July 15,
2013, with no further action on the proposed rule.
    On May 17, 2013, EPA received a comment from a single commenter
that could be viewed as adverse with regard to the approval action that
EPA contemplated for the PM portion of the Georgia SIP revision. In
summary, the commenter noted that Georgia's SIP revision related to the
PM2.5 NAAQS that was addressed in EPA's May 16, 2013,
rulemaking actions did not reflect EPA's December 2012 revision to this
standard. The commenter recommended that EPA conditionally approve
Georgia's ``particulate matter SIP'' on the condition that the State
submit a revised SIP within a reasonable amount of time reflecting the
December 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The commenter expressed support
for EPA's approval of the SIP revisions incorporating updates to the
other NAAQS subject to the May 16, 2013, rulemakings.
    As result of this comment, EPA is withdrawing the direct final
action related solely to the PM portion of the Georgia SIP revision.
Specifically, through today's action, EPA is withdrawing the May 16,
2013, direct final approval of Georgia's SIP submission to update the
PM NAAQS via incorporation of amended Georgia Rule 391-3-1-.02(4)(c)
``Particulate Matter'' into the SIP.
    As indicated in the direct final rulemaking, EPA's May 16, 2013,
proposed rulemaking approving Georgia's SIP revision related to the PM
NAAQS is still in effect. The Agency is not opening an additional
comment period and will only consider the comments received prior to
June 17, 2013, the close of the public comment period. If EPA
determines that it is appropriate to finalize the proposed approval of
the Georgia SIP revision related to the PM NAAQS, EPA will publish a
final rule which will include a response to the comment received. In
the event that EPA determines that it is not appropriate to finalize
the proposed approval related to the PM NAAQS, EPA may issue a
subsequent proposal with a different course of action.
    Today's withdrawal action does not affect EPA's May 16, 2013,
direct final action on Georgia's SIP revisions related to the sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and lead NAAQS. The SIP revisions
updating the sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and lead NAAQS
are approved and amended Georgia Rules 391-3-1-.02(4)(b), (e), (f), and
(g) are incorporated into the SIP as of the effective date of the May
16, 2013, direct final action (July 15, 2013).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 28, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart L--Georgia

0
2. Section 52.570 (c) is amended under Table 1, under Emission
Standards by revising the entry for ``391-3-1-.02(4)'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.570  Identification of plan

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                            EPA-Approved Georgia Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                State
          State citation                Title/subject         effective              EPA  approval  date                        Explanation
                                                                date
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Emission Standards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
391-3-1-.02(4)....................  Ambient Air Standards       9/13/2011  5/16/2013.............................  Only subparagraphs (b), (e), (f), and
                                                                                (g) were approved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-16655 Filed 7-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 25 (Monday, February 8, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6450-6451]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02284]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2015-7486; Airspace Docket No. 15-AGL-26]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Wilmington, OH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the legal description of Class E surface
area airspace and Class E airspace designated as an extension at
Wilmington Air Park, Wilmington, OH, eliminating the Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) part-time status. This action also updates the airport name of
Wilmington Air Park, Wilmington, OH, to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, March 31, 2016. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 29591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
FAA Order 7400.9Z at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at Wilmington Air Park, Wilmington,
OH.

History

    In a review of the airspace, the FAA found the airspace for
Wilmington Air Park, Wilmington, OH, as published in FAA Order 7400.9Z,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, does not require part time
status. This is an administrative change removing the part time NOTAM
information from the legal description for the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and
6004, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9Z dated August 6, 2015, and
effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document
will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B,
C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by eliminating the NOTAM information that reads, ``This Class E
airspace is effective during the specific dates and times established
in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility
Directory.'' from the regulatory text of the Class E surface area
airspace, and Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class D,
at Wilmington Air Park, Wilmington, OH, formerly Airborne Airpark.
    This is an administrative change amending the description for
Wilmington Air Park to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical
database, and does not affect the boundaries, or operating requirements
of the airspace; therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C.
553(b) are unnecessary.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (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); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA

Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,''
paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any
potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015,
effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

AGL OH E2 Wilmington, OH (Amended)

Wilmington, Wilmington Air Park, OH
    (Lat. 39[deg]25'41'' N., long. 083[deg]47'32'' W.)
Wilmington, Hollister Field Airport, OH
    (Lat. 39[deg]26'15'' N., long. 083[deg]42'30'' W.)

    Within a 4.2-mile radius of Wilmington Air Park, and within 3.7
miles each side of the Midwest VOR/DME 215[deg] radial extending
from the 4.2-mile radius of Wilmington Air Park to 7 miles southwest
of the airport, and within 3.7 miles each side of the Midwest VOR/
DME 041[deg] radial extending from the 4.2-mile radius of the
airport to 7 miles northeast of the airport, excluding that portion
of airspace within a 1-mile radius of Hollister Field Airport.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

AGL OH E4 Wilmington, OH (Amended)

Wilmington, Wilmington Air Park, OH
    (Lat. 39[deg]25'41'' N., long. 083[deg]47'32'' W.)
Wilmington, Hollister Field Airport, OH
    (Lat. 39[deg]26'15'' N., long. 083[deg]42'30'' W.)
Midwest VOR/DME
    (Lat. 39[deg]25'47'' N., long. 083[deg]48'04'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3.7 miles
each side of the Midwest VOR/DME 215[deg] radial, extending from the
4.2-mile radius of Wilmington Air Park to 7 miles southwest of the
airport, and within 3.7 miles each side of the Midwest VOR/DME
041[deg] radial extending from the 4.2-mile radius of the airport to
7 miles northeast of the airport, excluding that portion of airspace
within a 1-mile radius of Hollister Field Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 29, 2016.
Robert W. Beck,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-02284 Filed 2-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8554-8556]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03888]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82749; File No. SR-ISE-2018-15]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Gateway
Fees

February 21, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 12, 2018, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, 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 proposes to amend the Exchange's Schedule of Fees to
remove obsolete text and amend the current rule text to provide a more
accurate description of the Gateway Fees which are currently offered on
ISE.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://ise.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend ISE's current pricing related to

Gateways at VI, C of the Schedule of Fees. The Exchange's current
gateway offering was modified with the completion of the transition of
ISE to INET technology in July 2017. First, as of July 2017, the
Exchange no longer offered a Shared Gateway for its DTI \3\ port to its
Members. Second, the Exchange modified its offering of its Dedicated
Gateway to remove the paired offering which allowed access to both ISE
and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (``GEMX''). Both of these changes are discussed in
more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ DTI was an order entry protocol offered on ISE that was
utilized by all members. DTI ports are not offered today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shared Gateway
    With the transition to INET, ISE no longer offered DTI ports as of
July 2017. Prior to the replatform, ISE assessed Members a Shared
Gateway fee of $750 per gateway, per month for DTI ports. The offering
provided connectivity to both ISE and GEMX. The Exchange no longer
offers DTI ports and has not billed this fee since the decommissioning
of the DTI ports in July 2017. No ISE Member will be offered a Shared
Gateway for a DTI port. Today, the Exchange does not assess a Shared
Gateway fee for ports. ISE Members are able to utilize various ports
today, namely, SQF, OTTO, FIX and Precise. The Exchange is noting a
Shared Gateway fee of $0 on the Schedule of Fees for clarity. The
Shared Gateway fee shall apply to all ports including FIX, SQF, OTTO
and Precise.
Dedicated Gateway and Dedicated SQF
    The Exchange filed a rule change to establish a Dedicated SQF Host
in 2017 to discuss the transition of gateway services in connection
with the INET migration.\4\ In that rule change the Exchange noted it
would offer Dedicated Gateways to facilitate member access to the
Exchange.\5\ The filing described a Dedicated SQF Host as an optional
offering available to Market Makers--i.e., Primary Market Makers
(``PMMs'') and Competitive Market Makers (``CMMs'')--only for their SQF
Port & SQF Purge Port connectivity.\6\ A Dedicated SQF Host provides
the PMM or CMM with assurance that their SQF Port and SQF Purge Port
connection to the Exchange resides on a host that is not shared with
other PMMs and CMMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 81095 (July 7,
2017), 82 FR 32409 (July 13, 2017)(SR-ISE-2017-62).
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ Id. See also ISE Rule 100(a)(25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's Schedule of Fees currently provides for a Dedicated
Gateway fee which is assessed at $2,250 per gateway pair, per month.
The Schedule of Fees notes that the gateway connectivity provides
connectivity to both GEMX and ISE. Also, the Schedule of Fees notes a
Dedicated SQF Host Fee of $0 per host per month. The Exchange
established the Dedicated SQF Host Fee at no cost because the Exchange
did not desire to double bill ISE Market Makers for two sets of SQF
connectivity--one to the old T7 legacy system and one to the new INET
system.
    The Exchange discontinued its paired Dedicated Gateways in July
2017. Since that time the Exchange has not billed Market Makers for use
of Dedicated Gateways. The Exchange has offered the Dedicated SQF Host
at no cost. At this time, the Exchange proposes to increase and amend
the dedicated offering. The Exchange proposes to eliminate the
reference to a ``Dedicated SQF Host Fee'' and commence assessing a fee
for the ``Dedicated Gateway'' offering. The Exchange proposes to
continue to refer to the dedicated offering as the ``Dedicated
Gateway'' and assess a fee of $2,250 per SQF gateway, per month. Only
Market Makers that utilize SQF ports have the option of utilizing this
dedicated offering. Prior to the INET transition, all Members were able
to utilize the dedicated offering for their DTI port. Today, only SQF
ports, which are utilized by Market Makers, may be dedicated. All other
ports, namely FIX, OTTO and Precise, can only be shared. An SQF port
can be shared, at no cost, or dedicated. The current Dedicated SQF will
not offer connectivity for GEMX and therefore the ``pair'' language is
no longer relevant. The offering only grants access to ISE.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility,
and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shared Gateway
    The Exchange believes that removing the obsolete pricing for the
Shared Gateway for the DTI ports is reasonable because DTI ports are no
longer available and the Exchange does not assess any other port a
Shared Gateway fee. Also, the Exchange offers a Shared Gateway for any
port, SQF, OTTO, FIX or Precise, at no cost.
    The Exchange believes that removing the pricing for the Shared
Gateway for DTI ports is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because DTI ports are no longer available on ISE for any Member. Any
Member may utilize a Shared Gateway at no cost.
Dedicated Gateway and Dedicated SQF
    The Exchange believes that removing the current Dedicated Gateway
paired pricing and the reference to the Dedicated SQF Host Fee, and
increasing the fee for a dedicated offering, namely ``Dedicated
Gateway'' fee from $0 \9\ to $2,250 per SQF gateway, per month is
reasonable. The Exchange discontinued the paired connectivity through
the legacy T7 in July 2017. The Exchange offered these dedicated
servers at no cost since August 2017. Increasing the Dedicated Gateway
fee at this time permits the Exchange to recuperate costs its bears to
offer such dedicated services and permits ISE Marker Makers to select
between a Shared Gateway and a Dedicated Gateway for their SQF ports.
The Exchange believes that assessing a fee of $2,250 per host, per
month to obtain a dedicated server is reasonable given the cost of this
offering to the Exchange. ISE Market Makers have the option of
selecting a Shared Gateway for their SQF ports at no cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange is not currently assessing a fee for a
dedicated offering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that removing the current Dedicated Gateway
paired pricing and the reference to the Dedicated SQF Host Fee, and
increasing the fee for a dedicated offering, namely ``Dedicated
Gateway'' fee from $0 to $2,250 per SQF gateway, per month is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory. At this time, no ISE Member is being
assessed the paired Dedicated Gateway fees. Today, no ISE Market Maker
is being assessed a Dedicated SQF Host fee. Any ISE Market Maker may
select a Dedicated SQF, as compared to a Shared Gateway for their SQF
connectivity. The Exchange will uniformly assess any ISE Market Maker
the proposed $2,250 per host, per month fee. ISE Market Makers are
likely to benefit from a dedicated as compared to a shared gateway as
compared to other market participants. Dedicated SQF is designed to
provide a more deterministic experience for ISE Market Makers when
quoting on the Exchange by allowing them to better load balance their
trading sessions, but does not provide any latency benefit when
compared to using the shared

gateways, which are built on identical hardware to the dedicated
gateways. The Exchange therefore believes that ISE Market Makers are
likely to benefit from the load balancing provided by the dedicated
gateways, which will aid ISE Market Makers in their obligations to
maintain tight markets--a benefit that ultimately accrues to the
benefit of all market participants that trade on the Exchange. Based on
the Exchange's experience, the Exchange does not believe that market
participants using other protocols, namely FIX, OTTO and Precise, are
likely to use dedicated gateways, and the Exchange is therefore not
offering such Dedicated Gateways for any of ports other than SQF Ports.
    The Exchange does not believe that it is unfairly discriminatory to
offer Dedicated Gateways only for SQF ports, which are only available
to ISE Market Makers. Other exchanges also have gateways that are
restricted to market makers. The New York Stock Exchange, for example,
offers DMM Gateways that are only available to their Designated Market
Makers.\10\ ISE Market Makers provide liquidity on the Exchange and
have continuous quoting obligations \11\ to the market that require the
ability to quickly and efficiently interact with their quotes and
orders. Finally, with respect to assessing the same fee while
discontinuing access to GEMX, the Exchange believes that is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory to no longer offer access to GEMX with
this particular offering as other exchanges do not offer this
option.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79748 (January 6,
2017), 82 FR 3828 (January 12, 2017) (SR-NYSE-2016-93).
    \11\ See ISE Rule 804(e).
    \12\ Nasdaq MRX, LLC has never offered a dedicated gateway
option today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. In terms of inter-market
competition, the Exchange notes other exchanges offer similar dedicated
access to their servers.\13\ The Exchange 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. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See note 9 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In terms of intra-market competition, no ISE Member will be
assessed for a Shared Gateway. The new proposed Dedicated Gateway fee
will be uniformly assessed to ISE Market Makers, who provide liquidity
on the Exchange and have continuous quoting obligations \14\ to the
market. These market participants require the ability to quickly and
efficiently interact with their quotes and orders. Further will respect
to a Dedicated Gateways, the Exchange believes that ISE Market Makers
are likely to benefit from the load balancing, which will aid ISE
Market Makers in their obligations to maintain tight markets--a benefit
that ultimately accrues to the benefit of all market participants that
trade on the Exchange. An ISE Market Maker may selected a Shared
Gateway for their SQF ports at no cost. Further, the Exchange notes
that no ISE Market Maker will be offered connectivity to GEMX in
connection with this offering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See ISE Rule 804(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\15\ 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: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public
interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2018-15 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-ISE-2018-15. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (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 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 inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2018-15 and should be submitted on
or before March 20, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-03888 Filed 2-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 3, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 46027]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18886]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4429-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2019-0001]

Mississippi; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Mississippi (FEMA-4429-DR), dated April 23, 2019, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued August 22, 2019.

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: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Mississippi is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of April 23, 2019.

Issaquena, Sharkey, Warren, and Yazoo Counties for Public Assistance.

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.

Pete Gaynor,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-18886 Filed 8-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 52 (Friday, March 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15015-15018]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05675]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91324; File No. SR-IEX-2021-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Allow
Retail Orders To Trade With Certain Aggressively Priced Displayed Odd
Lot Orders

March 15, 2021.
    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 March 1, 2021, the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the 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

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Act,\4\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\5\ IEX is filing with the Commission a
proposed rule change to how Retail orders interact with displayed odd
lot orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to modify the manner in
which Retail orders \6\ interact with displayed odd lot orders, to make
it consistent with the manner in which the Exchange otherwise handles
displayed odd lot orders.\7\ Specifically, as detailed below, IEX
proposes to change the rules regarding Retail orders to allow them to
execute against a displayed odd lot order priced more aggressively than
the Midpoint Price.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See IEX Rules 11.190(b)(15) and 11.232(a)(2).
    \7\ IEX recently made an immediately effective rule filing to
allow displayed odd lot orders on the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 90933 (January 15, 2021), 86 FR 6687
(January 22, 2021) (SR-IEX-2021-01).
    \8\ The term ``Midpoint Price'' shall mean the midpoint of the
NBBO. See IEX Rule 1.160(t). The term ``NBBO'' shall mean the
national best bid or offer, as set forth in Rule 600(b) of
Regulation NMS under the Act, determined as set forth in IEX Rule
11.410(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX will soon be implementing rule changes that modify the way it
handles odd lot orders by allowing them to be displayed orders and to
aggregate to form a protected quotation,\9\ which include rule
provisions that allow displayed buy (sell) orders to rest on the IEX
Order Book \10\ at prices more aggressive than both the NBB \11\ (NBO
\12\) and the Midpoint Price.\13\ IEX's displayed odd lot rule filing
included several related rule changes to prevent a displayed odd lot
order that is a not protected quotation from resulting in a lock or
cross of IEX's Order Book.\14\ Specifically, IEX adjusted its non-
displayed price sliding rules to adjust the price of non-displayed
orders that would otherwise be locked or crossed by a displayed odd lot
order, and changed its order execution rules to allow a displayed order
previously subject to price sliding to match with a contra-side
displayed odd lot order that the original order would have locked or
crossed upon a subsequent repricing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ IEX currently expects to implement the rule changes to
provide for displayed odd lots during the first quarter of 2021. See
https://iextrading.com/alerts/#/137 (January 29, 2021).
    \10\ See IEX Rule 1.160(p).
    \11\ See IEX Rule 1.160(u).
    \12\ See IEX Rule 1.160(u).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90933 (January 15,
2021), 86 FR 6687 (January 22, 2021) (SR-IEX-2021-01).
    \14\ See supra note 13 at 6689-90.
    \15\ See supra note 13 at 6689-90.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX has identified an additional circumstance in which a displayed
unprotected odd lot order could result in a suboptimal trading impact.

Specifically, a displayed unprotected odd lot order that is resting at
a price more aggressive than the Midpoint Price (i.e. above the
Midpoint Price in the case of a buy order and below the Midpoint Price
in the case of a sell order) would effectively block a Retail order's
access to orders resting at the Midpoint Price. Thus, IEX now proposes
to make an analogous change to allow Retail orders to interact with
displayed odd lot orders priced more aggressively than the Midpoint
Price.
    IEX introduced its Retail Price Improvement Program (``Retail
Program'') in 2019.\16\ IEX's Retail Program is designed to provide
retail investors with meaningful price improvement opportunities by
offering price improvement to Retail orders. Only Members \17\ that the
Exchange has approved as Retail Member Organizations (``RMO'') \18\ may
submit Retail orders to the Exchange on behalf of their retail
customers.\19\ Retail orders are Discretionary Peg \20\ or Midpoint Peg
\21\ orders with a Time-in-Force of IOC or FOK, and that are only
eligible to trade at the Midpoint Price. Restricting Retail orders to
only execute at the Midpoint Price was designed to maximize their price
improvement opportunities, while recognizing that in 2019, a large
portion of IEX's resting liquidity was non-displayed orders eligible to
execute at the Midpoint Price.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86619 (August 9,
2019), 84 FR 41769 (August 15, 2019) (SR-IEX-2019-05) (SEC order
approving IEX's Retail Price Improvement Program).
    \17\ See IEX Rule 1.160(s).
    \18\ See IEX Rule 11.232(a)(1).
    \19\ For a Member to be approved as a RMO, it must complete an
application and submit materials reflecting that it either conducts
a retail business or routes retail orders on behalf of another
broker-dealer. See IEX Rule 11.232(b).
    \20\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(10).
    \21\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(9).
    \22\ See supra note 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because displayed odd lot orders can book at prices more aggressive
than the Midpoint Price, but Retail orders can only trade at the
Midpoint Price, Retail orders could miss the opportunity to obtain even
more price improvement that would be obtained by executing against an
aggressively priced displayed odd lot order. By way of example, if the
market is $10.10 by $10.20, and IEX has on its Order Book a displayed
odd lot order to sell 50 shares at $10.13 and a non-displayed Midpoint
Peg order to sell 100 shares at the Midpoint Price of $10.15, and IEX
receives an incoming Retail order to buy 100 shares; the Retail order
would not be able to match with the Midpoint Peg order at $10.15
because the displayed odd lot order has price priority to the Midpoint
Peg order. However, the Retail order also cannot execute against the
displayed odd lot order because a Retail order is only eligible to
trade at the Midpoint Price. Therefore, the Retail order is not
executable under current IEX rules and would be canceled.\23\ If the
Retail order could trade with the aggressively priced displayed odd lot
order, 50 shares would execute with the displayed odd lot order at
$10.13, and the remaining 50 shares would execute with the Midpoint Peg
order at $10.15. Allowing the Retail order to match with the
aggressively priced displayed odd lot order would offer greater price
improvement for the 50 shares that matched at $10.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See IEX Rule 11.230(a) (a non-executable, non-routable
order will be canceled).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, IEX is proposing to modify IEX Rules 11.232(a)(2) and
(e)(2) to provide that Retail orders are only eligible to trade at the
Midpoint Price, with the exception that Retail orders can also trade
with an aggressively priced displayed odd lot order priced on the far
side of the Midpoint Price. In other words, as proposed, a Retail order
to sell (buy) can match with any order to buy (sell) at the Midpoint
Price or a displayed odd lot order to buy (sell) priced at or between
the NBO (NBB) and the Midpoint Price.
    IEX notes that this proposed rule change is consistent with the
rules of the other exchanges with retail price improvement programs,
none of which restrict their retail orders from only executing at the
Midpoint Price.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See NYSE Rule 7.44(a)(3); Cboe BYX Rule 11.24 (a)(2);
Nasdaq BX Rule 4702(b)(6)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX is also proposing a conforming amendment to Rule 11.232(e)(3)
to reflect that an aggressively priced displayed odd lot order will
execute before any non-displayed Midpoint Price orders. In addition,
IEX is proposing to add Example 4 at the end of Rule 11.232, to
demonstrate how an aggressively priced displayed odd lot order will
trade with a Retail order before the Retail order matches with any non-
displayed Midpoint Price orders.
    Finally, IEX is proposing to correct two typographical errors: Add
a missing ``$'' in three places in Examples 1, 2, and 3; and correct
the reference in Example 3, so it cites IEX Rule 11.220(a)(c)(vii)
instead of Rule 11.220(a)(c)(viii).\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See supra note 13 (renumbering Rule 11.220(a)(c)(viii) as
Rule 11.220(a)(c)(vii)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\26\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\27\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. Specifically, the Exchange believes
that the proposed rule change to allow Retail orders to trade with an
aggressively priced displayed odd lot order is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because it is designed
to increase the opportunities for retail investors to obtain price
improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, as discussed in the Purpose section, IEX believes that
the proposed rule change is consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest because it is designed to further incentivize
the entry of additional Retail orders and displayed odd lot orders on
IEX by providing the opportunity for Retail orders to obtain greater
price improvement and additional execution opportunities against
displayed odd lot orders, while offering increased execution
opportunities to displayed odd lot orders. Moreover, because displayed
odd lots can result from displayed limit orders of more than odd lot
size, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is also
designed to incentivize the entry of displayed limit orders generally
by providing such increased execution opportunities to displayed odd
lot orders. IEX believes that, to the extent the proposed rule change
is successful in incentivizing the entry of additional Retail orders
and displayed odd lot and limit orders on IEX it will provide increased
liquidity on the Exchange to the benefit of all market participants,
thereby supporting the purposes of the Act to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
    Additionally, IEX believes that the proposed corrections to IEX
Rule 11.232 further the purposes of the Act because they will provide
greater clarity and consistency to the IEX Rule Book thereby reducing
the potential for confusion of any market participants. Specifically,
the proposed typographical

fixes will prevent any confusion to market participants about the
application of those examples, provide clarity, and reduce any possible
confusion to market participants.

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary,
and as discussed in the Statutory Basis section, the proposal is
designed to enhance IEX's competitiveness with other markets by further
incentivizing the entry of additional displayed odd lot and limit
orders on IEX by providing additional execution opportunities for
displayed odd lot orders and offering increased price improvement to
Retail orders, thereby increasing the overall liquidity profile of the
Exchange to the benefit of all market participants. IEX also believes
that conforming the Exchange's treatment of Retail orders with that of
other exchanges with retail price improvement programs would promote
intermarket competition for increasingly sought-after retail investor
orders, to the benefit of retail customers in particular, and the
market as a whole.
    The Exchange also does not believe that the proposed rule change
will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. While only
Members approved by the Exchange to be RMOs can submit Retail orders to
the Exchange, those differences are not based on the type of Member
entering orders but on whether the order is for a retail customer, and
there is no restriction on whether a Member can handle retail customer
orders. Further, any Member can submit a displayed odd lot or limit
order and would therefore benefit if aggressively priced displayed odd
lot orders have more opportunities to execute because they can now
trade with Retail orders.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \28\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \29\
thereunder. 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, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \29\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \30\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\31\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that
IEX can implement the proposed rule change concurrently with
implementation of its displayed odd lot rule filing, which is
anticipated within the next several weeks. The Exchange has represented
that the proposal is substantially similar to the functionality of
other exchanges and will provide the opportunity for Retail orders to
obtain greater price improvement by allowing them to execute against
displayed odd lot orders priced more aggressively than the Midpoint
Price. The Exchange further states that waiver of the operative delay
will allow it to synchronize the timing for implementation of the
proposed rule change with the displayed odd lot rule filing
implementation. The Commission believes that waiver of the operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest because the proposal does not raise any novel issues and will
allow Retail orders to benefit from more opportunities to receive
executions at improved prices. Waiver of the operative delay will allow
the Exchange to offer this benefit to investors without undue delay
when it implements its new displayed odd lot functionality. For these
reasons, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \32\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \33\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 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-IEX-2021-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2021-03. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (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 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 inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-
2021-03, and should be submitted on or before April 9, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-05675 Filed 3-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 78 (Friday, April 23, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21161-21162]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9376]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0502; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-02-AD;
Amendment 39-16273; AD 2010-09-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company (GE) CJ610
Series Turbojet Engines and CF700 Series Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for GE
CJ610 series turbojet engines and CF700 turbofan engines with AFT
Technologies combustion liners, part number (P/N) AFT-5016T30G02. This
AD requires removing from service, AFT Technologies combustion liners,
P/N AFT-5016T30G02. This AD results from a report of an AFT
Technologies combustion liner that released a large section of the
inner combustion liner and reports of six combustion liners with
premature cracks. We are issuing this AD to prevent premature cracks in
the combustion liner, which could release pieces of the inner
combustion liner. A release of pieces of the inner combustion liner
could cause an uncontained failure of the engine turbine and damage to
the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 28, 2010.

ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Norman Perenson, Aerospace Engineer,
New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516) 794-
5531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39
with a proposed AD. The proposed AD applies to GE CJ610 series turbojet
engines and CF700 turbofan engines with AFT Technologies combustion
liners, P/N AFT-5016T30G02 installed. We published the proposed AD in
the Federal Register on September 9, 2009 (74 FR 46395). That action
proposed to require replacing combustion liners, P/N AFT-5016T30G02:
     Before they accumulate 200 hours-since-new (HSN) or 300
cycles-since-new (CSN), or
     Within 15 hours-in-service or 10 cycles-in-service, after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, if the
combustion liner has already exceeded 200 HSN or 300 CSN.

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 regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is provided in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Agrees With the Proposed AD

    One commenter agrees with the AD.

Request To Replace ``* * * Other Products of the Same Type Design''

    One commenter, AFT Technologies, asks us to replace ``* * * other
products of the same type design'' with ``* * * other products of the
same manufacture.'' The commenter feels ``The A.D. inadvertently
suggests that despite PMA approval to manufacture the subject part,
it's failure or potential for failure is the result of a design defect,
as opposed to an equally possible manufacturing or assembly defect.''
And that the AD requires clarification.
    We do not agree that there is any need to distinguish between
design and manufacture in the AD. The regulation that controls type
design, 14 CFR part 21.31, defines type design as design and
manufacture. In addition, we didn't make any conclusion as to the cause
of the excessive cracking. Determination of the cracking is the
responsibility of the PMA holder. As stated in the discussion of the
proposed rule, ``The PMA holder has not been able to determine the
cause of the premature combustion liner failure.'' Also, the statement
``* * * other products of the same type design'' appears only in the
NPRM preamble section ``FAA's Determination and Requirements of the
Proposed AD.'' That

preamble section is not part of the final rule. We didn't change the
AD.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the
comment[s] received, and determined that air safety and the public
interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 13 engines installed on airplanes
of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 96 work-
hours per engine to perform the required actions, and that the average
labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $7,000
per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of the
AD to U.S. operators to be $190,840.

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 have 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 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); 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 summary of the costs to comply with this AD and
placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary at the
address listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the Federal Aviation Administration 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:
2010-09-08 General Electric Company (GE): Amendment 39-16273. Docket
No. FAA-2009-0502; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-02-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective May 28,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to GE CJ610 series turbojet and CF700 series
turbofan engines with AFT Technologies combustion liner, part number
(P/N) AFT-5016T30G02, installed. These engines are installed on, but
not limited to, Learjet Inc. model 24 series and model 25 series
airplanes, Dassault Aviation Fan Jet Falcon series airplanes, and
Sabreliner Corporation NA-265-70 and NA-265-80 series airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report of an AFT Technologies
combustion liner that released a large section of the inner
combustion liner and reports of six combustion liners with premature
cracks. We are issuing this AD to prevent premature cracks in the
combustion liner, which could release pieces of the inner combustion
liner. A release of pieces of the inner combustion liner could cause
an uncontained failure of the engine turbine and damage to the
airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the
actions have already been done.

Replacement of AFT Technologies Combustion Liner P/N AFT-5016T30G02

    (f) For engines that have an AFT Technologies combustion liner,
P/N AFT-5016T30G02, with fewer than 200 hours-since-new (HSN) or 300
cycles-since-new (CSN), remove the AFT Technologies combustion
liner, P/N AFT-5016T30G02, before exceeding 200 HSN or 300 CSN,
whichever occurs first.
    (g) For engines that have an AFT Technologies combustion liner,
P/N AFT-5016T30G02, with 200 HSN or more or 300 CSN or more, remove
the AFT Technologies combustion liner, P/N AFT-5016T30G02, within 15
hours-in-service or 10 cycles-in-service, after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first.
    (h) After the effective date of this AD, don't install any AFT
Technologies combustion liner, P/N AFT-5016T30G02, in any engine.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (i) The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, has the
authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD
if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (j) Contact Norman Perenson, Aerospace Engineer, New York
Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516) 794-
5531, for more information about this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 19, 2010.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-9376 Filed 4-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 206 (Thursday, October 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 59707]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23483]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-187-000]

Smoky Mountain Transmission LLC; Supplemental Notice That Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Smoky Mountain Transmission LLC's filing includes a request for blanket
authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities
and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is November 12, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 22, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-23483 Filed 10-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P