[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60325-60331]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24393]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1253; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-079-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive
(AD) that would supersede an existing AD for certain Airbus Model A318,
A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. For certain airplanes, that NPRM
proposed repetitive inspections for cracks of the forward lug of each
main landing gear (MLG) support rib 5 fitting and repair if necessary;
and removing Model 318 airplanes from the applicability. That NPRM was
prompted by reports of cracks found in the forward lug of the MLG
support rib 5 fitting. This action revises that NPRM by adding Model
A318 airplanes and others to the applicability; and requiring
repetitive detailed inspections for cracks of the MLG support 5
fitting, and repair of any cracks. We are proposing this AD to prevent
cracking in the forward lug of the MLG, which could result in failure
of the lug and consequent collapse of the MLG during takeoff or
landing. Since these actions impose an additional burden over that
proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the
public the chance to comment on these proposed changes.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 19,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, 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.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44
51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-1253;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-079-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with an earlier NPRM for the
specified products, which was published in the Federal Register on
November 23, 2011 (76 FR 72350). That earlier NPRM proposed to
supersede AD 2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14,
2008), which superseded AD 2006-11-04, Amendment 39-14608 (71 FR 29578,
May 23, 2006), to require actions intended to address the unsafe
condition for the products listed above.
    Since that NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011) was issued, new
service information has been issued that specifies additional actions
that are necessary to address the identified unsafe condition. We have
also determined that repetitive detailed inspections for cracks of the
MLG support rib 5 fitting, and repair of any cracks found, must be
required for Model A318 airplanes and airplanes on which Airbus
modification 32025 has been embodied in production. The European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the
Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA Airworthiness
Directive 2012-0032, dated February 24, 2012 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:
    Several cases of corrosion of the Main Landing Gear (MLG)
support Rib 5 fitting lug bores have been reported on A320 family
aeroplanes. In some instances, corrosion pits caused the cracking of
the forward lug (sometimes through its complete thickness). If not
detected, the cracking may lead to the complete failure of the
fitting and thus could affect the structural integrity of the MLG
installation.
    EASA AD 2007-0213 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2008-08-04,
Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008] was issued to
address this condition and required a repetitive inspection program
of the MLG support Rib 5 fitting forward lugs and, as terminating
action, the embodiment of Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A320-57-1118.
    After that [EASA] AD was issued, a case of Rib 5, ruptured at
the 4 o'clock position, was discovered on an aeroplane on which the
terminating action of EASA AD 2007-0213 had already been embodied in
accordance with Airbus SB A320-57-1118.
    Investigation of that case revealed that corrosion damage and
cracking that should have been removed by repair machining was below
the level of detectability of the Non Destructive Test (NDT)
technique that cleared the surfaces prior to bush installation.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To correct this potential unsafe condition, EASA issued AD 2011-
0011, [which corresponds to FAA NPRM 2011-NM-179-AD (76 FR 72350,
November 23, 2011)] superseding EASA AD 2007-0213, to:

--retain the requirements of EASA AD 2007-0213 for aeroplanes on
which the MLG Rib Bushes have not been modified/repaired in
accordance with the instructions of Airbus SB A320-57-1118, or
Airbus SRM 57-26-13, or the identified Airbus Repair Instructions,
as applicable, and
--require, for all aeroplanes on which Airbus SB A320-57-1118 has
been embodied in service, or on which Airbus SRM 57-26-13 or the
identified Airbus Repair Instructions have been applied, a
repetitive inspection program [for cracks] of the MLG support Rib 5
fitting forward lugs and, depending on findings, the accomplishment
of the associated corrective actions, and
--reduce the Applicability by deleting A318 aeroplanes, as Airbus
modification 32025 is embodied in production on both left-hand (LH)
and right-hand (RH) wings for all A318 aeroplanes.

    After that AD was issued, three cases of corrosion of Rib 5 were
discovered on aeroplanes on which Airbus modification 32025 had been
embodied in production. Investigations revealed that the unsafe
condition addressed by AD 2011-0011 could occur or develop on those
aeroplanes as well.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2011-0011, which is superseded, extends the
applicability to all aeroplanes, and requires for aeroplanes on
which Airbus modification 32025 has been embodied in production,
repetitive inspections of the MLG support Rib 5 fitting forward lugs
and, depending on findings, the accomplishment of applicable
corrective actions.

The unsafe condition is cracking in the forward lug of the MLG, which
could result in failure of the lug and consequent collapse of the MLG
during takeoff or landing. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57A1166, Revision
01, dated October 19, 2011; and Service Bulletin A320-75-1168, dated
November 7, 2011. The actions described in this service information are
intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

Comments

    We have considered the following comments received on the earlier
NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011).

Agreement With the Intent of the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011)

    United Airlines (United) stated that it generally agrees with the
intent of the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011).

Agreement With Post-Modification Inspections

    US Airways stated it agrees with the post-modification inspections
in the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011).

Support for the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011)

    Donjeta Dervisholli stated that the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23,
2011) should ``be passed'' because it will make flights safer and it
will also get things up to code. The commenter also stated that
adopting the AD will help create jobs for the economy as well, and will
help stabilize the economy and make money. The commenter concluded that
this regulation needs ``to pass'' to make sure that cracking will not
happen again and there will be no more damage.

Request To Delay Publication of Rule

    Airbus requested that we postpone issuing the final rule to ``be in
line with the forthcoming EASA AD,'' or that we issue the final rule
with caution notes. Airbus stated it is currently in the process with
EASA of issuing a new AD to extend the inspection program to all Airbus
Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 airplanes, and that Airbus
modification 32025 will no longer be considered a terminating action in
the forthcoming EASA AD.
    We agree with postponing the final rule and, instead, will release
this supplemental NPRM because it has been recently determined that
Airbus modification 32025 does not mitigate the unsafe condition. In
addition, we have recently determined that there is no terminating
action available for the repetitive inspection requirement of this
supplemental NPRM.

Request To Delay Issuance of the Final Rule

    US Airways requested that we review Airbus Service Bulletin A320-
57-1168, dated November 7, 2011, with EASA so that a single AD can be
written to cover both post-modification 32025 airplanes and the in-
service fleet and to avoid another supersedure AD. US Airways stated
that the production modification of the fittings and the in-service
modification according to Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57-
1118, Revision 04, dated June 4, 2008, has been shown to be ineffective
at

preventing corrosion. The commenter stated that Airbus has released
Airbus Service Bulletin SB A320-57-1168, dated November 7, 2011, which
recommends repetitive inspections at 500-flight-cycle intervals for new
delivery and replacement of fittings after a 5-year threshold elapses.
    As stated previously, we are releasing this supplemental NPRM
because it has been recently determined that Airbus modification 32025
does not mitigate the unsafe condition. In addition, we have recently
determined that there is no terminating action available for the
repetitive inspection requirement of this supplemental NPRM.

Requests To Clarify Approved Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    United and US Airways requested clarification of the applicability
of AMOCs previously approved for AD 2006-11-04, Amendment 39-14608 (71
FR 29578, May 23, 2006); and AD 2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR
19975, April 14, 2008).
    We agree to clarify the validity of AMOC approvals granted for AD
2006-11-04, Amendment 39-14608 (71 FR 29578, May 23, 2006); and AD
2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008). We have
revised the statement in paragraph (u)(1) of this supplemental NPRM to
state that AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2006-11-04
and AD 2008-08-04 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding
provisions of this supplemental NPRM.

Request To Reference a Repair Drawing

    United requested that we revise the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23,
2011) to include recently released Airbus Repair Drawing R572 481,
Issue A, dated November 11, 2011, in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of
the NPRM. United also requested that if Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 04, dated June 4, 2008, is revised
before the release of the final rule, then that service bulletin should
also include Airbus Repair Drawing R572 481, Issue A, dated November
11, 2011, and the new service information should be referenced in the
final rule.
    We disagree. Paragraph (j)(1) of the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November
23, 2011) references ``Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118,'' which
includes all revisions of that service bulletin. Once an operator
accomplishes any revision of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, the
affected airplane is subject to the actions specified in paragraphs
(k), (m), and (n) of this supplemental NPRM. In addition, Airbus Repair
Drawing R572 481, Issue A, dated November 11, 2011, is not an
acceptable method of compliance for any action in this supplemental
NPRM and, therefore, would not be included in the conditions specified
in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this supplemental NPRM. We have not
changed the supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request To Include New Service Information

    United requested that we revise the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23,
2011) to refer to Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57A1166,
Revision 01, dated October 19, 2011, for the actions specified in
paragraph (o) of the NPRM.
    We agree. As discussed previously, Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A320-57A1166, Revision 01, dated October 19, 2011, was issued
while the comment period was open for the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November
23, 2011). That service bulletin includes minor edits and does not add
an additional economic burden. We have revised paragraph (n) of this
supplemental NPRM (paragraph (o) of the NPRM) to reference Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57A1166, Revision 01, dated October 19,
2011; and added paragraph (t) to this supplemental NPRM to give credit
for corresponding actions done before the effective date of the AD
using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57A1166, dated January 12, 2011. We
have also updated the subsequent paragraph identifiers accordingly.

Request To Reference Specifications Without Revision Dates

    US Airways requested that we revise the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November
23, 2011) to specify the structural repair manual chapter and
paragraph, or by drawing number, without revision dates. US Airways
stated that specification of corrective actions by document dates, as
specified in paragraph (i) of the NPRM, unnecessarily restricts the use
of latest and best repair practices. The referenced repair documents
are now roughly between seven and eleven years old. US Airways pointed
out that Airbus has made efforts to improve these repairs in that time
frame, and by restricting operators to the use of historic documents,
the FAA is making it difficult to incorporate improved repair methods.
    We partially agree. We agree with US Airways that the most current
approved service information should be referenced in the AD. We must
reference the revision dates in an AD when referring to the service
document, because not doing so violates the Office of the Federal
Register (OFR) policies for approval of materials ``incorporated by
reference'' in rules. In general terms, we are required by these OFR
policies to either publish the service document contents as part of the
actual AD language; or submit the service document to the OFR for
approval as ``referenced'' material, in which case we may only refer to
such material in the text of an AD. The AD may refer to the service
document only if the OFR approved it for ``incorporation by
reference.'' To allow operators to use later revisions of the
referenced document (issued after publication of the AD), either we
must revise the AD to reference specific later revisions, or operators
may request approval to use later revisions as an AMOC with the AD
under the provisions of paragraph (u) of this supplemental NPRM. As
stated previously, we have revised the supplemental NPRM to accept
previously approved AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this
supplemental NPRM. We have not changed the AD regarding incorporating
service information without revision dates.

Request To Reformat Table 1 of the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23,
2011)

    US Airways requested that we correct the formatting of table 1 to
paragraph (k) of the NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011). The
commenter stated that the details in the first two rows of that table
are data for Airbus Model A319 and A320 airplanes, while the third and
fourth rows provide information for Model A321 airplanes.
    We find that clarification is necessary. The commenter correctly
specified the information in table 1 to paragraph (k) of the NPRM (76
FR 72350, November 23, 2011), but identified no errors that require
correction. The information in table 1 to paragraph (k) of this
supplemental NPRM is correct. However, we have added a reference to
Model A318 airplanes to the first row of the table.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent

information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to
exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
    Certain changes described above expand the scope of the earlier
NPRM (76 FR 72350, November 23, 2011). As a result, we have determined
that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional
opportunity for the public to comment on this proposed AD.

Additional Changes to the Supplemental NPRM

    We have removed certain service information as a method of
compliance from paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) of the NPRM (76 FR
72350, November 23, 2011), in this supplemental NPRM. We have also
added certain credit for actions done before the effective date of this
AD in paragraph (t) of this supplemental NPRM, using that removed
service information.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 740 products of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456
(73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008), and retained in this proposed AD take
about 73 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per
work hour. Required parts would cost about $3,860 per product. Where
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these
parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties,
some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these
figures, the estimated cost of the currently required actions is
$10,065 per product.
    We estimate that it would take about 3 work-hours per product to
comply with the new basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of the new actions in this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
up to $188,700, or $255 per product.
    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    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 proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. 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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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 removing Airworthiness Directive
(AD) 2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008), and
adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2011-1253; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-
079-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by November 19, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR
19975, April 14, 2008), which superseded AD 2006-11-04, Amendment
39-14608 (71 FR 29578, May 23, 2006).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122;
A319-111, A319-112, A319-113, A319-114, A319-115, A319-131, A319-
132, and A319-133; A320-111, A320-211, A320-212, A320-214, A320-231,
A320-232, and A320-233; and A321-111, A321-112, A321-131, A321-211,
A321-212, A321-213, A321-231, and A321-232 airplanes; certificated
in any category; all manufacturer serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks found in the forward
lug of the main landing gear (MLG) support rib 5 fitting. We are
issuing this AD to prevent cracking in the forward lug of the MLG,
which could result in failure of the lug and consequent collapse of
the MLG during takeoff or landing.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Repetitive Detailed Inspections With Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f) of AD
2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008), with
changes. Except for airplanes on which Airbus modification 32025 has
been accomplished in production, within 8 days after June 7, 2006
(the effective date of AD 2006-11-04, Amendment 39-14608 (71 FR
29578, May 23, 2006)), or before further flight after a hard
landing, whichever is first: Perform a detailed inspection for
cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the
left- and right-hand MLG, and, if any crack is found, replace the
MLG fitting with a new fitting before further flight, in accordance
with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent). Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 8 days, or before further
flight after a hard landing, whichever is first. As of May 19, 2008
(the effective date of AD 2008-08-04), the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (k) of this AD must be accomplished in lieu

of the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph.

 (h) Retained Optional Inspection Method With Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008), with
revised service information. Performing an ultrasonic inspection for
cracking in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the
left- and right-hand MLG, in accordance with an applicable method
specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD is an acceptable
alternative method of compliance for the initial and repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (1) In accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, or the EASA (or its delegated agent).
    (2) In accordance with Task 57-29-03-270-801-A-01, Gear Rib
Forward Lug Attachment for the Main Landing Gear Before Modification
32025J2211, of Chapter 57, Wings, of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Nondestructive Testing Manual, Revision 89, dated August 1, 2011.

(i) Retained Optional Terminating Action With Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008). Repair
of the forward lugs of the support rib 5 fitting of the left- and
right-hand MLG done before the effective date of this AD, in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, or the EASA (or its delegated agent); constitutes
terminating action for the requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), (k),
(l), and (m) of this AD.

 (j) Retained Referenced Conditions With Revised Affected Airplanes

    To identify affected airplanes in paragraphs (k), (m), and (o)
of this AD, this AD refers to the following conditions:
    (1) Airplanes on which the modification of the MLG rib bushes
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118 has been done.
    (2) Airplanes on which a repair of the MLG support rib 5 fitting
has been done in accordance with paragraph 5.C. of Subsection 57-26-
13, Attachments--Main Landing Gear, of the Airbus A319 Structural
Repair Manual (SRM), Revision November 1, 2004; paragraph 5.D. of
Subsection 57-26-13, Attachments--Main Landing Gear, of the Airbus
A320 SRM, Revision November 1, 2004; or paragraph 5.D. of Subsection
57-26-13, Attachments--Main Landing Gear, of the Airbus A321 SRM,
Revision February 1, 2005; as applicable.
    (3) Airplanes on which replacement in service of the MLG support
rib 5 specified in Airbus Repair Instruction R572-58507 and Airbus
Repair Drawing R57258209, or Airbus Repair Instruction R572-45020
and Airbus Repair Drawing R57245019, as applicable, has been done.

(k) Retained Repetitive Inspections

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008). For
airplanes on which none of the actions specified in paragraphs
(j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD have been done, except for
airplanes on which Airbus modification 32025 has been accomplished:
At the applicable time specified in table 1 to paragraph (k) of this
AD, or before further flight after a hard landing, whichever is
first, do a visual inspection or ultrasonic inspection for cracking
in the forward lug of the support rib 5 fitting of the left and
right MLG, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1138, Revision 01, dated October 27,
2006. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable interval
specified in table 1 to paragraph (k) of this AD or before further
flight after a hard landing, whichever is first, until the
modification required by paragraph (m) of this AD has been
accomplished. Accomplishing the initial inspection terminates the
requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

                              Table 1 to Paragraph (k) of This AD--Compliance Times
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Airplanes                           Initial inspection                   Repetitive interval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Model A318, A319, and A320          (i) If the most recent inspection is a    Within 150 flight cycles after
 airplanes.                              detailed inspection done in accordance    a visual inspection.
                                         with paragraph (g) of this AD, inspect
                                         within 150 flight cycles after the most
                                         recent detailed inspection.
                                        (ii) If the most recent inspection is an  Within 940 flight cycles after
                                         ultrasonic inspection done in             an ultrasonic inspection.
                                         accordance with paragraph (h) of this
                                         AD, inspect within 940 flight cycles
                                         after the most recent ultrasonic
                                         inspection.
(2) Model A321 airplanes..............  (i) If the most recent inspection is a    Within 100 flight cycles after
                                         detailed inspection done in accordance    a visual inspection.
                                         with paragraph (g) of this AD, inspect
                                         within 100 flight cycles after the most
                                         recent detailed inspection.
                                        (ii) If the most recent inspection is an  Within 630 flight cycles after
                                         ultrasonic inspection done in             an ultrasonic inspection.
                                         accordance with paragraph (h) of this
                                         AD, inspect within 630 flight cycles
                                         after the most recent ultrasonic
                                         inspection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(l) Retained Corrective Action

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD
2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008). If any
cracking is found during any inspection required by paragraph (k) of
this AD: Before further flight, repair or replace the cracked MLG
fitting, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, or the EASA (or its delegated agent).

(m) Retained Rib Bushing Modification

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (k) of AD
2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008), with
revised service information. Except for airplanes on which the
actions specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(3) of this AD have been
done, and except for airplanes on which Airbus modification 32025
has been accomplished: Within 60 months after May 19, 2008 (the
effective date of AD 2008-08-04), modify the rib bushings of the
left and right MLG, by accomplishing all of the applicable actions
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 03, dated April 23, 2007; or Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 04, dated June 4,
2008. Accomplishing this modification terminates the requirements of
paragraphs (g) and (k) of this AD, and then the requirements of
paragraph (n) of this AD must be done.

(n) New Post-Modification/Post-Repair Inspections

    For airplanes on which the actions specified in paragraph
(j)(1), (j)(2), or (m) of this AD have been done: At the later of
the times specified in paragraphs (n)(1) and (n)(2) of this AD, do a
detailed inspection for cracks of the forward lug of each left-hand
and right-hand MLG support rib 5 fitting, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A320-57A1166, Revision 01, dated October 19, 2011. Repeat the
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles.
    (1) Within 2,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the
modification specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (m) of this AD, or the
repair specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
    (2) Within 250 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD, without exceeding 3 months after the effective date of this AD.

(o) New Repair of Cracking Found During Post-Modification/Post-Repair

    If any crack is detected during any inspection required by
paragraph (n) of this AD: Before further flight, repair using a
method approved by either the Manager,

International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
or the EASA (or its delegated agent).

(p) New Optional Terminating Action

    Replacement of a MLG support rib 5 fitting at any position
(left-hand or right-hand), as specified in paragraph (j)(3) of this
AD, terminates the requirements of paragraphs (k) and (n) of this AD
for the MLG support rib 5 fitting at that position.

(q) New Repetitive Detailed Inspection for Certain Airplanes

    For airplanes on which the actions specified in paragraph (j)(3)
of this AD have been done: Within 60 months after the replacement or
within 500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the forward lug
of each left-hand and right-hand MLG support Rib 5 fitting that has
been replaced, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57A1166, Revision 01, dated
October 19, 2011. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 500 flight cycles.

(r) New Repetitive Inspections for Airplanes with Airbus Modification
32025

    For airplanes on which Airbus modification 32025 has been
accomplished: At the applicable time specified in paragraph (r)(1,)
(r)(2), (r)(3), or (r)(4) of this AD, do a detailed inspection for
cracks of the forward lug of each left-hand and right-hand MLG
support rib 5 fitting, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1168, dated November
7, 2011. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed
500 flight cycles.
    (1) For airplanes on which the MLG support rib 5 has not been
modified nor repaired since the first flight of the airplane as of
the effective date of this AD: Within 60 months after the first
flight of the airplane or within 500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (2) For airplanes on which the MLG support rib 5 has been
replaced as specified in paragraph (j)(3) of this AD as of the
effective date of this AD: Within 60 months after the replacement of
the MLG support rib 5 or within 500 flight cycles after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (3) For airplanes on which the MLG support rib 5 has been
repaired according to the SRM or a repair approval sheet as of the
effective date of this AD: At the later of the times specified in
paragraph (r)(3)(i) or (r)(3)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Within 2,000 flight cycles after the repair.
    (ii) Within 250 flight cycles or 3 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
    (4) For airplanes having a manufacturer serial number listed in
table 2 to paragraph (r)(4) of this AD, and on which the MLG support
rib 5 has been inspected before the effective date of this AD
according to specific Airbus repair instructions or technical
disposition: At the later of the times specified in paragraph
(r)(4)(i) or (r)(4)(ii) of this AD.

Table 2 to Paragraph (r)(4) of This AD--Manufacturer Serial Number (S/N)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  S/N--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             1965                     2056                    2155
             2274                     2278                    2288
             2321                     2478                    2586
             2588                     2612                    2672
             2688                     2707                    2929
             2942                     3089                    3117
             3361                     3427                    3486
             3489                     3806                    3891
             3937                     4243                    4345
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (i) Within 2,000 flight cycles after the last inspection done
using specific Airbus repair instructions or a technical
disposition, or within 60 months since first flight of the airplane,
whichever occurs later.
    (ii) Within 250 flight cycles or 3 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

(s) New Repair of Cracking

    If any crack is detected during any inspection required by
paragraph (q) or (r) of this AD: Before further flight, repair using
a method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, or the EASA (or its
delegated agent).

 (t) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Nondestructive Testing Manual, Chapter 51-90-00, Revision dated
February 1, 2003.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Nondestructive Testing Manual, Chapter 57-29-03, Revision dated
February 1, 2005 (for Model A318, A319, and A320 airplanes); or
Chapter 57-29-04, Revision dated May 1, 2005 (for Model A321
airplanes).
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using paragraph 5.C. of Subsection 57-26-
13, Attachments--Main Landing Gear, of the Airbus A319 Structural
Repair Manual (SRM), Revision November 1, 2004; paragraph 5.D. of
Subsection 57-26-13, Attachments--Main Landing Gear, of the Airbus
A320 SRM, Revision November 1, 2004; or paragraph 5.D. of Subsection
57-26-13, Attachments--Main Landing Gear, of the Airbus A321 SRM,
Revision February 1, 2005; as applicable.
    (4) This paragraph provides credit for the inspections required
by paragraphs (n) and (r) of this AD, if the inspections were
performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-57A1166, dated January 12, 2011.
    (5) This paragraph provides credit for the modification required
by paragraph (m) of this AD, if the modification was performed
before May 19, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-08-04, Amendment
39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April 14, 2008), using service information
identified in paragraph (t)(5)(i), (t)(5)(ii), or (t)(5)(iii) of
this AD.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, dated September 5,
2002.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 01, dated
August 28, 2003.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 02, dated
August 2, 2006.

(u) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD. AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2006-11-04, Amendment 39-14608 (71 FR 29578, May
23, 2006); and AD 2008-08-04, Amendment 39-15456 (73 FR 19975, April
14, 2008); are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of
this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to ensure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(v) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2012-0032, dated
February 24, 2012, and the following service information, for
related information.
    (1) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 04,
dated June 4, 2008.
    (2) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A320-57A1166, Revision 01,
dated October 19, 2011.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1168, dated November 7,
2011.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1118, Revision 03, dated
April 23, 2007.
    (5) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1138, Revision 01, dated
October 27, 2006.
    (6) Task 57-29-03-270-801-A-01, Gear Rib Forward Lug Attachment
for the Main Landing Gear Before Modification 32025J2211, of Chapter
57, Wings, of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Nondestructive Testing
Manual, Revision 89, dated August 1, 2011.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 26, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-24393 Filed 10-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 231 (Friday, November 30, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61700-61705]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25997]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84645; File No. SR-Phlx-2018-73]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Exchange's Provisions for Excluding Days for Purposes of Pricing Tiers

November 26, 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 14, 2018, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``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 the Exchange's provisions for
excluding a day from its volume calculations for purposes of
determining pricing tiers.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaqphlx.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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's

provisions for excluding a day from its volume calculations for
purposes of determining pricing tiers, as further discussed below.
Background
    To avoid penalizing members when aberrant low volume days result
from systems or other issues at the Exchange, or where the Exchange
closes early for holiday observance, the Exchange currently has
language in its Pricing Schedule allowing it to exclude certain days
from its average daily volume (``ADV'') calculations or calculations
that are based on a percentage of industry volume. Currently, Section
1(b) of the Exchange's Pricing Schedule provides that for Phlx options,
any day that the market is not open for the entire trading day or the
Exchange instructs members in writing to route their orders to other
markets may be excluded from the ADV calculation or calculation based
on a percentage of industry volume; provided that the Exchange will
only remove the day for members that would have a lower ADV or
percentage of industry volume with the day included. If a day is
removed from a calculation based on a percentage of monthly industry
volume, volume executed that day will be removed from both the
numerator and the denominator of the calculation.\3\ The proviso
language in Section 1(b) (hereinafter, the ``better of rule'') ensures
that members would only have the day removed when doing so is
beneficial for the member. As such, the Exchange only applies the
better of rule to ADV calculations and calculations based on a
percentage of industry volume, and not for other volume-based pricing
where members would not benefit from having the day excluded (e.g.,
straight volume accumulations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange removes the day from both the numerator and
denominator to ensure that members benefit from this rule as
removing the day from the numerator only (i.e., the member's volume)
without removing it from the denominator (i.e., industry volume)
would penalize the member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a recent review of the rule, the Exchange determined that it
would be beneficial to further expand upon and provide additional
detail regarding how the Exchange applies this rule.
Proposal
    The Exchange first proposes to delete the lead-in ``For Phlx
Options'' in Section 1(b) of Options 7, and retitle this section as
``Removal of Days for Purposes of Pricing Tiers.'' The fees for Phlx
options and PSX equities are no longer included in the same pricing
schedule, and the Exchange therefore believes that the current
clarifying lead-in is no longer necessary.\4\ The Exchange also
proposes to adopt the following language to replace current rule text
in Section 1(b):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84495 (October 29,
2018), 83 FR 55210 (November 2, 2018) (SR-Phlx-2018-66).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1)(A) Any day that the Exchange announces in advance that it will
not be open for trading will be excluded from the options tier
calculations set forth in its Pricing Schedule; and (B) any day with a
scheduled early market close (``Scheduled Early Close'') may be
excluded from the options tier calculations only pursuant to paragraph
(3) below.
    (2) The Exchange may exclude the following days (``Unanticipated
Events'') from the options tier calculations only pursuant to paragraph
(3) below, specifically any day that: (A) the market is not open for
the entire trading day, (B) the Exchange instructs members in writing
to route their orders to other markets, (C) the Exchange is
inaccessible to members during the 30-minute period before the opening
of trade due to an Exchange system disruption, or (D) the Exchange's
system experiences a disruption that lasts for more than 60 minutes
during regular trading hours.
    (3) If a day is to be excluded as a result of paragraph (1)(B) or
(2) above, the Exchange will exclude the day from any member's monthly
options tier calculations as follows:
    (A) the Exchange may exclude from the ADV calculation any Scheduled
Early Close or Unanticipated Event;
    (B) the Exchange may exclude from the calculation based on a
percentage of industry volume any Scheduled Early Close or
Unanticipated Event; and
    (C) the Exchange may exclude from any other applicable options tier
calculation provided for in its Schedule of Fees (together with (3)(A)
and (3)(B), ``Tier Calculations'') any Scheduled Early Close or
Unanticipated Event; provided, in each case, that the Exchange will
only remove the day for members that would have a lower Tier
Calculation with the day included. If a day is removed from a
calculation based on a percentage of monthly industry volume, volume
executed that day will be removed from both the numerator and the
denominator of the calculation.
    The proposed rule change: (i) Expands upon the existing scenarios
where the Exchange may remove a day to adopt two additional situations
related to Exchange systems disruptions, (ii) categorizes the scenarios
into days that are known in advance (i.e., days in proposed paragraph
(1), including Scheduled Early Closes) and days that are not (i.e.,
Unanticipated Events in proposed paragraph (2)), (iii) clarifies how
each scenario would apply to the options tier calculations in the
Pricing Schedule, (iv) adds a ``catch-all'' provision for other volume
based options tier calculations set forth in its Pricing Schedule, but
are not specified within paragraphs (3)(A) and (3)(B), to clarify how
the Exchange would exclude days for other such Tier Calculations going
forward, and (v) generally adds more detail to clarify the application
of the better of rule. As it relates to Unanticipated Events, the
Exchange will inform all members if any such day will be excluded from
its Tier Calculations through a publicly published alert. The Exchange
notes that it is not proposing any changes to the existing rebates or
to the current tier calculation thresholds required to achieve each
rebate tier.
Exchange Systems Disruptions
    The Exchange proposes to adopt two additional scenarios as
``Unanticipated Events'' that the Exchange may determine to exclude
from its Tier Calculations. First, the Exchange proposes to exclude
days where the Exchange is inaccessible to members during the 30-minute
period before the opening of trade (i.e., between 9:00 a.m. to 9:30
a.m. Eastern Time) due to an Exchange system disruption, even if the
Exchange does not instruct members to route away to other markets. As
discussed above, the Exchange's current ability to remove days from its
calculations of ADV and industry volume percentages is limited to days
where the market is not open for the entire trading day, and where the
Exchange instructs members to route away to other markets. This allows
the Exchange to exclude days, for example, where the Exchange honors a
market-wide trading halt declared by another market, closes early for
holiday observance, or instructs members to route away to other markets
because of a systems issue in the morning, which ultimately does not
carry over into the trading day. The Exchange notes, however, that it
may not always instruct members to route away. For instance, the
Exchange may be inaccessible to members in the morning due to a systems
disruption but the Exchange resolves the issue shortly before 9:30 a.m.
and as a result, the Exchange does not instruct members to route away.
In such cases, the Exchange is not permitted to exclude the day from
its ADV calculation or calculation based on a percentage of industry
volume. The Exchange generally experiences a high

volume of member participation within the 30-minute window leading up
to the opening of trade from members who submit eligible interest be
included in the Exchange's opening process. As a result, days where
members are precluded from submitting eligible interest during this 30-
minute time period due to an Exchange systems disruption, even if the
issue is ultimately resolved by the Exchange before the market opens
(and members therefore are not instructed to route away), are likely to
have lower trading volume. Including such days in calculations of ADV
or percentage of industry volume will therefore make it more difficult
for members to achieve particular pricing tiers for that month.
Accordingly, excluding such days from the monthly tier calculations
will diminish the likelihood of a cost increase occurring because a
member is not able to reach a pricing tier on that date that it would
reach on other trading days during the month.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to exclude days where there is an
Exchange system disruption that lasts for more than 60 minutes during
regular trading hours (i.e., 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time), even
if such disruption would not be categorized as a complete outage of the
Exchange's system. Such a disruption may occur where a certain options
series traded on the Exchange is unavailable for trading due to an
Exchange systems issue, or where the Exchange may be able to perform
certain functions with respect to accepting and processing orders, but
may have a failure to another significant process, such as routing to
other market centers, that would lead members who rely on such
processes to avoid using the Exchange until the Exchange's entire
system was operational. The Exchange believes that certain system
disruptions that are not complete system outages could preclude some
members from submitting orders to the Exchange. The Exchange notes that
this proposal is consistent with the rules of other options
exchanges.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., BATS BZX Options Exchange Fee Schedule (defining
an ``Exchange System Disruption'' as any day that the exchange's
system experiences a disruption that lasts for more than 60 minutes
during regular trading hours); and NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(defining an ``Exchange System Disruption'' as a disruption affects
an Exchange system that lasts for more than 60 minutes during
regular trading hours).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the two scenarios proposed above are
reasonable and equitable because the intent of the current rule has
always been to avoid penalizing members that might otherwise qualify
for certain tiered pricing but that because of aberrant low volume days
resulting, for instance, from Exchange systems disruptions, did not
participate on the Exchange to the extent they might have otherwise
participated.
    In addition, to avoid penalizing members that step up and trade on
a day with artificially low volume, the Exchange currently only removes
days for members that would have a lower ADV calculation or calculation
based on a percentage of industry volume with the day included (i.e.,
the better of rule). The Exchange believes that applying the better of
rule to the proposed system disruption-related scenarios would be
similarly helpful as it would ensure that members that continue to
execute a large volume of contracts on such days are not inadvertently
disadvantaged when the Exchange removes a systems disruption-related
day from its calculations of ADV or industry volume percentages.
    The Exchange also proposes that if a systems disruption-related day
is removed from a calculation based on a percentage of monthly industry
volume, volume executed that day will be removed from both the
numerator and denominator of the calculation. Removing the day from
both the numerator and denominator of the calculation will ensure that
members benefit from this rule as removing the day from the numerator
only (i.e., the member's volume) without removing it from the
denominator (i.e., industry volume) would penalize the member. The
Exchange takes the same approach for removing days from such
calculations under the current rule.
Categories of Excluded Days
    In light of the foregoing proposal to adopt two additional
situations that the Exchange may exclude from its pricing tier
calculations, the Exchange seeks to restructure the existing rule by
separating out the different scenarios between days that are known in
paragraph (1) and days that are not in paragraph (2), and define the
latter as Unanticipated Events.
    For planned days, the Exchange proposes to further distinguish
between days that the Exchange announces in advance that it will not be
open for trading in paragraph (1)(A) (e.g., Thanksgiving), and
Scheduled Early Closes in paragraph (1)(B) (e.g., the trading day after
Thanksgiving). The Exchange notes that it currently considers Scheduled
Early Closes as a subset of days that the market is not open for the
entire trading day. The Exchange believes it would be more clear to
distinguish Scheduled Early Closes in paragraph (1) as a day that is
planned for in advance, and separately consider days that are not open
for the entire trading day as Unanticipated Events in paragraph (2)(A).
As proposed, (2)(A) would continue to cover unplanned days where the
Exchange declares a trading halt in all securities or honors a market-
wide trading halt declared by another market. The other scenarios that
will be categorized as Unanticipated Events in paragraph (2) are the
two systems-related disruptions proposed above, and days that the
Exchange instructs members in writing to route their orders to other
markets, which is an existing scenario covered under the current rule
as described above.
Exclusion of Days by Tier Calculation
    The Exchange proposes to further amend the existing rule to specify
how the days in paragraphs (1) and (2) will be excluded from its tier
calculations. As discussed above, the Exchange currently removes the
days set forth in paragraphs (1)(B), (2)(A), and (2)(B) from its
calculations of ADV and industry volume percentages only for members
that would have a lower ADV or percentage of industry volume with the
day included. The Exchange is not changing how it currently excludes
these days from these calculations. And as further discussed above, the
Exchange is proposing to adopt the same principle-based approach for
excluding the system disruption-related days in paragraphs (2)(C) and
(2)(D). As such, proposed paragraph (3) will specify for the ADV
calculation and calculation based on a percentage of industry volume
that the Exchange may exclude any Scheduled Early Close or
Unanticipated Event, subject, in each case, to the better of rule.
    As it relates to days where the Exchange announces in advance that
it will not be open for trading, the Exchange notes that it will
exclude those days from all options tier calculations set forth in its
Pricing Schedule. This is also the case today since no trading activity
occurs on those days, and the Exchange is only clarifying its current
practice within the proposed rule text in paragraph (1)(A).
Catch-All Provision
    The proposal also adds a ``catch-all'' provision in paragraph
(3)(C) that would apply to other applicable options tier calculations
that are set forth in its Pricing Schedule (``Tier Calculations''), but
are not specified within paragraphs (3)(A) and (3)(B) (i.e., not an ADV
calculation or calculation based on a percentage of industry volume).
This

catch-all provision is to provide the Exchange with flexibility to
apply the better of rule going forward to all pricing programs
administered by the Exchange that are based on volume calculations.\6\
Specifically, the Exchange may exclude any Scheduled Early Close or
Unanticipated Event from such other Tier Calculations only if the
member will have a lower Tier Calculation with the day included. This
is the same principle-based approach that the Exchange currently takes
for its ADV calculation and calculation based on a percentage of
industry volume, and is similarly intended to ensure that days are
removed from a member's volume calculations only if doing so would be
beneficial for the member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As such, the proposed language will not apply to straight
volume accumulations, and the Exchange will continue to not exclude
days from such calculations, as is current practice, since members
do not benefit when a day is removed from straight volume
accumulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clarifying Changes
    The Exchange proposes to add further detail throughout the rule
text to bring greater transparency as to how the Exchange will apply
the better of rule when removing days from its tier calculations. The
Exchange proposes to make clear that it will only remove days pursuant
to the better of rule by specifying in paragraphs (1)(B) and (2) that
such days may be excluded from the Tier Calculations only pursuant to
paragraph (3). Paragraph (3) will then provide that if a day is to be
excluded as a result of paragraph (1)(B) or (2), the Exchange will be
required to exclude the day from any member's monthly options tier
calculations as detailed within paragraph (3) (i.e., excluding a
Scheduled Early Close or Unanticipated Event from a specified tier
calculation only for members that would have a lower tier calculation
with the day included). With the proposed changes, the Exchange seeks
to clarify current practice by expressing that it will exclude days
from any member's tier calculations in a uniform manner to ensure that
days are removed only in situations where the member benefits.
Currently, the Exchange looks at each potential excluded day in a month
and calculates for every member their ADV or industry volume percentage
based on their trading volume on that day. If any member would have a
lower ADV or percentage of industry volume with the particular day
included, the Exchange will exclude that day for that member. As such,
the proposed changes specify that the Exchange will apply the better of
rule in a uniform manner for all members, and that there is no
arbitrary selection of ``winners'' or ``losers'' when the Exchange
excludes days. Lastly, the Exchange proposes to make two technical
changes within the better of rule; first, to clarify that the rule
applies in each case of the tier calculations specified in paragraph
(3), and second, to use the defined term ``Tier Calculations'' instead
of ``ADV or percentage of industry volume'' to reflect the changes
proposed herein.
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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
and equitable as it provides a framework for removing days from the
Exchange's volume calculations that the Exchange believes is beneficial
to members. The proposed rule change would permit the Exchange to
remove a day from its Tier Calculations in more circumstances, and
ensures that the Exchange will only do so in circumstances where
beneficial for the member due to the member executing a lower ADV or
percentage of industry volume during the excluded day. The Exchange
believes it is reasonable and equitable to exclude a day from its tier
calculations when the Exchange's system experiences a disruption during
the 30-minute period prior to the opening of trade that renders the
Exchange inaccessible to members as this preserves the Exchange's
intent behind adopting volume-based pricing. Without this change,
members that are precluded from submitting eligible interest during the
30-minute window before the opening of trade may be negatively
impacted, even if the Exchange resolves the issue before the market
opens and as a result, does not instruct members to route away. The
proposed change to exclude such days will diminish the likelihood of a
cost increase occurring because a member is not able to reach a volume
tier calculation on that date that it would reach on other trading days
during the month. Furthermore, while the Exchange may have resolved the
systems disruption from its perspective prior to the opening of trade,
a member may now have issues managing their orders with the Exchange as
a result of the original disruption, causing a downstream ripple
effect.
    Similarly, excluding a day where the Exchange's system experiences
a disruption that lasts for more than 60 minutes intra-day is
reasonable and equitable because the proposal seeks to avoid penalizing
members that might otherwise qualify for certain tiered pricing but
that, because of an Exchange systems disruption, did not participate on
the Exchange to the extent they might have otherwise participated. The
Exchange believes that certain systems disruptions could preclude some
members from submitting orders to the Exchange even if such issue is
not actually a complete systems outage. Other options exchanges
similarly exclude exchange systems disruptions from their pricing
tiers.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See footnote 5 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes that it is reasonable and
equitable to apply the better of rule to both systems disruption-
related scenarios. Without these changes, members that step up and
trade significant volume on excluded trading days may be negatively
impacted, resulting in an effective cost increase for those members.
The proposal would align the Exchange's approach to how it applies this
rule today for days where the market is not open for the entire trading
day or where the Exchange instructs members to route away. Furthermore,
removing the proposed days from both the numerator and denominator of a
calculation based on a percentage of industry volume is reasonable and
equitable as this treatment ensures that the member actually benefits
from having the day removed. Again, this would align the Exchange's
current approach to how it removes days from such calculations.
    In light of the Exchange's proposal to adopt the two additional
scenarios related to systems disruptions, the Exchange is making
related, restructuring changes to the existing language in Options 7,
Section 1(b) to bring greater transparency to the application of its
rule. Specifically, the Exchange is distinguishing between planned and
unplanned days in paragraphs (1) and (2), defining the latter as
Unanticipated Events, and stipulating how the Exchange will exclude
such days pursuant to this rule. Categorizing days in this manner will
clarify the application of its rule in light of the Exchange's proposal
to expand the rule to adopt additional days that

may be excluded from its tier calculations. Similarly, the Exchange
believes that the proposed changes to specify how each of the days in
paragraphs (1) and (2) will be excluded from its tier calculations will
bring greater transparency to the application of the rule by clearly
delineating the various circumstances in which the rule will apply.
Providing in paragraph (1)(A) that the Exchange will always exclude
from its tier calculations days that it announces in advance it will
not be open for trading will clarify current practice. Providing in
paragraph (3) that the Exchange may exclude any Scheduled Early Close
or Unanticipated Event from the specified tier calculations, subject to
the better of rule, will make clear that the Exchange will take a
consistent approach when excluding days for purposes of its volume
based pricing tiers. Furthermore, the clean-up changes specifying that
the days in paragraphs (1)(B) and (2) may be excluded only pursuant to
paragraph (3), and requiring the Exchange to exclude such days pursuant
to the specifications in paragraph (3) will likewise make clear that
the Exchange will take a consistent approach with respect to excluding
days from its tier calculations. As discussed above, these
modifications will clarify that the Exchange will apply the better of
rule in a uniform manner to all members, and that there is no arbitrary
selection of ``winners'' or ``losers.'' The Exchange also believes that
the two technical changes proposed in the better of rule to reflect the
changes proposed herein will likewise bring greater clarity to its
rule. For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the
proposed changes to clarify and restructure its existing rule are
reasonable and equitable.
    Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes to
adopt a catch-all provision in paragraph (3)(C) to other Tier
Calculations not already specified in the rule to allow the Exchange to
apply the better of rule going forward to all pricing programs based on
other volume calculations is reasonable and equitable for the same
reasons as allowing the Exchange to apply the better of rule for
calculations based on ADV and industry volume percentages. The Exchange
notes that aberrant low volume days resulting from, for instance, an
Unanticipated Event, impacts all volume-based calculations, and
allowing the Exchange to exclude such days from any volume-based tier
calculation if the member would have a lower tier calculation with the
day excluded will further protect members from being inadvertently
penalized.
    Finally, the Exchange further believes that the proposed rule
change is not unfairly discriminatory because it will apply equally to
all members. While the Exchange currently has rules in place for
removing a day from its pricing, the Exchange believes that the
proposed changes will benefit all members by providing more
circumstances to remove a day, and ensuring that days are removed only
in situations where the member benefits.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
designed to protect members from the possibility of a cost increase by
excluding days when overall member participation might be significantly
lower than a typical trading day. The Exchange believes that the
proposed modifications to its tier calculations are pro-competitive and
will result in lower total costs to end users, a positive outcome of
competitive markets. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct their order flow
to competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to
remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described
above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes reflect this
competitive environment.

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) of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. At
any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the 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-Phlx-2018-73 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-Phlx-2018-73. 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-Phlx-2018-73, and should be submitted on
or before December 21, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25997 Filed 11-29-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 154 (Friday, August 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44713-44715]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17358]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2021-0532; FRL-8836-01-OW]

Notification of Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Section 1441
Application Submissions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing
receipt of Certifications of Need applications pursuant to the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Section 1441. Seven public water systems and
three publicly owned treatment works submitted these applications. Each
applicant cited receipt of notices of force majeure or unavailability
of treatment chemical via normal procurement channels. The notices
explained that a significant curtailment of deliveries of chlorine and
derivative treatment chemicals from producers and from producers to
repackagers would necessitate either a reduction in allocations of
chlorine, sodium hypochlorite, or ferric chloride relative to the
contractual agreements or an outright cancellation of the contracts.
The applications further stated that after receiving the notices, each
of these utilities tried to identify alternate treatment chemical
suppliers with no success. EPA is providing an opportunity for written
comments from the public on the SDWA Section 1441 applications, from
chemical producers and repackagers that could supply the required
chlorine, sodium hypochlorite, or ferric chloride to the applicants,
and from any other interested parties.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
HQ-OW-2021-0532, by any of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
    Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail code: 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    Hand Delivery/Courier (by scheduled appointment only): EPA Docket
Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center's hours of operations are 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except federal holidays).
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2018-0532 for this action. Comments received may be
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending
comments, see the ``Public Participation'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document. Out of an abundance of caution
for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and
Reading Room are closed to the public, with limited exceptions, to
reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will
continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and
webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov, as there may be delay in processing mail. Hand
deliveries and couriers may be received by scheduled appointment only.
For further information of EPA Docket Center Services and the current
status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on SDWA Section 1441
applications contact Gabrielle Minton, Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water, Water Security Division, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For information on water utility disinfection
products contact Steve Allgeier, Office of Ground Water and Drinking
Water, Water Security Division, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For more information, visit EPA's website at:
https://www.epa.gov/waterutilityresponse/watersectorsupplychainchemicalshortages.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action impose any requirements on Public Water
Systems (PWSs) or Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)?
    B. Public Participation
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. Purpose, Background, and Statutory Requirements of This Action
    A. What is the purpose of this action?
    B. Background and Statutory Requirements

I. General Information

A. Does this action impose any requirements on Public Water Systems
(PWSs) or Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)?

    This action, when published, will not impose any requirements on
utilities.

B. Public Participation

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2021-
0532, at https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or the
other methods identified in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket.
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    EPA is temporarily suspending its Docket Center and Reading Room
for public visitors, with limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center Staff will continue to provide
remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the
public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov/ as there may
be a delay in processing mail. Hand deliveries or couriers will be
received by scheduled appointment only. For further information and
updates on EPA Docket Center services, please visit us online at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    EPA continues to carefully monitor information from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), local area health departments,
and our federal partners so that we can respond rapidly as conditions
change regarding COVID-19.

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:

    Explain your views as clearly as possible.
    Describe any assumptions that you used.
    Provide any technical information and/or data you used that
support your views.
    Provide full references for any peer reviewed publication you
used that support your views.
    Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
    Offer alternatives.

    Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline.
To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket
identification number in the subject line on the first page of your
response. It would also be helpful if you provided the name, date,

and Federal Register citation related to your comments.

II. Purpose, Background, and Statutory Requirements of This Action

    This section briefly summarizes the purpose of this action and the
statutory requirements.

A. What is the purpose of this action?

    The purpose of this action is to provide notification of the
applications received under SDWA Section 1441.
    EPA has received applications for Certifications of Need under SDWA
Section 1441 authority, from the following public water systems and
publicly owned treatment works: City of Oceanside--Mission Basin
Groundwater Purification Facility (PWSID CA3710014, 12.5% sodium
hypochlorite, 5,000 gallons delivered every 65 days); City of
Oceanside--Weese Filtration Plant (PWSID CA3710014, 12.5% sodium
hypochlorite, 5,000 gallons delivered every 5 days); City of
Oceanside--San Luis Rey Water Reclamation Facility (POTW ID R9-2019-
0166, 12.5% sodium hypochlorite, 5,000 gallons delivered every 10
days); Western Municipal Water District--Western Water Recycling
Facility (POTW ID R9-2003-0113, 12.5% sodium hypochlorite, 5,000
gallons delivered every 10 days); Western Municipal Water District--
Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Authority (POTW CA8000216,
12.5% sodium hypochlorite, 5,000 gallons delivered every 3 days); City
of Poway (PWSID CA3710015, 100% gaseous chlorine, 5 tons delivered
every 21 days); Jordan Valley River Water Conservancy District (PWSID
UT18027, 100% gaseous chlorine, 12 tons delivered every 7 days); Helix
Water District (PWSID CA3710010, 100% gaseous chlorine, 12 tons
delivered every 14 days); Niagara Falls Water Board Wastewater
Treatment Plant (PWSID NY0026336, 12.5% sodium hypochlorite, 30,000
gallons delivered every day); and the City of Farmington Water and
Wastewater Utility (PWSID NM-35-10224, 38%-42% ferric chloride, 5,000
gallons delivered every 55 days).
    Submitted applications were reviewed by EPA for accuracy,
completeness, and basis for need. After the comment period, EPA will
issue or deny Certifications of Need. If issued, EPA will transmit the
Certifications of Need to the U.S. Department of Commerce
Undersecretary for Business and Industrial Security to implement the
certification by issuing an order to contracted suppliers. The orders
will require repackagers and/or suppliers to provide the fully
contracted chlorine and other derivative treatment chemical allocations
to the utilities listed in this Federal Register document. EPA requests
comment on the application submittals as well as feedback from
repackagers or suppliers who may be able to assist.
    On June 30, 2021, EPA Administrator Regan issued a letter to the
chemical sector encouraging chemical manufacturers and suppliers to
prioritize drinking water and wastewater systems. EPA has been in
frequent communication with representatives from the chemical sector,
including specific chlorine producers and chlorine repackagers. While
drinking water and wastewater disinfection accounts for less than 5% of
chlorine consumed in the U.S., the water sector's use of this chemical
is essential for protecting public health.
    The applicants indicated that if their public water systems cannot
obtain a sufficient and reliable supply of the required treatment
chemical in the form used at that treatment facility, they would be
compelled to issue boil water notices and Tier 1 public notifications
or shut down the treatment system until the supply of the required
treatment chemical is restored. If public water systems are forced to
shut down, the communities served by the system would lack a safe
drinking water supply, with significant consequences to public health
and the local economy. Similarly, if publicly owned treatment works
lack adequate chlorine or derivative chemical supplies, they would be
unable to disinfect treated wastewater prior to discharge to surface
waters, potentially leading to an increase in the concentration of
pathogens in the surface water, which may be used by downstream
drinking water utilities as a source of drinking water or by
recreational users.

B. Background and Statutory Requirements

    Pursuant to SDWA Section 1441, a PWS or POTW may submit an
application to the EPA Administrator for a Certification of Need when
the amount of a ``chemical or substance necessary to effectively treat
water is not reasonably available'' or ``will not be so available when
required.'' 42 U.S.C. 300j(a). Upon receipt of the application, EPA
must publish a notice in the Federal Register, notify in writing all
individuals who could be subject to an order based on the Certification
of Need, and provide time for written comment. EPA may waive such
requirements when the agency finds for good cause that a waiver is
necessary to protect public health. Id. at (b)(2). Within 30 days after
publishing the notice in the Federal Register or after receipt of the
application if publication is waived, EPA will either issue or deny the
Certification of Need. Id. at (b)(3). The EPA Administrator has
delegated the authority to receive applications for Certifications of
Need, issue such certifications, and take other actions under SDWA
Section 1441 to the EPA Assistant Administrator for Water.
    If EPA issues the Certification of Need, the agency will forward it
to the U.S. Department of Commerce (Department) for implementation. 42
U.S.C. 300j(c)(1). Within seven days of EPA issuing the certification,
the Department will issue an order requiring the manufacturers,
producers, processors, distributors, or repackagers of the chemical or
substance, identified in the amount and form in the Certification of
Need, that the Department determines the supplies to be necessary and
appropriate. Id. Persons or companies subject to the order will be
given a reasonable opportunity to consult with the Department with
respect to implementation of the order. Id.

Radhika Fox,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-17358 Filed 8-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P