[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 248 (Thursday, December 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 78451]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30765]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71144; File No. SR-MSRB-2013-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on
Proceedings To Determine Whether To Disapprove Proposed Rule Change
Relating to a New MSRB Rule G-45, on Reporting of Information on
Municipal Fund Securities

December 19, 2013.
    On June 10, 2013, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board
(``MSRB'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change consisting of new MSRB Rule G-45 (reporting of
information on municipal fund securities) and MSRB Form G-45;
amendments to MSRB Rule G-8 (books and records); and MSRB Rule G-9
(preservation of records). The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on June 28, 2013.\3\ The Commission
received five comment letters on the proposal.\4\ On August 9, 2013,
the MSRB granted an extension of time for the Commission to act on the
filing until September 26, 2013. On September 26, 2013, the Commission
initiated proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed
rule change and solicited additional comments.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69835 (June 24, 2013),
78 FR 39048.
    \4\ See letters to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
from Tamara K. Salmon, Senior Associate Counsel, Investment Company
Institute, dated July 16, 2013; David L. Cohen, Managing Director,
Associate General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial Markets
Association, dated July 18, 2013; Roger Michaud, Chairman, College
Savings Foundation, dated July 19, 2013; Michael L. Fitzgerald,
Chairman, College Savings Plans Network, dated July 19, 2013; and
Michael B. Koffler, Partner, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, dated July
19, 2013.
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70531 (September 26,
2013), 78 FR 60985 (October 2, 2013) (``Order Instituting
Proceedings'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission thereafter received four comment letters on the
proposal.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See letters to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
from Tamara K. Salmon, Senior Associate Counsel, Investment Company
Institute, dated November 8, 2013; Roger Michaud, Chairman, College
Savings Foundation, dated November 18, 2013; Michael L. Fitzgerald,
Chairman, College Savings Plans Network, dated November 18, 2013;
and Michael B. Koffler, Partner, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, dated
November 18, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \7\ provides that, after initiating
disapproval proceedings, the Commission shall issue an order approving
or disapproving the proposed rule change not later than 180 days after
the date of publication of notice of the filing of the proposed rule
change. The Commission, however, may extend the period for issuing an
order approving or disapproving the proposed rule change by not more
than 60 days if the Commission determines that a longer period is
appropriate and publishes the reasons for such determination. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on June 28, 2013. December 25, 2013, is 180 days from that date, and
February 23, 2014, is an additional 60 days from that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the proposed
rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed
rule change and the issues raised in the comment letters that have been
submitted in connection with the same. Specifically, as the Commission
noted in more detail in the Order Instituting Proceedings, the proposal
raises issues such as (1) whether the proposed rule change is
sufficiently clear as to whom the obligations of the rule apply and (2)
whether the proposed rule change applies the terms ``underwriters'' and
``broker dealers'' consistent with the Act and the Securities Act of
1933 and the rules thereunder. Extending the time within which to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change will enable the
Commission to more fully consider these issues, as well as the other
issues raised in the comment letters and in the Order Instituting
Proceedings.
    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\8\ designates February 23, 2014, as the date by which the
Commission should either approve or disapprove the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-30765 Filed 12-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68024-68029]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25991]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93659; File No. SR-BOX-2021-27]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Increase
Position Limits for Options on Certain Exchange-Traded Funds

November 23, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 16, 2021, BOX Exchange LLC (``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 self-regulatory organization. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend IM-3120-2 to permit [sic] increase
position limits for options on certain exchange-traded funds
(``ETFs''). The text of the proposed rule change is available from the
principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference
Room and also on the Exchange's internet website at http://boxoptions.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 self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend IM-3120-2 to increase position
limits for options on certain exchange-traded funds (``ETFs''). This is
a competitive filing that is based on a proposal recently submitted by
Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') and approved by the Commission.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93525 (November 4,
2021) (Notice of Filing of Amendment Nos. 2 and 3 and Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of SR-CBOE-2021-029).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Position limits are designed to address potential manipulative
schemes and adverse market impacts surrounding the use of options, such
as disrupting the market in the security underlying the options. While
position limits should address and discourage the potential for
manipulative schemes and adverse market impact, if such limits are set
too low, participation in the options market may be discouraged. The
Exchange believes that position limits must therefore be balanced
between mitigating concerns of any potential manipulation and the cost
of inhibiting potential hedging activity that could be used for
legitimate economic purposes.
    In its filing, Cboe states that it has observed an ongoing increase
in demand, for both trading and hedging purposes, in options on the
following exchange-traded products (``ETPs''): (1) iShares iBoxx $
Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (``LQD'') and (2) VanEck Vectors
Gold Miners ETF (``GDX''). Though the demand for these options appears
to have increased, position limits for options on LQD and GDX have
remained the same. The Exchange believes these unchanged position
limits may have impeded, and may continue to impede, trading activity
and strategies of investors, such as use of effective hedging vehicles
or income generating strategies (e.g., buy-write or put-write), and the
ability of Market Makers to make liquid markets with tighter spreads in
these options resulting in the transfer of volume to over-the-counter
(``OTC'') markets. OTC transactions occur through bilateral agreements,
the terms of which are not publicly disclosed to the marketplace. As
such, OTC transactions do not contribute to the price discovery process
on a public exchange or other lit markets. Therefore, the Exchange
believes that the proposed increases in position limits for options on
LQD and GDX may enable liquidity providers to provide additional
liquidity to the Exchange and other market participants to transfer
their liquidity demands from OTC markets to the Exchange. As described
in further detail below, the Exchange believes that the continuously
increasing market capitalization of LQD and GDX, ETF components, as
well as the highly liquid markets for each, reduces the concerns for
potential market manipulation and/or disruption in the underlying
markets upon increasing position limits, while the rising demand for
trading options on LQD and GDX for legitimate economic purposes compels
an increase in position limits.
Proposed Position Limits for Options on LQD and GDX
    Position limits for options on ETFs are determined pursuant to Rule
3120 and vary according to the number of outstanding shares and the
trading volumes of the underlying equity security (which includes ETFs)
over the past six months. Pursuant to Rule 3120, the largest in
capitalization and the most frequently traded stocks and ETFs have an
option position limit of 250,000 contracts (with adjustments for
splits, re-capitalizations, etc.) on the same side of the market; and
smaller capitalization stocks and ETFs have position limits of 200,000,
75,000, 50,000 or 25,000 contracts (with adjustments for splits, re-
capitalizations, etc.) on the same side of the market. Options on LQD
and GDX are currently subject to the standard position limit of 250,000
contracts as set forth in Rule 3120. IM-3120-2 sets forth separate,
higher position limits for specific equity options (including options
on specific ETFs).\4\ The

Exchange proposes to amend IM-3120-2 to increase the position limits
and, as a result, exercise limits, for options on LQD and GDX.\5\ The
table below represents the current, and proposed, position limits for
options on the ETFs subject to this proposal:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Adjusted option series, in which one option contract in the
series represents the delivery of other than 100 shares of the
underlying security as a result of a corporate action by the issuer
of the security underlying such option series, do not impact the
notional value of the underlying security represented by those
options. When an underlying security undergoes a corporate action
resulting in adjusted series, the Exchange lists new standard option
series across all appropriate expiration months the day after the
existing series are adjusted. The adjusted series are generally
actively traded for a short period of time following adjustment, but
orders to open options positions in the underlying security are
almost exclusively placed in the new standard option series
contracts.
    \5\ By virtue of Rule 3120(d), which is not being amended by
this filing, the exercise limits for LQD and GDX options would be
similarly increased.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Current        Proposal
                 Product                  position limit  position limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LQD.....................................         250,000         500,000
GDX.....................................         250,000         500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the proposed position limit for options on
LQD and GDX are consistent with current position limits for options on
the iShares MSCI Brazil Capped ETF (``EWZ''), iShares 20+ Year Treasury
Bond Fund ETF (``TLT''), iShares MSCI Japan ETF (``EWJ''), iShares
iBoxx High Yield Corporate Bond Fund (``HYG'') and Financial Select
Sector SPDR Fund [sic] (``XLF''). The Exchange represents that LQD and
GDX qualify for either (1) the initial listing criteria set forth in
Rule 5020(h)(2) for ETFs holding non-U.S. component securities, or (2)
the generic listing standards for series of portfolio depository
receipts and index fund shares based on international or global indexes
under which a comprehensive surveillance agreement (``CSA'') is not
required, as well as (3) the continued listing criteria in Rule 5030
(for ETFs).\6\ In compliance with its listing rules, the Exchange also
represents that non-U.S. component securities that are not subject to a
comprehensive surveillance agreement (``CSA'') do not, in the
aggregate, represent more than more than 50% of the weight of LQD and
GDX.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange notes that the initial listing criteria for
options on ETFs that hold non-U.S. component securities are more
stringent than the maintenance listing criteria for those same ETF
options. See Rule 5020(h)(2).
    \7\ See Rule 5020(h)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Composition and Growth Analysis for LQD and GDX
    As stated above, position (and exercise) limits are intended to
prevent the establishment of options positions that can be used to or
potentially create incentives to manipulate the underlying market so as
to benefit options positions. The Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') has recognized that these limits are designed to
minimize the potential for mini-manipulations and for corners or
squeezes of the underlying market, as well as serve to reduce the
possibility for disruption of the options market itself, especially in
illiquid classes.\8\ LQD and GDX, as well as the ETF components, are
highly liquid and are based on a broad set of highly liquid securities
and other reference assets, as demonstrated through the trading
statistics presented in this proposal. To support the proposed position
limit increases, Cboe considered the liquidity of LQD and GDX, the
value of LQD and GDX, their components and the relevant marketplace,
the share and option volume for LQD and GDX, and, where applicable, the
availability or comparison of economically equivalent products to
options on LQD and GDX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67672 (August 15,
2012), 77 FR 50750 (August 22, 2012) (SR-NYSEAmex-2012-29).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cboe collected the following trading statistics regarding shares of
and options on LQD and GDX and the values of LQD and GDX and their
components:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Average daily volume (ADV) data for ETF shares and option
contracts, as well as for ETF shares and options on the comparative
ETFs presented below, are for all of 2020. Additionally, reference
to ADV in ETF shares and ETF options, and indexes herein this
proposal are for all of calendar year 2020, unless otherwise
indicated.
    \10\ Shares Outstanding and Net Asset Values (``NAV''), as well
as for the comparative ETFs presented below, are as of April 5, 2021
for all ETFs.
    \11\ Fund Market Capitalization data, as well as for the
comparative ETFs presented below, are as of January 14, 2021.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Shares
                                ADV \9\ (ETF                     outstanding     Fund market
           Product                 shares)       ADV (option        (USD)         cap (USD)    Share value (USD)
                                 (millions)      contracts)      (millions)      (millions)
                                                                    \10\            \11\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LQD..........................            14.1          30,300           308.1        54,113.7       130.13 (NAV)
GDX..........................            39.4         166,000           419.8        16,170.5        33.80 (NAV)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cboe also collected the same trading statistics, where applicable,
as above regarding a sample of other ETFs, as well as the current
position limits for options on such ETFs, to draw comparisons in
support of proposed position limit increases for options on LQD and GDX
(see further discussion below):

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          ADV (ETF                         Shares        Fund market                          Current
                       Product                             shares)       ADV (option     outstanding      cap (USD)    Share value (USD)     position
                                                         (millions)      contracts)      (millions)      (millions)                           limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EWZ..................................................            29.2         139,400           173.8         6,506.8        33.71 (NAV)         500,000
TLT..................................................            11.5         111,800           103.7        17,121.3       136.85 (NAV)         500,000
EWJ..................................................             8.2          15,500           185.3        13,860.7        69.72 (NAV)         500,000
HYG..................................................            30.5         261,600           254.5        24,067.5        86.86 (NAV)         500,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that, overall, the liquidity in the shares of
LQD and GDX and in their overlying options, the larger market
capitalizations for each [sic] LQD and GDX, and the overall market
landscape relevant to each [sic] LQD and GDX support the proposal to
increase the position limits for each option class. Given the robust
liquidity in and value of LQD and GDX and their components, the
Exchange does not anticipate that the proposed increase in position
limits would create significant price movements as the relevant markets
are large enough to adequately absorb potential price movements that
may be caused by larger trades.
    LQD tracks the performance of the Markit iBoxx USD Liquid
Investment Grade (``IBOXIG'') Index, which is an index designed as a
subset of the broader U.S. dollar-denominated corporate bond market
which can be used as a basis for tradable products., such as ETFs, and
is comprised of over 8,000 bonds.\12\ The Exchange notes that from 2019
through 2020, ADV has grown significantly in shares of LQD and in
options on LQD, from approximately 9.7 million shares in 2019 to 14.1
million through 2020, and from approximately 8,200 option contracts in
2019 to 30,300 through 2020. LQD also continued to experience
significant growth in ADV in the first quarter of 2021 with an ADV of
approximately 140,200 option contracts. Further, LQD generally
experiences higher ADV in shares than both TLT (11.5 million shares)
and EWJ (8.2 million shares) and almost double the ADV in option
contracts than EWJ (15,500 option contracts). Options on each EWZ, TLT
and EWJ are currently subject to a position limit of 500,000
contracts--the proposed limit for options on LQD. The NAV of LQD is
also higher than, or comparable to, that of the NAV of the ETFs
underlying the options that are currently subject to a position limit
of 500,000 option contracts (as presented in the table above), which is
indicative that the total value of its underlying components is
generally higher or comparable. Per the tables above, LQD's total
market capitalization of approximately $54.1 billion is also higher
than or comparable to the total market capitalization of the ETFs
underlying the options currently subject to a position limit of
5000,000 [sic] contracts. In addition to this, the Exchange notes that,
although there are currently no options listed for trading on the
IBOXIG Index, the components \13\ of the IBOXIG Index, which can be
used in creating a basket of securities that equate to the LQD ETF, are
made up of over 8,000 bonds for which the outstanding face value of
each must be greater than or equal to $2 billion.\14\ The Exchange
believes that the total value of the bonds in the IBOXIG Index, coupled
with LQD's share and option volume, total market capitalization, and
NAV price indicates that the market is large enough to absorb potential
price movements caused by a large trade in LQD. Also, as evidenced
above, trading volume in LQD shares has increased over the past few
years and the Exchange understands that market participants' need for
options have continued to grow alongside the ETF. Particularly, the
Exchange notes that in the last year, market participants have sought
more cost-effective hedging strategies through the use of LQD options
as a result of the borrow on other fixed income ETFs, such as HYG.
Therefore, the Exchange believes that because LQD options are being
increasingly utilized as an alternative to similar products, such as
HYG options, then it is appropriate that options on LQD be subject to
the same 500,000 contract position limit that currently exists for
options on HYG.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Markit iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade Index,
available at https://cdn.ihsmarkit.com/www/pdf/MKT-iBoxx-USD-Liquid-Investment-Grade-Index-factsheet.pdf (January 14, 2021).
    \13\ Investment grade corporate bonds.
    \14\ See supra note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    GDX seeks to replicate as closely as possible the price and yield
performance of the NYSE Arca Gold Miners (``GDMNTR'') Index, which is
intended to track the overall performance of companies involved in the
gold mining industry.\15\ ADV in GDX options has increased from 2019
through 2020, with an ADV of approximately 117,400 option contracts in
2019 to an ADV of approximately 166,000 option contracts in 2020. The
Exchange notes that ADV in GDX shares did not increase from 2019 to
2020. GDX options also experienced an ADV of approximately 287,800
option contracts in the first quarter of 2021. The Exchange notes that
the ADV in GDX shares (39.4 million) and options on GDX (166,000 option
contracts) are greater than the ADV in EWZ (29.2 million shares and
139,300 option contracts), TLT (11.5 million shares and 111,800 option
contracts), EWJ (8.2 million shares and 15,500 option contracts) and
HYG (30.5 million shares and 261,600 option contracts), each of which
is currently subject to a position limit of 500,000 option contracts--
the proposed limit for options on GDX. GDX also experiences a
comparable, or higher, market capitalization (approximately $16.2
billion) than EWZ, TLT and EWZ. The Exchange particularly notes that
many of the Brazil-based gold mining constituents included in GDX are
also included in EWZ, which tracks the investment results of an index
composed of Brazilian equities, and that the Exchange has not
identified any issues with the continued listing and trading of EWZ
options or any adverse market impact on EWZ in connection with the
current 500,000 position limit in place for EWZ options. Additionally,
like that of LDQ above, there is currently no index option analogue for
the GDX ETF on the GDMNTR Index approved for options trading, however,
the components of the GDMNTR Index, which can be used to create the GDX
ETF, currently must each have a market capitalization greater than $750
million, an ADV of at least 50,000 shares, and an average daily value
traded of at least $1 million in order to be eligible for inclusion in
the GDMNTR Index. The Exchange believes that the GDMNTR Index component
inclusion requirements, as well as GDX's share and option volume and
total market capitalization, indicate that the GDX market is
sufficiently large and liquid enough to absorb price movements as a
result of potentially oversized trades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF, available at https://
www.vaneck.com/library/vaneck-vectors-etfs/gdx-fact-sheet-pdf\
(January 14, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Creation and Redemption for ETFs
    The Exchange believes that the creation and redemption process for
the ETFs subject to this proposal will lessen the potential for
manipulative activity with options on LQD and GDX. When an ETF provider
wants to create more shares, it looks to an Authorized Participant
(``AP'') (generally a Market Maker or other large financial
institution) to acquire the underlying components the ETF is to hold.
For instance, when an ETF is designed to track the performance of an
index, the AP can purchase all the constituent securities in the exact
same weight as the index, then deliver those shares to the ETF
provider. In exchange, the ETF provider gives the AP a block of equally
valued ETF shares, on a one-for-one fair value basis. The price is
based on the NAV, not the market value at which the ETF is trading. The
creation of new ETF units can be conducted during an entire trading day
and is not subject to position limits. This process works in reverse
where the ETF provider seeks to decrease the number of shares that are
available to trade. The creation and redemption processes for LQD and
GDX creates a direct link to the underlying

components of the ETF and serves to mitigate potential price impact of
the ETF shares that might otherwise result from increased position
limits for the options on LQD and GDX.
    The Exchange understands that the ETF creation and redemption
processes seek to keep an ETF's share price trading in line with the
product's underlying net asset value. Because an ETF trades like a
stock, its share price will fluctuate during the trading day, due to
simple supply and demand. If demand to buy an ETF is high, for
instance, an ETF's share price might rise above the value of its
underlying components. When this happens, the AP or issuer believes the
ETF may now be overpriced, so it may buy shares of the component
securities or assets and then sell ETF shares in the open market. This
may drive the ETF's share price back toward the underlying net asset
value. Likewise, if an ETF share price starts trading at a discount to
the component securities or assets it holds, the AP or issuer can buy
shares of the ETF and redeem them for the underlying components. Buying
undervalued ETF shares may drive the share price of an ETF back toward
fair value. This arbitrage process helps to keep an ETF's share price
in line with the value of its underlying portfolio.
Surveillance and Reporting Requirements
    The Exchange believes that increasing the position limits for the
options on LQD and GDX would lead to a more liquid and competitive
market environment for these options, which will benefit customers
interested in trading these products. The reporting requirement for the
options on LQD and GDX would remain unchanged. Thus, the Exchange would
still require that each Participant that maintains positions in the
options on the same side of the market, for its own account or for the
account of a customer, report certain information to the Exchange. This
information would include, but would not be limited to, the options'
positions, whether such positions are hedged and, if so, a description
of the hedge(s). Market-Makers would continue to be exempt from this
reporting requirement, however, the Exchange may access Market-Maker
position information.\16\ Moreover, the Exchange's requirement that
Participants file reports with the Exchange for any customer who held
aggregate large long or short positions on the same side of the market
of 200 or more option contracts of any single class for the previous
day will remain at this level for the options subject to this proposal
and will continue to serve as an important part of the Exchange's
surveillance efforts.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') through the
Large option Position Reporting (``LOPR'') system acts as a
centralized service provider for Participant compliance with
position reporting requirements by collecting data from each
Participant, consolidating the information, and ultimately providing
detailed listings of each Participant's report to the Exchange, as
well as Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''),
acting as its agent pursuant to a regulatory services agreement
(``RSA'').
    \17\ See Rule 3150 for reporting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the existing surveillance procedures and
reporting requirements at the Exchange and other SROs are capable of
properly identifying disruptive and/or manipulative trading activity.
The Exchange also represents that it has adequate surveillances in
place to detect potential manipulation, as well as reviews in place to
identify potential changes in composition of LQD and GDX and continued
compliance with the Exchange's listing standards. These procedures
utilize daily monitoring of market activity via automated surveillance
techniques to identify unusual activity in both options and the
underlyings, as applicable.\18\ The Exchange also notes that large
stock holdings must be disclosed to the Commission by way of Schedules
13D or 13G,\19\ which are used to report ownership of stock which
exceeds 5% of a company's total stock issue and may assist in providing
information in monitoring for any potential manipulative schemes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Exchange believes these procedures have been effective
for the surveillance of trading the options subject to this proposal
and will continue to employ them.
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.13d-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the current financial requirements
imposed by the Exchange and by the Commission adequately address
concerns regarding potentially large, unhedged positions in the options
on LQD and GDX. Current margin and risk-based haircut methodologies
serve to limit the size of positions maintained by any one account by
increasing the margin and/or capital that a Participant must maintain
for a large position held by itself or by its customer.\20\ In
addition, Rule 15c3-1 \21\ imposes a capital charge on Participants to
the extent of any margin deficiency resulting from the higher margin
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Rule 10100 for a description of margin requirements.
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.15c3-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\22\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\23\ in
particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the
public interest. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \24\ requirement that the
rules of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed increase in position limits
for options on LQD and GDX will remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, protect investors and the public interest, because it will
provide market participants with the ability to more effectively
execute their trading and hedging activities. The proposed increases
will allow market participants to more fully implement hedging
strategies in related derivative products and to further use options to
achieve investment strategies (e.g., there are other exchange-traded
products (``ETPs'') that use options on the ETFs subject to this
proposal as part of their investment strategy, and the applicable
position limits as they stand today may inhibit these other ETPs in
achieving their investment objectives, to the detriment of investors).
Also, increasing the applicable position limits may allow Market Makers
to provide the markets for these options with more liquidity in amounts
commensurate with increased consumer demand in such markets. The
proposed position limit increases may also encourage other liquidity
providers to shift liquidity, as well as encourage consumers to shift
demand, from OTC markets onto the Exchange, which will enhance the
process of price discovery conducted on the Exchange through increased
order flow.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that the structure of LQD and
GDX, the considerable market capitalization of the funds and underlying
components,

and the liquidity of the markets for the applicable options and
underlying components will mitigate concerns regarding potential
manipulation of the products and/or disruption of the underlying
markets upon increasing the relevant position limits. As a general
principle, increases in market capitalizations, active trading volume,
and deep liquidity of the underlying components do not lead to
manipulation and/or disruption. This general principle applies to the
recently observed increased levels of market capitalization and trading
volume and liquidity in shares of and options on LQD and GDX (as
described above), and, as a result, the Exchange does not believe that
the options markets or underlying markets would become susceptible to
manipulation and/or disruption as a result of the proposed position
limit increases. Indeed, the Commission has previously expressed the
belief that not just increasing, but removing, position and exercise
limits may bring additional depth and liquidity to the options markets
without increasing concerns regarding intermarket manipulation or
disruption of the options or the underlying securities.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62147 (October 28,
2005) (SR-CBOE- 2005-41), at 62149.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change to
increase position limits for select actively traded options is not
novel and the Commission has approved similar proposed rule changes to
increase position limits for options on similar, highly liquid and
actively traded ETPs.\26\ Furthermore, the Exchange again notes that
that the proposed position limits for options on LQD and GDX are
consistent with existing position limits for options on other ETFs in
IM-3120-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 88768 (April 29,
2020), 85 FR 26736 (May 5, 2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-015); 83415 (June 12,
2018), 83 FR 28274 (June 18, 2018) (SR-CBOE-2018-042); and 68086
(October 23, 2012), 77 FR 65600 (October 29, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-
066).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's surveillance and reporting safeguards continue to be
designed to deter and detect possible manipulative behavior that might
arise from increasing or eliminating position and exercise limits in
certain classes. The Exchange believes that the current financial
requirements imposed by the Exchange and by the Commission adequately
address concerns regarding potentially large, unhedged position in the
options on LQD and GDX, further promoting just and equitable principles
of trading, the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and the
protection of 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 regard and as indicated
above, the Exchange notes that the rule change is being proposed as a
competitive response to a filing submitted by Cboe that was approved by
the Commission.\27\ The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule
change will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because the increased position limits (and exercise limits) will be
available to all market participants and apply to each in the same
manner. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will
provide additional opportunities for market participants to more
efficiently achieve their investment and trading objectives of market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See supra, note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the Act. On the contrary, the Exchange
believes the proposal promotes competition because it may attract
additional order flow from the OTC market to exchanges, which would in
turn compete amongst each other for those orders. The Exchange believes
market participants would benefit from being able to trade options with
increased position limits in an exchange environment in several ways,
including but not limited to the following: (1) Enhanced efficiency in
initiating and closing out position; (2) increased market transparency;
and (3) heightened contra-party creditworthiness due to the role of OCC
as issuer and guarantor. The Exchange notes that other options
exchanges may choose to file similar proposals with the Commission to
increase position limits on options on LQD and GDX.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \28\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \29\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \30\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \31\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. The Exchange
states that waiver of the operative delay would be consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because it will ensure
fair competition among the exchanges by allowing the Exchange to
immediately increase the position limits for the products subject to
this proposal, which the Exchange believes will provide consistency for
BOX Participants that are also members at Cboe where these increased
position limits are currently in place. For this reason, the Commission
believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the
Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the
proposal as operative upon filing.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \32\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the

public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2021-27 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-BOX-2021-27. 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 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. 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-BOX-2021-27, and should be submitted on
or before December 21, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-25991 Filed 11-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 49)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11003-11004]
[DOCID:fr16mr09-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-28689; Directorate Identifier 2006-SW-17-AD;
Amendment 39-15832; AD 2009-05-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Trimble or FreeFlight Systems 2101 I/O
Approach Plus Global Positioning System (GPS) Navigation Systems

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
the Trimble or FreeFlight Systems 2101 I/O Approach Plus global
positioning system (GPS) navigation system (2101 I/O Approach Plus
system) that requires a software upgrade for this system. This
amendment is prompted by an incident that led to the discovery of
several annunciation errors with the 2101 I/O Approach Plus system. The
actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent a pilot from
making an unsafe decision based on erroneous information provided by
the 2101 I/O Approach Plus system, which could result in loss of
control of the aircraft.

DATES: Effective April 20, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may get the service information identified in this AD
from FreeFlight Systems, 3700 IH 35, Waco, Texas, USA, 76706, or by
calling<PHONE_NUMBER> or on the Internet at http://
www.freeflightsystems.com.
    Examining the Docket: You may examine the docket that contains this
AD, any comments, and other information on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or at the Docket Operations office, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sung-Hui Cavazos, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Special Certification Office,
Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0190, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax (817) 222-
5785.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend 14 CFR part 39 to
include an AD for the specified navigation system was published in the
Federal Register on July 13, 2007 (72 FR 38532). That action proposed
to require, within 180 days after the effective date of the AD for
aircraft approved for instrument flight rule (IFR) flight, or 270 days
after the effective date of the AD for aircraft approved for visual
flight rule (VFR) flight, upgrading the 2101 I/O Approach Plus system
software to correct several software errors.
    Freeflight Systems issued Service Information Letter (SIL) 81440-
XX-00-17, dated November 7, 2005, when the manufacturer believed that
software version 241H would correct the erroneous information displays.
However, version 241H did not correct all the errors. Therefore,
FreeFlight Systems issued SIL 81440-XX-00-19, dated May 10, 2006, which
describes the release of new operating system software, version 241J,
``that makes communication between the Host and the GPS processors more
robust.'' Freeflight Systems subsequently issued Service Bulletin No.
SB 81440-XX-00-19, dated December 12, 2006, that contains the
instructions for obtaining and upgrading the software to version 241J.
Although the proposed AD included a Note referencing SIL 81440-XX-00-
17, this AD references the most recently available service information,
Service Bulletin No. SB 81440-XX-00-19, dated December 12, 2006.
    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received.
    The commenter, FreeFlight Systems, states that ``the proposed AD
specifies 81440-13-XXXX as being applicable for this upgrade. The
81440-13-XXXX is a number assigned for an NVG (night vision goggles)
version of the 81440 that was never put into production so no units
exist that would require this upgrade. The 81440-13-XXXX was included
in error in the AD Worksheet identifying applicable systems provided to
the FAA by FreeFlight Systems.'' Therefore, part number (P/N) 81440-13-
XXXX (where XXXX is -241E, -241F, or 241G) should be removed from the
AD. The FAA concurs and has removed those P/Ns from the AD.
    After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes described
previously. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither
increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.
    The FAA estimates that this AD will affect 259 2101 I/O Approach
Plus systems installed on aircraft of U.S. registry, and the required
actions will take approximately 2 work hours per aircraft to accomplish
at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts will cost
approximately $300 per aircraft. Based on these figures, we estimate
the total cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators to be $72,520,
assuming one 2101 I/O Approach Plus system is installed on each
aircraft, the manufacturer will provide all $300 in parts at no cost,
and the only costs for these parts will be $120 for shipping costs for
each unit.

Regulatory Findings

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding a new airworthiness directive to
read as follows:

2009-05-08 Trimble or Freeflight Systems: Amendment 39-15832. Docket
No. FAA-2007-28689; Directorate Identifier 2006-SW-17-AD.

Applicability

    All aircraft with a Trimble or FreeFlight Systems 2101 I/O
Approach Plus global positioning system (GPS) navigation system
(2101 I/O Approach Plus system), part number 81440-xx-241E, 81440-
xx-241F, or 81440-xx-241G (xx indicates either the numbers 02, 03,
or 12), with software revision -241E, -241F, or 241G, installed,
certificated in any category.

Compliance

    Required within 180 days after the effective date of this AD for
aircraft approved for instrument flight rule (IFR) flight, or 270
days after the effective date of this AD for aircraft approved for
visual flight rule (VFR) flight, unless accomplished previously.
    To prevent a pilot from making an unsafe decision based on
erroneous information provided by the 2101 I/O Approach Plus system,
which could result in loss of control of the aircraft, accomplish
the following:
    (a) Upgrade the system software of any Trimble or FreeFlight
Systems 2101 I/O Approach Plus GPS navigation system, part number
(P/N) 81440-xx-241E, 81440-XX-241F, or 81440-xx-241G (xx indicates
the numbers 02, 03, or 12), that currently has software revision -
241E, -241F, or -241G, to system software revision, P/N 81440-XX-
241J.

    Note: Sections II and III of FreeFlight Systems Service Bulletin
No. SB 81440-XX-00-19, dated December 12, 2006, pertains to the
requirements of this AD.

    (b) Upgrading the Trimble or FreeFlight Systems 2101 I/O
Approach Plus GPS Navigation System's software, to system software
revision, P/N 81440-xx-241J, is considered a terminating action for
the requirements of this AD.
    (c) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Contact the Manager, Special Certification Office, FAA, ATTN: Sung-
Hui Cavazos, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Special Certification Office, Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0190,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for information about
previously approved alternative methods of compliance.
    (d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199 to operate the aircraft to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished provided that the
aircraft is operated under VFR only.
    (e) This amendment becomes effective on April 20, 2009.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February 19, 2009.
Scott A. Horn,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
 [FR Doc. E9-4942 Filed 3-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 133 (Friday, July 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40175-40177]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16189]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72546; File No. SR-Phlx-2014-40]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Eliminate
the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order and Modify the Minimum Quantity Order
on NASDAQ OMX PSX

July 7, 2014.
    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 23, 2014, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to eliminate the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order
and to modify the functioning of the Minimum Quantity Order on NASDAQ
OMX PSX (``PSX''). The text of the proposed rule change is available at
http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/nasdaqomxphlx/phlx/, at the
Exchange's principal office, 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
    Phlx is proposing two modifications to order types on PSX. First,
Phlx is proposing to eliminate the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order. Like a
regular Midpoint Pegged Order, a Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order is a non-
displayed order that is priced at the midpoint between the national
best bid and best offer (``NBBO''). However, like a Post-Only Order,
the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order does not remove liquidity from PSX
upon entry if it would lock a non-displayed order on PSX. Rather, the
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order posts and locks the pre-existing order,
but remains undisplayed. If a Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order would cross
a pre-existing order, however, the crossing orders will execute. A
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order that posts to the book and locks a pre-
existing non-displayed order executes against an incoming order only if
the price of the incoming buy (sell) order is higher (lower) than the
price of the pre-existing order. If a Midpoint Pegged Order and a
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order are locked, and a Midpoint Pegged Order is
entered on the same side of the market as the Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order, the new order executes against the original Midpoint Pegged
Order, because the market participant entering the Midpoint Peg Post-
Only Order has expressed its intention not to execute against posted
liquidity, and therefore cedes execution priority to the new order.
    In a pricing environment characterized by fees on one side of a
trade being used to fund rebates on the other side, the Midpoint Peg
Post-Only Order and similar orders were introduced on PSX and various
other markets to allow market participants to structure their trading
activity in a manner that is more likely to avoid a fee and earn a
rebate. In exchange, the party entering the order also generally
provides price improvement to its counterparty. In order to simplify
order processing and evaluate the effect of the order type on overall
market quality, however, PSX is proposing to eliminate the Midpoint Peg
Post-Only Order, while retaining the Midpoint Pegged Order as a means
by which market participants may offer hidden liquidity with price
improvement at the midpoint between the NBBO.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In addition to eliminating the order description from Rule
3301, Phlx is also making conforming changes to Rule 3305 and the
NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Pricing Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Phlx is also proposing to modify the functioning of PSX's Minimum
Quantity Order. A Minimum Quantity Order is an order that will not
execute unless a specified minimum quantity of shares can be obtained.
Minimum Quantity Orders are not displayed, and upon entry must have a
size and a minimum quantity condition of at least one round lot. In the
event that the shares remaining in the size of the order following a
partial execution thereof are less than the minimum quantity specified
by the market participant entering the order, the minimum quantity
value of the order is reduced to the number of shares remaining. Phlx
is proposing to modify this final condition, so that if the shares
remaining in the size of the order are less than one round lot, the
minimum quantity condition will be removed from the order. The change
will simplify processing of Minimum Quantity Orders by ensuring that
once a partially executed order is reduced in size to less than one
round lot (generally 100 shares), no restrictions prevent execution of
the remainder of the order. The change is also consistent with the
existing requirement that a Minimum Quantity Order must be entered with
a size and a minimum quantity restriction of at least one round lot.
Phlx believes that the change will improve the efficiency of order
processing on PSX by limiting the extent to which small Minimum
Quantity Orders remain on the PSX book.
    Phlx proposes to implement the rule change on or shortly after a
date that is thirty days after the date of this proposed rule change,
and will notify members of the date of implementation through a widely
disseminated notice.
2. Statutory Basis
    Phlx believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\4\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\5\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Although the availability of the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order is
consistent with the Act because the order type was designed to provide
market participants with better control over their execution costs and
to provide a means to offer price improvement opportunities, Phlx
believes that the elimination of the order type, together with the
continued availability of the Midpoint Pegged Order are likewise
consistent with the Act. Specifically, the proposal would allow market
participants that seek to provide liquidity at the midpoint between the
NBBO to use the Midpoint Pegged Order to do so. Accordingly, the change
is designed to facilitate 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, by reducing the complexity of order-type interaction
on PSX while still allowing for liquidity provision with price
improvement at the midpoint.
    The proposed change to Minimum Quantity Orders is consistent with
the Act because it will promote the complete execution of partially
executed Minimum Quantity Orders once the order is reduced in size to
less than one round lot. The change will thereby remove impediments to
a free and open market by promoting order interaction and reducing the
complexity of PSX's order processing.

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

    Phlx 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. The change to
eliminate the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order will provide a means by
which PSX may distinguish itself from trading venues that offer orders
similar to the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order. Accordingly, the change
has the potential to promote competition by allowing PSX to
differentiate itself from other trading venues. Similarly, the proposed
change to the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order and Minimum Quantity Orders
has the potential to promote competition by enhancing the efficiency of
PSX's processing of orders. In both instances, the changes would not
affect the ability of market participants to avail themselves of
alternative order-type

processing at other trading venues, and therefore would not impose any
burden on competition.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \6\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii) [sic].
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (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.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2014-40 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2014-40. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used.
    To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the
hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal offices 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-
Phlx-2014-40, and should be submitted on or before August 1, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-16189 Filed 7-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 54 (Friday, March 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 14999]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06445]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 [9924-98-Region 3]

Notice of Proposed Settlement Agreement Pursuant to CERCLA
Section 122(H)(1) and Opportunity for Public Comment: Millsboro TCE
Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (``CERCLA''), notice is hereby given
that a proposed administrative settlement agreement for recovery of
past response costs (``Proposed Agreement'') associated with Millsboro
TCE Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site, Millsboro, Delaware was
executed by the Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') and is now
subject to public comment, after which EPA may modify or withdraw its
consent if comments received disclose facts or considerations that
indicate that the Proposed Agreement is inappropriate, improper, or
inadequate. The Proposed Agreement would resolve potential EPA claims
under Section 107(a) of CERCLA, against Intervet, Inc. and Mallinckrodt
Veterinary, Inc. (``Settling Parties''). The Proposed Agreement would
require Settling Parties to reimburse EPA $950,000.00 for all non-
reimbursed past response costs incurred by EPA for the Site through May
27, 2014.
    For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this
notice, EPA will receive written comments relating to the Proposed
Agreement. EPA's response to any comments received will be available
for public inspection at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on April 20, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The Proposed Agreement and additional background information
relating to the Proposed Agreement are available for public inspection
at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103. A copy of the Proposed Agreement may be
obtained from Cynthia T. Weiss (3RC42), Senior Assistant Regional
Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103. Comments should reference the ``Millsboro TCE
Contaminated Superfund Site, Proposed Administrative Settlement
Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs'' and ``EPA Docket No.
CERCLA-03-2015-0036-CR,'' and should be forwarded to Cynthia T. Weiss
at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia T. Weiss (3RC42), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA
19103, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 4, 2015.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Director, Hazardous Site Cleanup Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2015-06445 Filed 3-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 62 (Thursday, March 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 18614]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07245]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2077-104]

TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc.; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Amendment of fish passage plan.
    b. Project No.: 2077-104.
    c. Date Filed: March 8, 2016.
    d. Applicant: TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Fifteen Mile Falls Project.
    f. Location: Connecticut River, near the town of Littleton in
Grafton County, New Hampshire, and Caledonia County, Vermont.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. John L. Ragonese, License Manager,
TransCanada, U.S. Northeast Hydro Region, 4 Park Street, Suite 402
Concord, NH 04347<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Joseph Enrico,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the
Commission. All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
If unable to be filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To
paper-file, an original and seven copies should be mailed to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. Please
include the project number (P-2077-104 on any comments, motions, or
recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant requests that the
Commission suspend the requirement or permanently amend the license to
eliminate or suspend the requirement to provide downstream fish passage
under Articles 409 and 413 at the Fifteen Mile Falls Project. Due to
suspension of the Atlantic salmon restoration program in the
Connecticut River basin by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2012,
the applicant believes that continued operation of the skimmer gate for
downstream smolt passage at the McIndoes Falls development should be
discontinued. In addition, the requirement to conduct studies to
monitor the effectiveness of the downstream fish passage facilities and
associated operational flows to pass Atlantic salmon smolts downstream
at the Moore and McIndoes developments, should also be discontinued.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field (P-2077) to access the document. You may
also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-
208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call (202) 502-
8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the
address in item (h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the application. Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of
any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each
representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: March 23, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-07245 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 161 (Monday, August 22, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51271-51273]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17985]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1053; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00200-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a finding that when the
autopilot is engaged, the architecture of the autopilot system does not
automatically disconnect the autopilot in response to pilot application
of a pitch input or when the electric pitch trim switch on either pilot
control wheel is operated. This proposed AD would require modifying the
autopilot engagement circuit. The FAA is proposing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 6,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited, Customer Information Department,
Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United
Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292 675704; email
[email protected]; internet https://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. You may view this service
information 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>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-1053; 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 NPRM, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-1053; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-00200-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA,
International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any
commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated
as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority (U.K. CAA), which is the
aviation authority for the United Kingdom, has issued U.K. CAA AD G-
2022-0002, dated February 11, 2022 (U.K. CAA AD G-2022-0002) (also
referred to after this as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for
all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-
1053.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a finding that when the autopilot
is engaged, the architecture of the autopilot system does not
automatically disconnect the autopilot in response to pilot application
of a pitch input or when the electric pitch trim switch on either pilot
control wheel is operated. This finding was a result of a safety
recommendation made by the United Kingdom's Air Accidents Investigation
Branch (AAIB), after an incident on a

Saab AB, Support and Services Model SAAB 2000 airplane, for the
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to review autopilot system
designs of aircraft certified under certain regulations, and if needed,
require modifications to ensure that the autopilot does not create a
potential unsafe condition when the flightcrew applies an override
force to the flight controls. The FAA is proposing this AD to address
continued autopilot engagement after flightcrew input to disengage of
the autopilot, which could lead to reduced controllability of the
airplane. See the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has issued Modification Service
Bulletin SB.22-072-36262A, dated September 14, 2021. This service
information describes procedures for modifying the autopilot engagement
circuit, including the wiring, relay, and certain module blocks. This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    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 the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD
because the FAA evaluated all the relevant information and determined
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
on other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 20 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
130 work-hours x $85 per hour= $11,050.......................          $2,124          $13,174         $263,480
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would 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 Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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:

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited: Docket No. FAA-2022-1053; Project
Identifier MCAI-2022-00200-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by October 6, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model
BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 22, Auto-Flight.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a finding that when the autopilot is
engaged, the architecture of the autopilot system does not
automatically disconnect the autopilot in response to pilot
application of a pitch input or when the electric pitch trim switch
on either pilot control wheel is operated. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address continued autopilot engagement after flightcrew input
to disengage the autopilot, which could lead to reduced
controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modification

    Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, modify the
autopilot engagement circuit in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Modification
Service Bulletin SB.22-072-36262A, dated September 14, 2021.

(h) No Reporting Requirement

    Although BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Modification Service
Bulletin SB.22-

072-36262A, dated September 14, 2021, specifies to submit certain
information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that
requirement.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, 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 Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
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, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or the United Kingdom
Civil Aviation Authority (U.K. CAA); or BAE Systems (Operations)
Limited's U.K. CAA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved
by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) U.K. CAA AD G-2022-0002, dated February 11, 2022, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2022-1053.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Todd Thompson,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited, Customer Information Department,
Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United
Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292 675704; email
[email protected]; internet https://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. You may view this service
information 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>.

    Issued on August 10, 2022.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-17985 Filed 8-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 25010]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08960]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL22-38-000]

PacifiCorp; Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and
Refund Effective Date

    On April 21, 2022, the Commission issued an order in Docket No.
EL22-38-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16
U.S.C. 824e, instituting an investigation into whether PacifiCorp's
formula rate protocols are unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory
or preferential, or otherwise unlawful. PacifiCorp, 179 FERC ] 61,053
(2022).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL22-38-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL22-38-
000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as
appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in
accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214 (2021), within 21 days of the date of
issuance of the order.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at
http://www.ferc.gov. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a
paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    Dated: April 21, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-08960 Filed 4-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P