[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58496-58498]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24273]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2011-0752, FRL-9468-7]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; State Program Adequacy Determination: Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills (MSWLFs) and Non-Municipal, Non-Hazardous Waste
Disposal Units That Receive Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity
Generator (CESQG) Hazardous Waste

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to renew
an existing approved Information Collection Request (ICR) concerning
the State Program adequacy determinations for non-hazardous municipal
waste disposal. This ICR is scheduled to expire on February 29, 2012.
Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is
soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information
collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 21, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2011-0752 by one of the following methods:
    http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Mail: RCRA Docket (28221T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    Hand Delivery: 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Room 3334, Washington,
DC 20460. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-
2011-0752. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov website
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Dufficy, Materials Recovery and
Waste Management Division, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery, mail code 5304P, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 703-
308-9037; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2011-0752, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the RCRA Docket in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for the RCRA Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft
collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What information collection activity or ICR does this apply to?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
States.
    Title: State Program Adequacy Determination: Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills (MSWLFs) and Non-Municipal, Non-Hazardous Waste Disposal
Units that Receive Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
(CESQG) Hazardous Waste.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1608.06, OMB Control No. 2050-0152.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on February
29, 2012. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Section 4010(c) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) of 1976 requires that EPA revise the landfill criteria
promulgated under paragraph (1) of Section 4004(a) and Section
1008(a)(3). Section 4005(c) of RCRA, as amended by the Hazardous Solid
Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984, requires states to develop and
implement permit programs to ensure

that MSWLFs and non-municipal, non-hazardous waste disposal units that
receive household hazardous waste or CESQG hazardous waste are in
compliance with the revised criteria for the design and operation of
non-municipal, non-hazardous waste disposal units under 40 CFR part
257, Subpart B and MSWLFs under 40 CFR Part 258. (40 CFR part 257,
subpart B and 40 CFR part 258 are henceforth referred to as the
``revised federal criteria''.) Section 4005(c) of RCRA further mandates
the EPA Administrator to determine the adequacy of state permit
programs to ensure owner and/or operator compliance with the revised
federal criteria. A state program that is deemed adequate to ensure
compliance may afford flexibility to owners or operators in the
approaches they use to meet federal requirements, significantly
reducing the burden associated with compliance.
    In response to the statutory requirement in Sec.  4005(c), EPA
developed 40 CFR Part 239, commonly referred to as the State
Implementation Rule (SIR). The SIR describes the state application and
EPA review procedures and defines the elements of an adequate state
permit program.
    The collection of information from the state during the permit
program adequacy determination process allows EPA to evaluate whether a
program for which approval is requested is appropriate in structure and
authority to ensure owner or operator compliance with the revised
federal criteria. The SIR does not require the use of a particular
application form. Section 239.3 of the SIR, however, requires that all
state applications contain the following five components:
    (1) A transmittal letter requesting permit program approval.
    (2) A narrative description of the state permit program, including
a demonstration that the state's standards for non-municipal, non-
hazardous waste disposal units that receive CESQG hazardous waste are
technically comparable to the part 257, subpart B criteria and/or that
its MSWLF standards are technically comparable to the Part 258
criteria.
    (3) A legal certification demonstrating that the state has the
authority to carry out the program.
    (4) Copies of state laws, regulations, and guidance that the state
believes demonstrate program adequacy.
    (5) Copies of relevant state-tribal agreements if the state has
negotiated with a tribe for the implementation of a permit program for
non-municipal, non-hazardous waste disposal units that receive CESQG
hazardous waste and/or MSWLFs on tribal lands.
    The EPA Administrator has delegated the authority to make
determinations of adequacy, as contained in the statute, to the EPA
Regional Administrator. The appropriate EPA Regional Office, therefore,
will use the information provided by each state to determine whether
the state's permit program satisfies the statutory test reflected in
the requirements of 40 CFR part 239. In all cases, the information will
be analyzed to determine the adequacy of the state's permit program for
ensuring compliance with the federal revised criteria.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 242 hours per
response. There is no recordkeeping burden associated with this ICR.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 12.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 2,405.
    Estimated total annual costs: $128,268. All costs are labor costs,
there are no capital/start-up or O&M costs associated with this ICR.

What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: September 14, 2011.
Suzanne Rudzinski,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
 [FR Doc. 2011-24273 Filed 9-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 227 (Monday, November 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60514-60516]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25598]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84621; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2018-090]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Introduce a New Midpoint Trade Now Functionality

November 19, 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 November 9, 2018, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 4702 (Order Types) and Rule
4703 (Order Attributes) to introduce a new Midpoint Trade Now
functionality.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaq.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 Rule 4702 (Order Types) and Rule
4703 (Order Attributes) to introduce a new Midpoint Trade Now
functionality.\3\ Midpoint Trade Now will be an Order Attribute \4\
that allows a resting Order that becomes locked at its non-displayed
price by an incoming Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order \5\ to automatically
execute against that Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order as a liquidity taker.
Any remaining shares of the resting Order will remain posted on the
Nasdaq Book with the same priority. The Midpoint Trade Now Order
Attribute may be enabled on a port level basis for all Order Types that
support it and, for the Non-Displayed Order Type, also on an order-by-
order basis. Midpoint Trade Now will be available for all Order entry
protocols except for QIX.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Order'' means an instruction to trade a specified
number of shares in a specified System Security submitted to the
Nasdaq Market Center by a Participant. An ``Order Type'' is a
standardized set of instructions associated with an Order that
define how it will behave with respect to pricing, execution, and/or
posting to the Nasdaq Book when submitted to Nasdaq. An ``Order
Attribute'' is a further set of variable instructions that may be
associated with an Order to further define how it will behave with
respect to pricing, execution, and/or posting to the Nasdaq Book
when submitted to Nasdaq. The available Order Types and Order
Attributes, and the Order Attributes that may be associated with
particular Order Types, are described in Rules 4702 and 4703. One or
more Order Attributes may be assigned to a single Order; provided,
however, that if the use of multiple Order Attributes would provide
contradictory instructions to an Order, the System will reject the
Order or remove non-conforming Order Attributes. See Rule 4701(e).
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ A Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order is an Order Type with a Non-
Display Order Attribute that is priced at the midpoint between the
NBBO and that will execute upon entry only in circumstances where
economically beneficial to the party entering the Order. See Rule
4702(b)(5).
    \6\ Nasdaq notes that, although the QIX protocol can support the
removing of liquidity, QIX is designed to provide two-sided quote
messages to the trading system, unlike the OUCH, RASH, FLITE and FIX
protocols, which are designed to facilitate Order submission. See
Item II.B. discussion, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to offer the Midpoint Trade Now
instruction for all Orders that have the Non-Displayed Order Attribute
\7\ and are not otherwise subject to restrictions on execution.
Accordingly, the Midpoint Trade Now instruction shall not be available
for Price to Display Orders (Rule 4702(b)(2)), Market Maker Peg Orders
(Rule 4702(b)(7)), Supplemental Orders (Rule 4702(b)(6)), Market On
Open Orders (Rule 4702(b)(8)), Limit On Open Orders (Rule 4702(b)(9)),
Opening Imbalance Only Orders (Rule 4702(b)(10)), Market On Close
Orders (Rule 4702(b)(11)), Limit on Close Orders (Rule 4702(b)(12)),
Imbalance Only Orders (Rule 4702(b)(13)), and Midpoint Extended Life
Orders (Rule 4702(b)(14)). These order types are either: (a) Ancapable
of having a non-displayed price, hence the use of the Midpoint Trade
Now instruction is not applicable, or b) subject to other Nasdaq rules
regarding the display and execution of those orders, thus the use of
the Midpoint Trade Now instruction would be inconsistent with those
other Nasdaq rules.\8\ The Midpoint Trade-

Now instruction will be available as a port-setting for all other Order
Types, namely Price to Comply Orders (Rule 4702(b)(1)), Non-Displayed
Orders (Rule 4702(b)(3)), Post Only Orders (Rule 4702(b)(4)) and
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Orders (Rule 4702(b)(5)). In addition, Midpoint
Trade Now will be available on an Order-by-Order basis \9\ for Non-
Displayed Orders.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ There is both a Non-Display Order Attribute (Rule 4703(k))
and a Non-Display Order (Rule 4702(b)(3)).
    \8\ For example, a Supplemental Order is an order type with a
Non-Display Order attribute that is held on the Nasdaq Book in order
to provide liquidity at the NBBO through a special execution process
described in Rule 4757(a)(1)(D). Rule 4757(a)(1)(D) provides that a
Supplemental Order will be matched against an order only at the
National Best Bid or Offer, and only if the size of the order is
less than or equal to the aggregate size of Supplemental Order
interest available at the price of the order. In addition, a
Supplemental Order will not execute if the NBBO is locked or
crossed. See Rule 4757(a)(1)(D). To the extent that a Supplemental
Order will only be matched at the National Best Bid or Offer, and
the Midpoint Trade-Now instruction allows a locked resting order to
execute at a price that is potentially better than the NBBO, the
function of the Trade-Now [sic] instruction is inconsistent with the
function of the Supplemental Order.
    \9\ If a port is set to not use Midpoint Trade Now and a Non-
Displayed Order is sent with a Midpoint Trade Now specification
through the port, the Order's instructions will override the port
setting.
    \10\ While the port-level setting applies to Orders with a Non-
Displayed Order Attribute, order-by-order specification is available
only for the Orders with the specific Non-Displayed Order Type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A resting Order that is entered with the Midpoint Trade Now Order
Attribute will execute against locking interest automatically. As such,
the availability of Midpoint Trade Now obviates the need for execution
restrictions on incoming Orders because when a resting Order without
the Midpoint Trade Now Order Attribute is being locked at its non-
displayed price by a Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order, new incoming Orders
(with or without the Midpoint Trade Now Attribute, as applicable) will
be able to execute against the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order at the
locking price. Nasdaq also proposes to amend Rule 4702(b)(5)(A) to
reflect this new functionality. Currently, if a Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order that posts to the Nasdaq Book is locking a preexisting Order, the
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order will execute against an incoming Order
only if the price of the incoming sell (buy) Order is lower (higher)
than the price of the preexisting Order. As an example, if the midpoint
is at $11.03 and there is a Non-Displayed Order (or another Order with
a Non-Display Order Attribute) on the Nasdaq Book to sell at $11.03,
and if the incoming buy Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order locks the
preexisting Non-Displayed Order at $11.03, the Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order could execute only against an incoming Order to sell priced at
less than $11.03.
    However, under the proposed functionality, if there is a resting
sell (buy) Order on the Nasdaq Book without the Midpoint Trade Now
Attribute that is locked at its non-displayed price by a buy (sell)
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order, new incoming Orders (with or without the
Midpoint Trade Now Order Attribute), entered at a price equal to or
lower (higher) than the non-displayed price of the locked sell (buy)
Order, will be able to execute against the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order
at the locking price. The resting Order will remain on the Nasdaq Book
and will retain its priority after the subsequent Order has executed
against the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order. For example, the Best Bid is
$11 and the Best Offer is $11.06, and a buy Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order is locking a preexisting sell Non-Displayed Order without the
Midpoint Trade Now Attribute at $11.03. The Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order could execute against incoming Orders, with or without the
Midpoint Trade Now Attribute, to sell priced equal to or less than
$11.03.
    The proposed functionality relating to Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Orders that lock a pre-existing Order, is set forth in Rule 4703(n).
This new text makes the current functionality described in Rule
4702(b)(5)(A) obsolete with respect to non-display orders. Accordingly,
Nasdaq is revising language in Rule 4702(b)(5)(A) that once applied to
both displayed and non-displayed orders to now only apply to displayed
orders.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As part of this proposal, Nasdaq also proposes to include
references in Rule 4702(b)(5)(A) ``to buy,'' where appropriate, to
further clarify this rule language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation
    The Exchange will implement Midpoint Trade Now in the first quarter
of 2019, and will announce the implementation date via an Equity Trader
Alert. The Exchange will implement the proposed clarifying change to
Rule 4702(b)(5)(A) at the earliest permissible time.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Midpoint Trade Now functionality will allow market
participants to have their Orders executed as a taker of liquidity
should that Order become locked at its non-displayed price by a contra-
side Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order. This functionality will therefore
promote an efficient and orderly market by allowing Orders in this
scenario to execute and resolve a locked market. Similarly, allowing a
subsequent Order to execute against a locking Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order if the Order that is locked by the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order
has not enabled the Midpoint Trade-Now functionality will also promote
an efficient and orderly market by allowing the incoming Order in that
scenario to execute and resolve an instance where Orders with a non-
displayed price on both the buy and sell side of the market are priced
equally but not executing against each other. The Midpoint Trade Now
functionality is an optional feature that is being offered at no
additional charge, and is designed to reflect both the objectives of
the Nasdaq market, and the order flow management practices of various
market participants.
    The Exchange believes that the decision to offer the new
functionality on an order-by-order basis only for one Order Type--and
as a port setting for others--is consistent with the Act because it
reflects the varying use cases of Nasdaq's Order Types and the
flexibility required by different market participants. Users of the
Non-Displayed Order Type may be more or less sensitive to removing
liquidity depending on market conditions and thus would prefer to
decide on a case-by-case basis whether that order will trade with any
available liquidity on the book. In contrast, Price to Comply Orders,
Post Only Orders, and Midpoint Peg-Post Only Orders are generally
entered with the expectation of joining a certain price level,
executing only as an adder of liquidity.\15\ Therefore, Nasdaq does not
believe users of these Order Types would want or need flexibility on an
order-by-order basis as it is generally inconsistent with the purpose
of the Order Type. Nevertheless, Nasdaq recognizes that some market
participants may prefer to execute whenever possible and thus

will make Midpoint Trade Now available for these Order Types as a port
setting to provide blanket coverage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Price to Comply Orders and Post Only Orders are generally
Orders with a Display Attribute, but may in certain circumstances
also have a non-displayed price. For example, if the NBBO is 10.99 x
11.00, a Price to Comply Order to buy at 11.00 would be ranked at
11.00 but displayed at 10.99. If the National Best Offer
subsequently moved to 11.01, and the Participant did not elect to
have their order canceled back or otherwise adjusted in such
circumstances, the Order would then be ranked at the new midpoint.
In this case, an incoming Midpoint Peg-Post Only Order could lock
the resting Price to Comply Order at its non-displayed price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq believes that the proposed clarifying changes and revised
rule text under Rule 4702(b)(5)(A) are consistent with the Act because
they will help avoid investor confusion that may be caused by not
making it clear that a Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order in the Rule's
example is an Order to buy, and by having text that refers to
functionality that will no longer apply. As noted above, Nasdaq is
revising language in Rule 4702(b)(5)(A) that once applied to both
displayed and non-displayed orders to now only apply to displayed
orders.

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. This is an optional
functionality that is being offered at no charge, and which may be used
equally by similarly-situated participants. Moreover, the functionality
may be replicated by other markets if deemed to be appropriate for
their markets.
    As noted above, Nasdaq will offer the Midpoint Trade Now
functionality through the OUCH, RASH, FLITE, and FIX protocols. Nasdaq
will not offer the Midpoint Trade Now functionality through the QIX
protocol.\16\ Nasdaq notes that, although the QIX protocol can support
the removing of liquidity, QIX is designed to provide two-sided quote
messages to the trading system, unlike the OUCH, RASH, FLITE and FIX
protocols, which are designed to facilitate Order submission. Nasdaq
also notes that QIX is an infrequently-used protocol,\17\ and that this
protocol cannot support the expansion of fields that adopting the
Midpoint Trade Now instruction would require. Nasdaq therefore believes
that its decision to offer the Midpoint Trade Now instruction through
the OUCH, RASH, FLITE, and FIX protocols will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Although participants may use other protocols, such as
DROP, those protocols are not related to Order entry, and so the
Midpoint Trade Now functionality is not being offered for those
protocols.
    \17\ As of September 12, 2018, of the 4,855 customer ports for
the various Nasdaq protocols, only 134 of those ports are QIX
protocol.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Because the foregoing 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 \18\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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 to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
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 email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2018-090 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-NASDAQ-2018-090. 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-NASDAQ-2018-090 and should be submitted
on or before December 17, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25598 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 25, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 206)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 65941-65944]
[DOCID:fr25oc11-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0993; Directorate Identifier 2010-NE-08-AD;
Amendment 39-16849; AD 2011-22-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc RB211-524 Series,
RB211-Trent 700 Series, and RB211-Trent 800 Series Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

    Cracking has been found on the inner wall between intermediate
dilution chutes on a total of five front combustion liners of the
standard corresponding to Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No. 72-
D133. The lives of two of these liners were confirmed to be below
the currently valid borescope inspection interval. Ultimately, crack
propagation could result in hot gas breakout with potential of
downstream component distress and multiple turbine blade release
beyond containment capabilities of the engine casings. Thus,
cracking of this nature constitutes a potentially unsafe condition.
    Since Rolls-Royce Service Bulletin No. 72-E902 introduces
further developments of Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No. 72-
D133, engines incorporating Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No.
72-E902 are also considered to be potentially affected and are
therefore included in the applicability of this AD.

We are issuing this AD to detect cracks in the front combustion liner,
which could result in hot section distress, multiple blade release, and
possible damage to the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective November 29, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in this AD as of November 29, 2011.

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: Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2010 (75
FR 61363). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states that:

    Cracking has been found on the inner wall between intermediate
dilution chutes on a total of five front combustion liners of the
standard corresponding to Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No. 72-
D133. The lives of two of these liners were confirmed to be below
the currently valid borescope inspection interval. Ultimately, crack
propagation could result in hot gas breakout with potential of
downstream component distress and multiple turbine blade release
beyond containment capabilities of the engine casings. Thus,
cracking of this nature constitutes a potentially unsafe condition.
    Since Rolls-Royce Service Bulletin No. 72-E902 introduces
further developments of Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No. 72-
D133, engines incorporating Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No.
72-E902 are also considered to be potentially affected and are
therefore included in the applicability of this AD.
    This AD requires a change to the initial and repeat borescope
inspection intervals for the front combustion liner.

Comments

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

Request To Expand Address for Service Information

    One commenter, Rolls-Royce plc (RR), asked us to consider changing
the information for getting the service information to ``For any
questions concerning the technical content of the requirements in this
AD (NPRM), please contact your designated Rolls-Royce representative
for a copy of the service information, please download the publication
from your Aeromanager account at http://www.aeromanager.com. If you do
not have a designated representative or an Aeromanager account, please
contact Corporate Communications at Rolls-Royce plc, PO Box 31, Derby,
DE24 8BJ, United Kingdom, phone: 011-44-1331-242424, fax: 011-44-1332-
249936, or e-mail: http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp
identifying the correspondence as being related to Airworthiness
Directives.'' RR states that this should make sure that any questions
from operators of their engines and those from other parties are
directed to the area best equipped to answer.
    We partially agree. We agree that operators and maintenance
providers need to get timely and accurate service information, and that
additional information is worth including. We changed paragraph (k) of
the AD to state ``* * * contact Corporate Communications at Rolls-Royce
plc PO Box 31, Derby, DE24 8BJ, United Kingdom, Phone: 011-44-1331-
242424, fax 011-44-1332-249936 or e-mail from http://www.rolls-
royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp identifying the correspondence as
being related to Airworthiness Directives.''
    We do not agree that operators or maintenance providers should
contact RR for questions about this AD. We did not include that
information in the AD.

Requests To Change References to the Service Bulletin That Is
Incorporated by Reference

    Two commenters, American Airlines (AA) and The Boeing Company
(Boeing), asked us to add ``or later

revision'' after ``Service Bulletin No. RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 2,
dated December 21, 2007.'' Boeing stated the latest revision of Service
Bulletin (SB) No. RB.211-72-AF458 is Revision 4. Boeing stated that
airlines have been inspecting their combustion liners to Revision 4 of
the SB and the compliance intervals specified in the NPRM are
consistent with RR SB RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 4 and EASA AD 2009-
0243R1. AA stated the borescope inspection is the same on later
revisions, so the life should be counted from the latest SB revision.
    We do not agree. On review of the SB, we determined that the
inspection requirements and limits called out in the SB are already in
the engine and aircraft maintenance manuals. We changed the AD to
remove the incorporation by reference of the SB.
    One commenter, AA, asked us to revise paragraph (f) of the AD to
specifically call out which paragraphs of SB RB.211-72-AF458 are
incorporated by reference. AA stated the NPRM called out all of section
3 of the SB, which is too prescriptive given the nature of the
inspections.
    We do not agree. On review of the SB, we found incorporation by
reference unnecessary. We changed the AD to remove the incorporation by
reference of the SB.

Request To Remove an Engine Model From the Applicability

    One commenter, AA, asked us to remove the RR RB211-535 engine model
from the applicability of the proposed AD. AA stated they have recorded
no crack findings against the RB211-535 model.
    We agree. The thermal, acoustical, and vibratory stress environment
of the RB211-535 combustion liner is different from that of the other
engines to which this AD applies. We removed the RB211-535E4-37, RB211-
535E4-B-37, RB211-535E4-C-37, and RB211-535E4-B-75 from the
Applicability paragraph (c) of this AD, and updated our cost estimate
to reflect the fewer affected engines.

Request To Change the Number of Cracking Events

    One commenter, Boeing, asked us to change paragraph (d) of the
proposed AD to specify that six cracking events have been found instead
of five. Boeing states that changing paragraph (d) of the proposed AD
will more accurately reflect the need for the inspections.
    We agree. Although an additional cracking event has occurred, the
AD was prompted by the investigation of five events. We changed
paragraph (d) of this AD to reflect six known cracking events.

Request To Add a Grace Period for Compliance

    One commenter, Boeing asked us to change paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and
(f)(1)(iii) of the proposed AD to add ``within 15 cycles of the date of
issue of the AD'' before the word ``or.'' Boeing states that adding the
15 cycle grace period will give operators time to get back to base for
the inspection.
    We partially agree. No additional grace period is required. This AD
does not require inspecting any engine earlier than 250 cycles after
the effective date of the AD. We clarified the wording of paragraph (f)
to make this clearer.

Statement of the Possibility of Cost and Operational Impact Increasing

    One commenter, Federal Express, stated that cost and operational
impact could increase if certain RB211-535 models are added to the
applicability of the proposed AD. The commenter provided no reason for
its statement.
    We agree. However, additional engine models are not being added,
and we are specifically excluding the RB211-535 engine in response to
another comment. We did not change the AD in response to this comment.

Conclusion

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect about 46 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
will take about 1.5 work-hours per product to comply with this AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. No parts are required so parts
will cost $0 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost
of the AD on U.S. operators to be $5,865.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2011-22-07 Rolls-Royce: Amendment 39-16849. Docket No. FAA-2010-
0993; Directorate Identifier 2010-NE-08-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective November
29, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce (RR) turbofan engine models
RB211-524G2-T-19, RB211-524G3-T-19, RB211-524H2-T-19, RB211-524H-T-
36, RB211-Trent 768-60, RB211-Trent 772-60, RB211-Trent 772B-60,
RB211-Trent 875-17, RB211-Trent 877-17, RB211-Trent 884-17, RB211-
Trent 884B-17, RB211-Trent 892-17, RB211-Trent 892B-17 and RB211-
Trent 895-17 that incorporate RR Service Bulletin (SB) RB.211-72-
D133 or RB.211-72-E902. These engines are installed on, but not
limited to, Airbus A330 series airplanes; Boeing 747-400 series, 767
series, and 777 series airplanes.

Reason

    (d) This AD results from:
    Cracking has been found on the inner wall between intermediate
dilution chutes on a total of five front combustion liners of the
standard corresponding to Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No. 72-
D133. The lives of two of these liners were confirmed to be below
the currently valid borescope inspection interval. Ultimately, crack
propagation could result in hot gas breakout with potential of
downstream component distress and multiple turbine blade release
beyond containment capabilities of the engine casings. Thus,
cracking of this nature constitutes a potentially unsafe condition.
    Since Rolls-Royce Service Bulletin No. 72-E902 introduces
further developments of Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No. 72-
D133, engines incorporating Rolls-Royce RB211 Service Bulletin No.
72-E902 are also considered to be potentially affected and are
therefore included in the applicability of this AD.

    Since EASA issued its AD, another cracking event has occurred,
bringing to six the total of crack events of which we are aware. We
are issuing this AD to detect cracks in the front combustion liner,
which could result in hot section distress, multiple blade release,
and possible damage to the airplane.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) Unless already done, do the following actions.

Initial Inspection

    (f) Perform a borescope inspection of the front combustion liner
inner wall, before accumulating the cyclic limits specified in
paragraphs (f)(2) and (f)(3) of this AD.
    (1) If you incorporated paragraph 3.A.(2)(a) of RR Alert Service
Bulletin (ASB) RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 4, dated March 9, 2009, or
ASB RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 5, dated April 20, 2011, you have
satisfied the requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD.
    (2) If the engine has a combustion liner installed with:
    (i) A LIFE on the effective date of this AD, that is equal to or
greater than the initial inspection threshold specified in column
(b) of Table 1 of this AD or a LIFE on the effective date of this
AD, that is not known, within 250 cycles after the effective date of
this AD, perform a borescope inspection as specified in paragraph
(f) of this AD.
    (ii) A LIFE on the effective date of this AD, that is less than
the initial inspection threshold specified in column (b) of Table 1
of this AD, perform the borescope inspection before the LIFE exceeds
the limit specified in column (c) of Table 1 of this AD.

Repeat Inspection

    (3) Thereafter, repeat the borescope inspection specified in
paragraph (f) of this AD at intervals not to exceed the cycles
specified in column (d) of Table 1 of this AD.

                                Table 1--Initial Inspection Thresholds and Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Column (a)                       Column (b)                Column (c)              Column (d)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Initial inspection
                                                Initial            limit if LIFE is less     Repeat inspection
            Engine model                  inspectionthreshold        than the initial            interval
                                                                   inspection threshold
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) RB211-524G2-T-19, 524G3-T-19 and  1,150 cycles..............  1,400 cycles..........  1,400 cycles.
 524H2-T-19.
(ii) RB211-524H-T-36................  550 cycles................  800 cycles............  800 cycles.
(iii) RB211-Trent 768-60, 772-60 and  1,250 cycles..............  1,500 cycles..........  1,500 cycles.
 772B-60.
(iv) RB211-Trent 892-17, RB211-Trent  750 cycles................  1,000 cycles..........  1,000 cycles.
 884-17, RB211-Trent 884B-17, RB211-
 Trent 877-17, RB211-Trent 875-17,
 RB211-Trent 892B-17 and RB211-Trent
 895-17 engines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definitions

    (g) This AD defines LIFE as the lowest of:
    (1) The number of cycles-since-new of the combustion liner, or
    (2) The number of cycles-in-service (CIS) since replacement of
the inner wall, or
    (3) The number of CIS since the inner wall of the combustion
liner was last borescope-inspected, or inspected by performing
paragraph 3.A.(2)(a) of RR ASB RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 4, dated
March 9, 2009 or ASB RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 5, dated April 20,
2011.

FAA AD Differences

    (h) This AD differs from the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information (MCAI) in that the MCAI AD applies to the RB211-Trent
772C-60 engine, which is not type certificated in the United States.
The MCAI also allows use of later revisions of the SBs. This AD does
not.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs
for this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2009-0243R2, Corrected, dated February 22, 2011, for
related information.
    (k) Rolls-Royce ASB RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 4, dated March 9,
2009, or ASB RB.211-72-AF458, Revision 5, dated April 20, 2011,
provide information on how to do the actions required by this AD.
For service information identified in this AD, contact Corporate
Communications at Rolls-Royce plc, PO Box 31, Derby, DE24 8BJ,
United Kingdom, phone: 011-44-1331-242424, fax: 011-44-1332-249936,
or e-mail: http://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp
identifying the correspondence as related to airworthiness
directives.
    (l) Contact Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, for more information about
this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (m) None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on October 18, 2011.
Peter A. White,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-27513 Filed 10-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P