[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 193 (Thursday, October 4, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50012-50014]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21472]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[DE105-1105; FRL-9983-49-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Delaware; Update to Materials Incorporated by Reference

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; administrative change.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is updating the
materials that are incorporated by reference (IBR) into the Delaware
State implementation plan (SIP). The regulations affected by this
update have been previously submitted by the Delaware Department of
Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) and approved by
EPA. This update affects the SIP materials that are available for
public inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA) and the EPA Regional Office.

DATES: This action is effective October 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES: SIP materials which are incorporated by reference into 40
CFR part 52 are available for inspection at the following locations:
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; and the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. EPA requests that you email the contact listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Trouba,<PHONE_NUMBER> or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Each State has a SIP containing the control measures and strategies
used to attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS). The SIP is extensive, containing such elements as air
pollution control regulations, emission inventories, monitoring
networks, attainment demonstrations, and enforcement mechanisms.
    Each State must formally adopt the control measures and strategies
in the SIP after the public has had an opportunity to comment on them
and then submit the proposed SIP revisions to EPA. Once these control
measures and strategies are approved by EPA, and after notice and
comment, they are incorporated into the federally-approved SIP and are
identified in part 52 ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans,'' title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR part 52).
The full text of the State regulation approved by EPA is not reproduced
in its entirety in 40 CFR part 52, but is ``incorporated by
reference.'' This means that EPA has approved a given State regulation
with a specific effective date. The public is referred to the location
of the full text version should they want to know which measures are
contained in a given SIP. The information provided allows EPA and the
public to monitor the extent to which a State implements a SIP to
attain and maintain the NAAQS and to take enforcement action if
necessary.
    The SIP is a living document which a State revises as necessary to
address its unique air pollution problems. Therefore, EPA, from time to
time, must take action on SIP revisions containing new and/or revised
regulations as being part of the SIP. On May 22, 1997 (62 FR 27968),
EPA revised the procedures for incorporating by reference federally-
approved SIPs, as a result of consultations between EPA and the Office
of the Federal Register (OFR). The description of the revised SIP
document, IBR procedures and ``Identification of plan'' format are
discussed in further detail in the May 22, 1997 Federal Register
document. On December 7, 1998 (63 FR 67407), EPA published a document
in the Federal Register beginning the new IBR procedure for Delaware.
On June 21, 2004 (69 FR 34285), April 3, 2007 (72 FR 15839), April 17,
2009 (74 FR 17771), May 2, 2011 (76 FR 24372), September 24, 2013 (78
FR 58465), and May 30, 2017 (82 FR 24529) EPA published updates to the
IBR material for Delaware.

    Since the publication of the last IBR update, EPA has not made any
regulatory changes to paragraph (c) of the Delaware SIP. However, in
paragraph (c), EPA is correcting the title in section 1112 to read,
Control of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions. In paragraph (d) of the Delaware
SIP, source specific requirements, EPA incorporated a Secretary's Order
for Delaware City Refining and removed Secretary's orders for SPI
Polyols, Inc. and General Chemical Corporation.

A. Added Regulations

    In paragraph (d) of the Delaware SIP, source specific requirements,
EPA incorporated a Secretary's Order for Delaware City Refining.

B. Revised Regulations

    None.

C. Removed Regulations

    In paragraph (d) of the Delaware SIP, source specific requirements,
EPA removed Secretary's orders for SPI Polyols, Inc. and General
Chemical Corporation.

II. EPA Action

    In this action, EPA is announcing the update to the IBR material as
of May 25, 2018 and revising the text within 40 CFR 52.420(b), (c), and
(d).

III. Good Cause Exemption

    EPA has determined that this rule falls under the ``good cause''
exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedures Act
(APA) which, upon finding ``good cause,'' authorizes agencies to
dispense with public participation and section 553(d)(3) which allows
an agency to make a rule effective immediately (thereby avoiding the
30-day delayed effective date otherwise provided for in the APA). This
rule simply codifies provisions which are already in effect as a matter
of law in Federal and approved State programs. Under section 553 of the
APA, an agency may find good cause where procedures are ``impractical,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Public comment is
``unnecessary'' and ``contrary to the public interest'' since the
codification only reflects existing law. Immediate notice in the CFR
benefits the public by removing outdated citations and incorrect table
entries.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of previously
EPA approved regulations promulgated by the State of Delaware and
federally effective prior to May 25, 2018. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region III Office (please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Administrator is required to
approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements
and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    EPA has also determined that the provisions of section 307(b)(1) of
the CAA pertaining to petitions for judicial review are not applicable
to this action. Prior EPA rulemaking actions for each individual
component of the Delaware SIP compilations had previously afforded
interested parties the opportunity to file a petition for judicial
review in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit within 60 days of such rulemaking action. Thus, EPA sees no
need in this action to reopen the 60-day period for filing such
petitions for judicial review for this ``Identification of plan''
update action for Delaware.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 21, 2018.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart I: Delaware

0
2. Section 52.420 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b).
0
b. In paragraph (c), revising the table heading for section 1112.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  52.420  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (b) Incorporation by reference. (1) Material listed in paragraphs
(c) and (d) of this section with an EPA approval date prior to May 25,
2018, was approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. Entries in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section with the EPA
approval dates after May 25, 2018 for the State of Delaware have been
approved by EPA for inclusion in the State implementation plan and for
incorporation by reference into the plan as it is contained in this
section, and will be considered by the Director of the Federal Register
for approval in the next update to the SIP compilation.
    (2) EPA Region III certifies that the materials provided by EPA at
the addresses in paragraph (b)(3) of this section are an exact
duplicate of the officially promulgated State rules/regulations which
have been approved as part of the State implementation plan as of the
dates referenced in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (3) Copies of the materials incorporated by reference into the
State implementation plan may be inspected at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103. To obtain the material, please call the Regional
Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may also inspect the material with an EPA
approval date prior to May 25, 2018 for the State of Delaware at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    (c) * * *

                                                EPA-Approved Regulations and Statutes in the Delaware SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   State
  State citation (7 DNREC 1100)          Title/subject        effective date            EPA approval date             Additional explanation/ citation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        1112 Control of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-21472 Filed 10-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 93)]
[Notices]
[Page 27590-27593]
[DOCID:fr13my08-101]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57795; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2008-037]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Nasdaq's Continued
Listing Requirements To Replace Round Lot Shareholders

May 7, 2008.
    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 April 25, 2008, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Exchange'' or
``Nasdaq'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Nasdaq.
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

    Nasdaq proposes to change the shareholder requirements for
continued listing. Nasdaq will implement the proposed rule immediately
upon approval.
    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is italicized; proposed deletions are in brackets.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Changes are marked to the rule text that appears in the
electronic manual of Nasdaq found at http://nasdaq.complinet.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4200. Definitions

    (a) For purposes of the Rule 4000 Series, unless the context
requires otherwise:
    (1)-(31) No change.
    (32) ``Public holders'' of a security include both beneficial
holders and holders of record, but does not include any holder who is,
either directly or indirectly, an executive officer, director, or the
beneficial holder of more than 10% of the total shares outstanding.
[``Reported Security'' means an equity security for which quotations
are entered into the Consolidate Quotations Service.]
    (33) ``Round lot holder'' means a holder of a normal unit of
trading. The number of beneficial holders will be considered in
addition to holders of record.
    (34)-(37) No change.
    (38) ``Total holders'' of a security include both beneficial
holders and holders of record.
    (39) ``Transaction costs'' means costs incurred in connection with
a limited partnership rollup transaction, including printing and
mailing the proxy, prospectus or other documents; legal fees not
related to the solicitation of votes or tenders; financial advisory
fees; investment banking fees; appraisal fees; accounting fees;
independent committee expenses; travel expenses; and all other fees
related to the preparatory work of the transaction, but not including
costs that would have otherwise been incurred by the subject limited
partnerships in the ordinary course of business or solicitation
expenses.
    [(39)] (40) ``Underwriting Activity Report'' is a report provided
by the Corporate Financing Department of NASD Regulation, Inc. in
connection with a distribution of securities subject to SEC Rule 101
pursuant to NASD Rule 2710(b)(11) and includes forms that are submitted
by members to comply with their notification obligations under Rules
4614, 4619, and 4623.
    (b)-(c) No change.
* * * * *

4310. Listing Requirements for Domestic and Canadian Securities

    To qualify for listing in Nasdaq, a security of a domestic or
Canadian issuer shall satisfy all applicable requirements contained in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) hereof. Issuers that meet these
requirements, but that are not listed on the Nasdaq Global Market, are
listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market.
    (a)-(b) No change.
    (c) In addition to the requirements contained in paragraph (a) and
(b) above, and unless otherwise indicated, a security shall satisfy the
following criteria for listing on Nasdaq:
    (1)-(5) No change.
    (6) (A) In the case of common stock, for initial [and continued]
listing[,] there shall be at least 300 round lot holders of the
security and for continued listing there shall be at least 300 public
holders of the security.
    (B) In the case of preferred stock and secondary classes of common
stock, for initial [and continued] listing[,] there shall be at least
100 round lot holders of the security and for continued listing there
shall be at least 100 public holders of the security, provided in each
case that the issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent equity
security must be listed on Nasdaq or be a covered security. In the
event the issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent security
either is not listed on Nasdaq or is not a covered security, the
preferred stock and/or secondary class of common stock may be listed on
Nasdaq so long as the security satisfies the listing criteria for
common stock.
    (C) No change.
    (7)-(30) No change.
    (d) No change.

4320. Listing Requirements for Non-Canadian Foreign Securities and
American Depositary Receipts

    To qualify for listing on Nasdaq, a security of a non-Canadian
foreign issuer, an American Depositary Receipt (ADR) or similar
security issued in respect of a security of a foreign issuer shall
satisfy the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) of this Rule.
Issuers that meet these requirements, but that are not listed on the
Nasdaq Global Market, are listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market.
    (a)-(d) No change.

    (e) In addition to the requirements contained in paragraphs (a) and
(b), the security shall satisfy the criteria set out in this subsection
for listing on Nasdaq. In the case of ADRs, the underlying security
will be considered when determining the ADR's qualification for initial
or continued listing on Nasdaq.
    (1)-(3) No change.
    (4)(A) In the case of common stock, for initial [and continued]
listing[,] there shall be at least 300 round lot holders of the
security and for continued listing there shall be at least 300 public
holders of the security.
    (B) In the case of preferred stock and secondary classes of common
stock, for initial [and continued] listing[,] there shall be at least
100 round lot holders of the security and for continued listing there
shall be at least 100 public holders of the security, provided in each
case that the issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent equity
security must be listed on Nasdaq or be a covered security. In the
event the issuer's common stock or common stock equivalent security
either is not listed on Nasdaq or is not a covered security, the
preferred stock and/or secondary class of common stock may be listed on
Nasdaq so long as the security satisfies the listing criteria for
common stock.
    (C) No change.
    (5)-(26) No change.
    (f) No change.
* * * * *

4426. Nasdaq Global Select Market Listing Requirements

    (a) No change.
    (b) Liquidity Requirements
    (1) The security must demonstrate either:
    (A)(i) a minimum of 550 [beneficial] total shareholders, and (ii)
an average monthly trading volume over the prior 12 months of at least
1,100,000 shares per month; or
    (B) a minimum of 2,200 [beneficial] total shareholders; or
    (C) a minimum of 450 [beneficial] round lot shareholders
    (2)-(3) No change.
    (c)-(f) No change.
* * * * *

4450. Quantitative Maintenance Criteria

    After listing as a Nasdaq Global Market security, a security must
substantially meet the criteria set forth in paragraphs (a) or (b), and
(c), (d), (e) (f), (g), (h) or (i) below to continue to remain listed
on the Nasdaq Global Market. A security maintaining its listing under
paragraph (b) need not also be in compliance with the quantitative
maintenance criteria in the Rule 4300 series.
    (a) Maintenance Standard 1--First Class of Common Stock, Shares or
Certificates of Beneficial Interest of Trusts, Limited Partnership
Interests in Foreign or Domestic Issues and American Depositary
Receipts.
    (1)-(3) No change.
    (4) 400 total shareholders [of round lots]; and
    (5)-(6) No change.
    (b) Maintenance Standard 2--First Class of Common Stock, Shares or
Certificates of Beneficial Interest of Trusts, Limited Partnership
Interests in Foreign or Domestic Issues and American Depositary
Receipts.
    (1)-(4) No change.
    (5) 400 total shareholders [of round lots]; and
    (6) No change.
    (c)-(g) No change.
    (h) Quantitative Maintenance Criteria--Preferred Stock and
Secondary Classes of Common Stock.
    For continued listing, if the common stock or common stock equity
equivalent security of the issuer is listed on Nasdaq or another
national securities exchange, the issue shall have:
    (1)-(3) No change.
    (4) A minimum of 100 [round lot] public shareholders;
    (5) No change.
    Alternatively, in the event the issuer's common stock or common
stock equivalent security is not listed on either Nasdaq or another
national securities exchange, the preferred stock and/or secondary
class of common stock may be listed on Nasdaq so long as the security
satisfies the listing criteria for common stock.
    (i) No change.
* * * * *

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

    In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq 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. Nasdaq 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
    Nasdaq rules require a company to maintain a certain minimum number
of round lot holders for continued listing.\4\ However, for a variety
of reasons, it is often difficult for Nasdaq and the listed company to
determine compliance with these requirements. First, the Commission
only requires companies to annually disclose the number of record
holders, not round lot holders, in their proxy. Companies often don't
know how many round lot holders they have since that group includes
``objecting beneficial holders'' who wish their identity to remain
confidential from the company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The minimum requirement for continued listing of the first
class of common stock or its equivalent on both the NASDAQ Global
and Global Select Markets is 400 round lot shareholders and on the
NASDAQ Capital Market is 300 round lot shareholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It also can be difficult to obtain the number of shares held by
beneficial owners from record holders, such as broker-dealers.
    In order to determine compliance with the round lot requirement,
Nasdaq reviews a number of factors, including whether the company has a
number of record holders well in excess of the round lot holder
requirement and shareholder data provided by the company's transfer
agent and Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. (formerly, Automatic
Data Processing, Inc.). While this process is effective, it is very
time-consuming for Nasdaq and can be frustrating to the company, which
has to spend considerable time and may be charged a fee to obtain this
information.
    In contrast, the number of total holders is more easily determined.
For example, the number of proxies that a company mails is a very good
approximation of the number of its total holders. In fact, many
companies disclose the number of beneficial holders in their public
filings, either instead of, or in addition to, the number of record
holders. Further, the number of public holders generally can be easily
determined by subtracting from the total shareholders the number of
executive officers, directors, and 10% shareholders that are disclosed
in the company's proxy statement.
    When the round lot holder requirement was originally adopted it was
difficult and costly to trade in increments of less than 100 shares.
Thus odd lot holders (that is, holders of fewer

than 100 shares) added little to the distribution and potential
liquidity of a security. These impediments no longer exist, given the
current state of online trading and competitive commission structures.
As such, Nasdaq believes that today all holders, not just holders of
round lots, can potentially contribute to a security's liquidity.
    In addition, in Nasdaq's experience, companies do not typically see
a decrease in the number of round lot holders following their listing,
absent a transaction such as a reverse stock split or major stock buy-
back.
    Given these difficulties and changed circumstances, Nasdaq proposes
that the shareholder requirements for continued listing be changed so
that it no longer considers only round lot holders. As revised, Nasdaq
would generally require 300 public shareholders \5\ for continued
listing on the Capital Market, and 400 total shareholders for continued
listing on the Global and Global Select Markets.\6\ In the case of
preferred stock and secondary classes of common stock, 100 public
shareholders would be required for continued listing on the Capital,
Global and Global Select Markets. As proposed, a public holder would
exclude any holder who is, either directly or indirectly, an executive
officer, director, or the beneficial holder of more than 10% of the
total shares outstanding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The definition of ``public holders'' would appear in
proposed Rule 4200(a)(32) and replace the definition of ``Reported
Security'' because that term is now defined in Regulation NMS and is
not used within the Nasdaq rules.
    \6\ Nasdaq proposes to require public shareholders, instead of
total shareholders, on the Capital Market so that Nasdaq's rules
remain substantially similar to the rules of the American Stock
Exchange (``Amex''), which require 300 public shareholders. See
Section 1003(b)(i)(B) of the Amex Company Guide. Nasdaq does not
believe it necessary to limit the shareholders on the Global and
Global Select Markets to public shareholders given the higher number
of total holders required. In addition, Nasdaq notes that the New
York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') requires 400 total shareholders for
continued listing. See Section 802.01A of the NYSE Listed Company
Manual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under this definition, Nasdaq would consider immediate family
members of an executive officer, director, or 10% holder to not be
public holders to the extent the shares held by such individuals are
considered beneficially owned by the executive officer, director or 10%
holder under Rule 16a-1 under the Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 17 CFR 240.16a-1(a)(2). Nasdaq will determine ``public
holders'' based on the information disclosed in public filings about
the company, including ownership statements and proxy statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq also proposes to modify the rules relating to the Nasdaq
Global Select Market to use the newly defined term ``total
shareholders'' in those rules; however, no substantive change is being
made to the requirements for the Global Select Market. In addition, no
change is proposed to the initial listing requirements because the
majority of initial listings are initial public offerings, where the
number of round lot shareholders can be easily determined by the
underwriter when distributing the offering, and because SEC rules
require that markets have a minimum of 300 round lot holders for
initial listing to avoid having listed securities be subject to the
penny stock rules.\8\ Nasdaq does propose, however, to clarify that the
definition of round lot holders includes beneficial holders in addition
to holders of record, consistent with current practice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 17 CFR 240.3a51-1(a)(2)(i)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that the proposal is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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. The proposed
rule change is consistent with these requirements in that modifying the
requirement will facilitate consistent application of the rules by
Nasdaq and ease the burden of compliance on listed companies, without
increasing the risk to investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Nasdaq-2008-037 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Nasdaq-2008-037. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days

between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will
be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
Nasdaq-2008-037 and should be submitted on or before June 3, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-10622 Filed 5-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23752-23755]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10830]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83257; File No. SR-ISE-2018-42]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Exchanges Schedule of Fees

May 16, 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 May 1, 2018, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' 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 the Exchanges Schedule of Fees.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://ise.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's
Schedule of Fees, as described further below.

Fee for Responses to PIM Orders
    Currently, for regular orders in Non-Select Symbols,\3\ the
Exchange charges all market participants a fee for Responses to Price
Improvement Mechanism (``PIM'') orders that is $0.20 per contract. For
complex orders in both Select Symbols \4\ and Non-Select Symbols, the
fee for Responses to PIM orders is likewise $0.20 per contract for all
market participants. The Exchange now proposes to increase the
aforementioned fees to $0.25 per contract for all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Non-Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols
excluding Select Symbols.
    \4\ ``Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols listed
on the Nasdaq ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee for Responses to Crossing Orders Except PIM Orders
    Today, the Exchange charges all market participants a fee for
Responses to Crossing Orders \5\ except PIM orders that is $0.48 per
contract for complex orders in Select Symbols. The Exchange now
proposes to increase this fee to $0.50 per contract for all market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A ``Crossing Order'' is an order executed in the Exchange's
Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism, PIM or submitted
as a Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') order. For purposes of the
Fee Schedule, orders executed in the Block Order Mechanism are also
considered Crossing Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

QCC and Solicitation Rebate
    Currently, members using QCC and/or other solicited crossing
orders, including solicited orders executed in the Solicitation,
Facilitation or Price Improvement Mechanisms, receive rebates for each
originating contract side in all symbols traded on the Exchange. Once a
member reaches a certain volume threshold in QCC orders and/or
solicited crossing orders during a month, the Exchange provides rebates
to that member for all of its QCC and solicited crossing order traded
contracts for that month.\6\ The applicable rebates are applied on QCC
and solicited crossing order traded contracts once the volume threshold
is met. Members receive the Non-``Customer to Customer'' rebate for all
QCC and/or other solicited crossing orders except for QCC and solicited
orders between two Priority Customers.\7\ QCC and solicited orders
between two Priority Customers receive the ``Customer to Customer''
rebate. Non-``Customer to Customer'' and ``Customer to Customer''
volume is aggregated in determining the applicable volume tier. The
current volume threshold and corresponding rebates are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ All eligible volume from affiliated members will be
aggregated in determining QCC and Solicitation volume totals,
provided there is at least 75% common ownership between the members
as reflected on each member's Form BD, Schedule A.
    \7\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in Nasdaq ISE Rule
100(a)(37A).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Non-``Customer to    ``Customer to
    Originating contract sides      Customer'' rebate  Customer'' rebate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 to 99,999.......................              $0.00              $0.00
100,000 to 199,999................             (0.05)             (0.01)
200,000 to 499,999................             (0.07)             (0.01)
500,000 to 999,999................             (0.09)             (0.03)
1,000,000+........................             (0.11)             (0.03)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To incentive greater QCC and/or other solicited crossing order flow
to ISE, the Exchange now proposes to amend the tier schedule by
adjusting current tier 4 (i.e., 500,000 to 999,999) so that it becomes
500,000 to 749,999 originating contract sides, and adopting a new tier
5 for 750,000 to 999,999 originating contract sides. With this proposed
change, members that execute between 500,000 to 749,999 originating
contract sides of eligible volume will earn the current tier 4 rebates
(i.e., a Non-``Customer to Customer'' rebate of $0.09 per originating
contract side and a ``Customer to Customer'' rebate of $0.03 per
originating contract side). For members that meet the volume threshold
in the new tier 5, the Exchange proposes to pay a Non-``Customer to
Customer'' rebate of $0.10 per originating contract side and a
``Customer to Customer'' rebate of $0.03 per originating contract side.
The new tier schedule and corresponding rebates will be as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Non-``Customer to    ``Customer to
    Originating contract sides      Customer'' rebate  Customer'' rebate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 to 99,999.......................              $0.00              $0.00
100,000 to 199,999................             (0.05)             (0.01)
200,000 to 499,999................             (0.07)             (0.01)
500,000 to 749,999................             (0.09)             (0.03)
750,000 to 999,999................             (0.10)             (0.03)
1,000,000+........................             (0.11)             (0.03)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clean-up Change
    The Exchange proposes to make a non-substantive change to remove an
obsolete reference to its old website in its Schedule of Fees. In
particular, the definition of Select Symbols in the Exchange's Schedule
of Fees presently states that: `` `Select Symbols' are options
overlying all symbols listed on the Nasdaq ISE that are in the Penny
Pilot Program. The current list of Nasdaq ISE-listed Penny Pilot
Program symbols is available at http://www.ise.com/assets/files/products/pennies/penny_stocks.xls.'' The Exchange proposes to delete
the second sentence in the definition of Select Symbols now that the
legacy website is no longer available.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the

objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee for Responses to PIM Orders
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to increase the regular and
complex order fees for Responses to PIM orders from $0.20 to $0.25 per
contract for all market participants is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory. With the proposed changes, market participants
that respond to PIM auctions will pay response fees that remain
significantly lower than those charged for Responses to other Crossing
Orders. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the PIM response fees
proposed herein will remain attractive to market participants and will
continue to encourage them to respond to PIM auctions, thereby
increasing price improvement opportunities for PIM orders. Furthermore,
the Exchange believes that the proposed PIM response fees are equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory they will apply uniformly to all market
participants.
Fee for Responses to Crossing Orders Except PIM Orders
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to increase the complex
order fees for Responses to Crossing Orders except PIM orders in Select
Symbols to $0.50 per contract for all market participants is reasonable
because the proposed fee remains within the range of similar fees
charged by other options exchanges, including, for example, BOX Options
Exchange (``BOX''), which charges up to $0.50 per contract for
responses in its solicitation or facilitation auction mechanisms for
penny pilot classes.\10\ Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the
response fees proposed herein for Crossing Orders except PIM orders are
set at levels that the Exchange believes will remain attractive to
market participants that trade on ISE. Additionally, the Exchange
believes that the proposed fees for Responses to Crossing Orders except
PIM orders are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they
will apply uniformly to all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ BOX charges a fee for responses in the solicitation or
facilitation auction mechanisms for all account types that is $0.25
per contract for penny pilot classes. See BOX Fee Schedule, Section
I.C. As set forth in the BOX Fee Schedule, ``[r]esponses to
Facilitation and Solicitation Orders executed in these mechanisms
shall be charged the ``add'' fee.'' Id. at Section III.B, second
bullet. For all account types, this fee (i.e., the Fee for Adding
Liquidity) is $0.25 for penny pilot classes. Id. Thus, BOX may
charge a fee for responses in its solicitation or facilitation
auction mechanisms of up to $0.50 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

QCC and Solicitation Rebate
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the QCC and
Solicitation rebate tier schedule are reasonable because the proposed
changes are designed to encourage members to bring additional QCC and/
or other solicited crossing order volume to the Exchange in order to
benefit from the enhanced rebates. As explained above, the Exchange is
(i) adjusting the volume threshold in the current tier 4 from 500,000
to 999,999 to 500,000 to 749,999 originating contract sides and
offering the current tier 4 Non-``Customer to Customer'' rebate of
$0.09 per originating contract side and ``Customer to Customer'' rebate
of $0.03 per originating contract side, and (ii) adopting a new tier 5
for 750,000 to 999,999 originating contract sides with a corresponding
Non-``Customer to Customer'' rebate of $0.10 per originating contract
side and ``Customer to Customer'' rebate of $0.03 per originating
contract side. With the proposed changes, members will be provided more
opportunities to meet the volume thresholds and qualify for enhanced
rebates by bringing greater QCC and/or other solicited crossing order
flow to the Exchange. The Exchange also believes that the proposed
changes to the tier schedule are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because all members will be able to attain the enhanced
rebates by executing the required volume of QCC and/or other solicited
crossing orders on the Exchange.
Clean-up Change
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to remove the obsolete
reference to its old website from its Schedule of Fees is reasonable,
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it is a non-
substantive change designed to make the Schedule of Fees more
transparent to members and investors.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In this instance, the Exchange
is proposing various changes to its fees and rebates program for
Crossing Orders, specifically to increase the response fees for
Crossing Orders, including PIM orders, and to enhance its QCC and
Solicitation rebate program by modifying the current tier schedule,
each as described in detail above. The Exchange does not believe that
the proposed changes impose an undue burden on competition because the
proposed fees and rebates will apply uniformly to all market
participants, as discussed above. Furthermore, the Exchange believes
that its fees and rebates program for Crossing Orders will remain
attractive with the changes proposed herein, and will continue to
attract additional order flow to ISE, thereby enhancing the
competitiveness of ISE relative to other options exchanges.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they
deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate
opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In such
an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems
that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards
applicable to exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their
own fees in response, and because market participants may readily
adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the
degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited. In sum, if the changes proposed
herein are unattractive to market participants, it is likely that the
Exchange will lose market share as a result. Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of
members or competing order execution venues to maintain their
competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\11\ and Rule

19b-4(f)(2) \12\ 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: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii)
for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2018-42 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2018-42. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2018-42 and should be submitted on
or before June 12, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-10830 Filed 5-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 147)]
[Notices]
[Page 42193-42195]
[DOCID:fr01au07-133]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56140; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-55]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change,
as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, Relating to Rule 106
(Specialists' Contact With Listed Companies and Member Organizations)

July 26, 2007.
    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 June 28, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' 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 substantially prepared by the Exchange.
NYSE filed the proposal pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. On July 25, 2007, the
Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 7 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 106 (Specialists' Contact
with Listed Companies and Member Organizations). The text of the
proposed rule change is available at NYSE, the Commission's Public
Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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 seeks to amend NYSE Rule 106 in order to modify the
requirements related to specialist contact with listed companies and
with Exchange member organizations. The proposal takes into
consideration the reality that a listed company's, or a member
organization's, access to electronic information may result in such
listed company or member organization declining to have meetings with
the specialist. Therefore, the Exchange seeks to amend the rule to
require the specialist unit to make itself available for contact with
its listed companies and with certain Exchange member organizations.
    NYSE Rule 106 was adopted at a time when orders entered with the
specialist were handled manually, and contact between a specialist unit
and its listed companies was necessary to ensure that such listed
companies were informed about the trading in its listed security on the
Exchange trading floor.\5\ As a result, NYSE Rule 106(a) mandates
interaction between a specialist unit and representatives of its listed
companies. The rule is very specific as to the frequency of contact
(quarterly) and the status of the issuer representative with whom the
contact must be had (Secretary or higher). Further, the rule mandates
that at least one of the quarterly meetings be in person. NYSE Rule
106(a) was intended to help foster a better understanding of the
specialist function, the operations of the Exchange market, and the
markets that are maintained in the listed company's stock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 27292 (September 26,
1989), 54 FR 41193 (October 5, 1989) (SR-NYSE-89-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is mindful of the busy schedules kept by the highest
ranking corporate employees in listed companies. As such, the Exchange
believes that NYSE Rule 106 no longer takes into consideration the
possibility that in today's world of electronic messaging, Internet
connectivity, and automated trading, a listed company may not need or
want the type of contact with their specialist unit that is currently
required by NYSE Rule 106(a).
    In addition to the listed companies' ability to access public
information, specialist units have internal departments that are
responsible for

communicating with its listed companies during the trading day.
Specifically, specialist units have corporate relations groups that
serve to provide its listed companies with information and are
available to answer questions from such listed companies during the
trading day. As such, the requirements of NYSE Rule 106(a) are
unnecessary since the specialist units are in contact with their listed
companies on a daily basis as part of its regular course of business.
    NYSE Rule 106(a) places the responsibility of contact between the
specialist unit and the listed company solely on the proverbial
``shoulders'' of the specialist unit. If the current requirements of
NYSE Rule 106(a) are not met by a specialist unit, it is the specialist
unit, and not the listed company, that is in violation of the rule and
potentially subject to disciplinary action.
    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes that NYSE Rule 106(a) be amended
to require a specialist unit to make itself available for contact with
its listed companies. The proposal would continue to afford listed
companies with opportunities for contact with its specialist unit,
while removing potential for disciplinary action against a specialist
unit that acts as the registered specialist for such listed company
that declines to meet or have contact with the specialist unit.
    Similarly, while NYSE Rule 106(b) was originally designed to foster
a better understanding between the specialist units and the Exchange's
fifteen largest member organizations through required, semi-annual
``off the Exchange Trading Floor'' contact, the Exchange believes that
NYSE Rule 106(b) no longer reflects the needs of the member
organizations. In today's world of electronic messaging, Internet
connectivity, and 24-hour news coverage of market activity, a member
organization may not want or need the type of contact with a specialist
unit that is currently required by NYSE Rule 106(b). The interpersonal
relationships between specialists and member organizations that once
took front stage in the marketplace have been significantly replaced by
automated trading initiatives and computerized market data reports.
Moreover, the specialist units are generally in contact with member
organizations on a regular basis through electronic and/or telephonic
means, which render the requirements of NYSE Rule 106(b) unnecessary.
    As does the current version of NYSE Rule 106(a), NYSE Rule 106(b)
currently places the responsibility of the semi-annual ``off the
Exchange Trading Floor'' contact on the specialist unit, not on the
member organization, and if the member organization is unable or
chooses not to have such contact with the specialist unit, the
specialist unit may be in violation of NYSE Rule 106(b) and potentially
subject to disciplinary action. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to
amend NYSE Rule 106(b) to require a specialist unit to ``make itself
available'' semi-annually for ``off the Exchange Trading Floor''
contact with the fifteen largest member organizations of the Exchange
and certain other members.
    Finally, given the current frequency of contact as described above,
the Exchange does not believe that it is necessary for specialist units
to provide the Exchange with a record of their contacts. As such, the
Exchange further proposes to amend NYSE Rule 106(c) to have the
specialist report such contacts to the Exchange upon request of the
Exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of
section 6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, because 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing. However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a
self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission with 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.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As required under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange
provided the Commission with written notice of its intent to file
the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the
filing date. See 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay to allow the Exchange to immediately implement the proposed rule
change and avoid any rule violations by specialist units that are
unable to fulfill the current obligations of NYSE Rule 106. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
\11\ because the proposed rule change to amend NYSE Rules 106(a) and
(b) would continue to foster contact and interaction between the
specialist units and the Exchange's listed companies and member
organizations, respectively, taking into consideration the
contemporary, real-time means of communication, connectivity, and
access to information. In addition, the Commission believes that the
proposed amendment to NYSE Rule 106(c) is consistent with the
requirements of the Act, and the Commission notes that, as proposed,
the Exchange would still be able to obtain information regarding
contact between the specialist units and their listed companies and
certain member organizations upon request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate

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

    \12\ For purposes of calculating the 60-day period within which
the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change, as
amended, under section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission
considers the period to commence on July 25, 2007, the date on which
the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-NYSE-2007-55 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NYSE-2007-55. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-NYSE-2007-55 and should be
submitted on or before August 22, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-14843 Filed 7-31-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 153 (Thursday, August 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 48540]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19195]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Noise
Certification Standards for Subsonic Jet Airplanes and Subsonic
Transport Category Large Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on May 20, 2013, vol. 78, no. 97, page 29426. The information
collected is needed for applicants' noise certification compliance
reports in order to demonstrate compliance with 14 CFR Part 36.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by September 9, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy DePaepe at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0659.
    Title: Noise Certification Standards for Subsonic Jet Airplanes and
Subsonic Transport Category Large Airplanes.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this
collection of information.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The information collected is needed for applicants'
noise certification compliance reports in order to demonstrate
compliance with 14 CFR Part 36, which is implemented under the Aircraft
Noise Abatement Act of 1968. An applicant's collected information is
incorporated into a noise compliance report that is provided to and
approved by the FAA. The noise compliance report is used by the FAA in
making a finding that the airplane is in compliance with regulations.
    Respondents: Approximately 10 applicants annually.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 135 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 1,350 hours.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20503.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC on August 2, 2013.
Albert R. Spence,
FAA Assistant Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. 2013-19195 Filed 8-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 232 (Monday, December 5, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74291-74294]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0463; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00895-T;
Amendment 39-22245; AD 2022-24-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. This AD
was prompted by a report that damage (including delamination of the
work deck, and corroded and cracked retainer blocks) was found during
inspection of certain galleys. This AD requires repetitive inspections
of certain galleys for corrosion of trolley retainer aluminum blocks
and delamination of the upper panel of the trolley compartment, and
applicable corrective action, as specified in a European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. This AD
also limits the installation of affected parts under certain
conditions. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 9, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 9,
2023.

ADDRESSES:
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-0463; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone
+49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You
may find this IBR material on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
     You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD docket at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-0463.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model
A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -
114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes; Model
A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N, -
253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -
131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253N,
-253NX, -271N, -271NX, -272N, and -272NX airplanes. The NPRM published
in the Federal Register on April 18, 2022 (87 FR 22818). The NPRM was
prompted by AD 2021-0183R1, dated September 20, 2021, issued by the
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union (referred to after
this as the MCAI). The MCAI states that damage (including delamination
of the work deck, and corroded and cracked retainer blocks) was found
during inspection of certain galleys. The FAA is proposing this AD to
detect and correct damage that could affect the galley's capability to
hold the trolley under emergency landing loads, which could lead to
trolley detachment, possibly resulting in blocking of an escape path
during an emergency exit.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require repetitive inspections of
certain galleys for corrosion of trolley retainer aluminum blocks and
delamination of the upper panel of the trolley compartment, and
applicable corrective action, as specified in EASA AD 2021-0183R1. The
NPRM also proposed to limit the installation of affected parts under
certain conditions. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-0463.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from two commenters, including American
Airlines (AAL) and Delta Air Lines (DAL). The following presents the
comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request for Improved Repair Instructions

    AAL requested that the FAA coordinate with Safran, Airbus, and/or
EASA to discuss a repair solution more appropriate than the repair
specified in the service information referenced in the MCAI, perhaps
one that would replace a section of the entire work deck that
encompasses all of the trolley blocks with a pre-fabricated composite
and less-corrosive work deck section. AAL considered the intervals, and
in particular, the repair methods to be ill-conceived. AAL explained
that the repair is impractical and overly invasive and does not take
into consideration details of the bonded structure such as potted
inserts, cutouts for pivoting T-dividers, and adjacent structural
elements such as the stabbing assembly which is often destroyed or
damaged during a disbond process. AAL also explained that, among other
things, applying heat to bonded parts to facilitate their removal is
overly optimistic (as a solution to address the unsafe condition) and
causes damage that can lead to other unsafe conditions. AAL expressed
concerns that the scope of damage could lead to additional approvals
that would be overwhelming to the FAA, AAL, Safran, and Airbus.
Therefore, AAL asked the FAA to consider a more comprehensive repair
approach in lieu of incorporating by reference EASA AD 2021-0183R1. AAL
proposed a repair that would involve trimming and replacing a section
of the entire work deck that encompasses all of the trolley blocks. The
FAA does not agree. The FAA has not received revised service
information that would address AAL's concerns and waiting for revised
service information would delay the actions required to address the
specified unsafe condition. In addition, EASA's response to a similar
comment in the associated EASA proposed AD (PAD) explains that it is in
the interest of safety to start the inspection campaign with the
available instructions, rather than delaying that, pending the
development and approval of a new repair. As stated in the NPRM, this
AD action has been identified as interim action pending the potential
development of a final action. However, under the provisions of
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, the FAA will consider requests for
approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) if sufficient
data are submitted to substantiate that the method would provide an
acceptable level of safety. The FAA has not changed this AD in this
regard.

Request for Revised Cost Estimate

    AAL requested the proposed AD be revised to include repair cost
estimations in the on-condition cost estimate. AAL stated that its
prior operational experience shows that an operator should expect an
average workscope greater than an inspection, likely including retainer
block replacement.
    The FAA agrees to revise the cost estimate for on-condition
actions. The estimate has been revised to include a worst-case scenario
of 40 work-hours per airplane for the intermediate repair of replacing
all retaining blocks.

Request for Delay of AD Issuance

    DAL requested delaying AD issuance until new or revised service
information is published. DAL stated that the next revisions of the
service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0183R1 would contain the
following corrections and add-ons: a final fix for Galley G2A, G4x, and
G5; revision of the ``Quick Fix'' adhesive reference from DP100FR to
DP100; and the addition of a missing figure in the instructions for
installing doublers when doing the panel skin restoration.
    The FAA disagrees. Although a later revision was issued, the later
revision did not include updated instructions for the galleys. The FAA
does not consider that delaying this action for the final fix is
warranted since sufficient service information currently exists to
address the unsafe condition until the final fix is identified and
published. As stated previously, the FAA might consider further
rulemaking once a final action is developed, approved, and available.
However, under the provisions of paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, the FAA
will consider requests for an AMOC if such final action is submitted.
The FAA has not changed this AD in this regard.

Requests To Extend Compliance Time

    DAL requested extending the initial inspection grace period from 12
months after the effective date of the AD to 24 months. DAL stated that
during conversations with Airbus, DAL was not provided with a definite
answer on whether sufficient parts or materials would be available to
support repairs within a 12-month timeline. AAL also expressed concerns
about obtaining replacement parts from Safran in a timely manner.
    The FAA disagrees to extend this compliance time. The FAA
considered the recommendations of EASA and the manufacturer, the
availability of parts and the safety implications, and determined that
the 12-month grace period, as proposed, will provide an adequate level
of safety. However, under the provisions of paragraph (j)(1) of this
AD, the FAA will consider requests for approval of an extension of the
compliance time if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that
the extension would provide an acceptable level of safety. The FAA has
not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Address Damage Found During Post-Repair Inspection

    DAL requested that the proposed AD be revised to specify the
follow-on corrective action necessary to address damage found during
inspections done after an ``Intermediate Fix'' was accomplished. DAL
noted that after an ``Intermediate Fix'' has been accomplished, the
service information states that the next inspection may be postponed up
to 36 months after the repair action, but if that inspection has
findings of damage, no repair instructions are specified.
    The FAA agrees that no repair instructions are specified for
findings of damage. Since no repair instructions are specified, the FAA
has added paragraph (h)(4) of this AD to specify contacting EASA, the
FAA, or Airbus's SAS EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA) for
approval of repair instructions.

Request To Address Existing Repairs on Inspection Area

    DAL requested that the FAA add an exception in paragraph (h) of the
proposed AD that addresses a related plan of action, explains whether
an AMOC is required for existing repairs in the inspection area, or
states that existing repairs that are permanent terminate the
repetitive inspection.
    The FAA agrees to clarify. AMOCs provide an alternative method of
compliance to the methods required to be used in the associated AD. An
AMOC is issued only after an AD has been issued and only after data are
provided to show that the proposed solution is complete and addresses
the unsafe condition. However, once this AD is published, any person
may request approval of an AMOC under the

provisions of paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Operators with an existing
repair in the inspection area may submit information on the repair for
consideration as a possible terminating action. The FAA has not changed
this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the
comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting
this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial
changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted
as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic
burden on any operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0183R1 specifies procedures for repetitive general
visual inspections of certain galleys for discrepancies including
corrosion of trolley retainer aluminum blocks and delamination of upper
panel of trolley compartment, and corrective action. Corrective actions
include repeating the inspection at an earlier interval, repairing the
trolley compartment upper panel, and limiting trolley weight. This
material is reasonably available because the interested parties have
access to it through their normal course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Interim Action

    The FAA considers that this AD is an interim action. If final
action is later identified, the FAA might consider further rulemaking
then.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1,425 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Labor cost                    Parts cost       Cost per product         Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170 per                 $0  $170 per inspection cycle.  $242,250 per inspection
 galley, per inspection cycle.                                                          cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
            Labor cost                   Parts cost           product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 work-hours x $85 per hour =     Minimal..............          $3,400
 $3,400.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2022-24-05 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-22245; Docket No. FAA-2022-0463;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00895-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective January 9, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any
category.
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.

    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -
151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -
252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -
251N, -251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253N, -253NX, -271N, -271NX, -272N,
and -272NX airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/
Furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that damage (including
delamination of work deck, and corroded and cracked retainer blocks)
was found during inspection of certain galleys. The FAA is issuing
this AD to detect and correct damage that could affect the galley's
capability to hold the trolley under emergency landing loads, which
could lead to trolley detachment, possibly resulting in blocking of
an escape path during an emergency exit.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0183R1, dated September 20, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0183R1).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0183R1

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0183R1 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where EASA AD 2021-0183R1 refers to ``18 August 2021,'' this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (3) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0183R1 does not
apply to this AD.
    (4) Where EASA AD 2021-0183R1 does not specify corrective action
after a post-repair inspection that has findings of damage, this AD
requires obtaining repair instructions before further flight from
the FAA, EASA, or Airbus SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA) and accomplishing those actions accordingly. If approved by
the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-
0183R1 specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer,
this AD does not include that requirement.

(j) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation Branch, 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 responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate If sending information directly to the manager,
International Validation Branch, mail it to the address identified
in paragraph (k) of this AD or email to: [email protected].
If mailing information, also submit information by email. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraphs (i) and (j)(2) of this AD, if any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(k) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0183R1,
dated September 20, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2021-0183R1, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer
3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA
AD on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on November 9, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-26357 Filed 12-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P