[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19709-19712]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09184]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-1019; Product Identifier 2018-NE-05-AD; Amendment
39-19622; AD 2019-08-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; RECARO Aircraft Seating GmbH & Co. KG

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
RECARO Aircraft Seating GmbH & Co. KG (RECARO) Model 3510A and 3510D
passenger seats. This AD requires modification and re-identification of
all affected RECARO model passenger seats. This AD was prompted by an
analysis that the affected RECARO model passenger seats contain a seat
pan assembly design that can trap a person using the seat to assist
during an emergency evacuation. We are issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 21, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 21, 2019.
    We must receive comments on this AD by June 20, 2019.

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 http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
RECARO Aircraft Seating GmbH & Co. KG, Daimlerstrasse 21, 74523
Schwabisch Hall, Germany; phone: 49<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 49<PHONE_NUMBER>;
exception occurred on : 2019-09184.htm
exception occurred on : 2019-09184.htm
email: as.com">[email protected]as.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Standards Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA, 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also
available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-1019.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
1019; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dorie Resnik, Aerospace Engineer,
Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA, 01803;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has
issued EASA AD 2017-0192, dated September 28, 2017 (referred to after
this as ``the MCAI''), to address an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    Analyses and test results have shown that the seat pan design of
certain RECARO model 3510A and 3510D passenger seats, when installed
next to a Type III over-wing emergency exit, is insufficiently
stable to sustain the loads applied by a person who would use the
seat as assistance means in case of an emergency evacuation. Body
parts (e.g., knees and feet) could slide through and get trapped.
This condition, if not corrected, could restrict or significantly
delay an emergency evacuation, possibly resulting in injury to
occupants.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, RECARO issued SB
3510-25-609, SB 3510-25-752 and SB 3510-25-753, providing
modification instructions to replace the seat pan and/or pan
attachment package with a new one, that has a more robust design,
and to re-identify modified seats with a different P/N.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
modification of the affected seats and prohibits installation of any
unmodified seat.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-1019.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed RECARO Service Bulletin (SB) No. 3510-25-609, Original
Issue, dated June 20, 2016; RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752, Original Issue,
dated May 20, 2016; and RECARO SB No. 3510-25-753, Original Issue,
dated June 23, 2016. RECARO SB No. 3510-25-609 describes procedures for
removing the straps and installing two additional cable ties on the
seat pan. RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752 describes procedures for removing
the straps and replacing the seat pan assembly. RECARO SB No. 3510-25-
753 describes procedures for removing the straps and installing a new
seat pan assembly or installing two additional cable ties. 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 EASA, and is approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement
with the European Community, EASA has notified us of the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced
above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of
the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires modification and re-identification of all affected
RECARO model passenger seats.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    No domestic operators use this product. Therefore, we find good
cause that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are
unnecessary. In addition, for the reason stated above, we find that
good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30
days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or
arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2018-
1019 and Product Identifier 2018-NE-05-AD at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this final rule. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
final rule because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this final rule.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects no aircraft seats installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Install the placard to re-identify P/N  0.1 work-hours x $85 per             $27          $35.50              $0
 (All Series).                           hour = $8.50.
Series 383, 384, 389, 390, 392, 527,    0.2 work hours x $85 per              12              29               0
 592, 911, 942 Modify seats per RECARO   hour = $17.
 SB No. 3510-25-609.
Series 377 & 381 Modify seats per       0.4 work hours x $85.00              477             511               0
 RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752.              = $34.
Series 330, 347, 349, 364, and 549      0.4 work hours x $85 per             546             580               0
 Modify seats per RECARO SB No. 3510-    hour = $34.
 25-753.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to engines, propellers, and
associated appliances to the Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards
Branch, Policy and Innovation Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2019-08-01 RECARO Aircraft Seating GmbH & Co. KG: Amendment 39-
19622; Docket No. FAA-2018-1019; Product Identifier 2018-NE-05-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 21, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to RECARO Aircraft Seating GmbH & Co. KG
(RECARO) Model 3510A and 3510D passenger seats.
    (2) These appliances are installed on, but not limited to,
Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, and A320 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2520, Passenger
Compartment Equipment.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an analysis that the affected RECARO
model passenger seats contain a seat pan assembly design that can
trap a person using the seat to assist during an emergency
evacuation. We are issuing this AD to prevent passenger entrapment
in the event a person climbs on a seat to assist during an emergency
evacuation. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
possible passenger entrapment, injury, or delay in the case of
emergency evacuation.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Within 2,700 flight hours (FHs) or 945 flight cycles (FCs),
whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, modify
the affected passenger seat and re-identify each modified passenger
seat as follows:
    (1) Review the seat part numbers (P/Ns) identified in Table 1 to
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD to identify the applicable service
bulletin (SB).
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06MY19.000

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    (2) For seats identified by RECARO SB No. 3510-25-609, Original
Issue, dated June 20, 2016 (``RECARO SB No. 3510-25-609''):
    (i) Review Planning Information, paragraph 1.A., Tables 2 and 3,
in RECARO SB No. 3510-25-609, to determine if a modification is
required for the specific P/N seat.
    (ii) Follow the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.A.,
3.B., 3.C., 3.D., and 3.E. in RECARO SB No. 3510-25-609.
    (3) For seats identified by RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752, Original
Issue, dated May 20, 2016 (``RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752''):
    (i) Review Planning Information, paragraph 1.A., Tables 2 and 3,
in RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752, to determine if a modification is
required for the specific P/N seat.
    (ii) Follow the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.A.,
3.B., 3.C., 3.D., and 3.E. in RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752.
    (4) For seats identified by RECARO SB No. 3510-25-753, Original
issue, dated June 23, 2016 (``RECARO SB No. 3510-25-753''):
    (i) Review Planning Information, paragraph 1.A., Tables 2 and 3,
in RECARO SB No. 3510-25-753, to determine the required modification
for the specific P/N seat.
    (ii) Follow the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.A.,
3.B., 3.C., 3.D., and 3.E. in RECARO SB No. 3510-25-753.

(h) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install an affected
RECARO model passenger seat on any aircraft, unless the seat has
been modified and re-identified in accordance with paragraph (g)(2),
(3), or (4) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Boston ACO 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 local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Dorie Resnik,
Aerospace Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2017-0192, dated September 28, 2017, for more information. You may
examine the EASA AD in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No.
FAA-2018-1019.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) RECARO Service Bulletin (SB) No. 3510-25-609, Original
issue, dated June 20, 2016.
    (ii) RECARO SB No. 3510-25-752, Original issue, dated May 20,
2016.
    (iii) RECARO SB No. 3510-25-753, Original issue, dated June 23,
2016.
    (3) For RECARO Aircraft Seating GmbH & Co. KG service
information identified in this AD, contact RECARO Aircraft Seating
GmbH & Co. KG, Daimlerstrasse 21, 74523 Schwabisch Hall, Germany;
phone: 49<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 49<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
exception occurred on : 2019-09184.htm
exception occurred on : 2019-09184.htm
as.com">[email protected]as.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Engine &
Propeller Standards Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA
01803. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on May 1, 2019.
Robert J. Ganley,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-09184 Filed 5-3-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 13 (Tuesday, January 21, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3299-3301]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00775]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0002; Airspace Docket No. 19-ACE-10]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-125, V-178, V-313,
and V-429 in the Vicinity of Cape Girardeau, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend four VHF Omnidirectional Range
(VOR) Federal airways, V-125, V-178, V-313, and V-429, in the vicinity
of Cape Girardeau, MO. The modifications are necessary due to the
planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Cape Girardeau, MO,
VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigation aid (NAVAID),
which provides navigation guidance for portions of the affected air
traffic service (ATS) routes. The Cape Girardeau VOR is being
decommissioned as part of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network
(MON) program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 6, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2020-0002; Airspace Docket No. 19-ACE-10 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information,
you can contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for inspection
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would

modify the route structure as necessary to preserve the safe and
efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2020-0002; Airspace Docket No. 19-ACE-10) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2020-0002; Airspace Docket No. 19-ACE-10.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group, Central
Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Blvd.,
Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective
September 15, 2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

Background

    The FAA is planning decommissioning activities for the VOR portion
of the Cape Girardeau, MO, VOR/DME in July, 2020. The Cape Girardeau
VOR is one of the candidate VORs identified for discontinuance by the
FAA's VOR MON program and listed in the final policy statement notice,
``Provision of Navigation Services for the Next Generation Air
Transportation System (NextGen) Transition to Performance-Based
Navigation (PBN) (Plan for Establishing a VOR Minimum Operational
Network),'' published in the Federal Register of July 26, 2016 (81 FR
48694), Docket No. FAA-2011-1082. Although the VOR portion of the Cape
Girardeau, MO, VOR/DME NAVAID is planned for decommissioning, the co-
located DME is being retained. The ATS routes affected by the planned
Cape Girardeau VOR decommissioning are VOR Federal airways V-125, V-
178, V-313, and V-429.
    With the planned decommissioning of the Cape Girardeau VOR, the
remaining ground-based NAVAID coverage in the area is insufficient to
enable the continuity of the affected ATS routes. As such, proposed
modifications to the affected VOR Federal airways would result in gaps
in the airways. To overcome the airway gaps, instrument flight rules
(IFR) traffic could use adjacent ATS route segments, including V-9, V-
67, V-190, V-305, and V-540, to circumnavigate the affected area. IFR
traffic could also file point to point through the affected area using
the existing airway fixes that will remain in place, as well as
adjacent NAVAIDs, or receive air traffic control (ATC) radar vectors
through the area. Visual flight rules pilots who elect to navigate via
the airways through the affected area could also take advantage of the
adjacent VOR Federal airways or ATC services listed previously.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying VOR Federal Airways V-125, V-
178, V-313, and V-429. The planned decommissioning of the VOR portion
of the Cape Girardeau, MO, VOR/DME NAVAID has made this action
necessary. The proposed VOR Federal airway changes are outlined below.
    V-125: V-125 currently extends between the Cape Girardeau, MO, VOR/
DME and the St Louis, MO, VOR/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC). The FAA
proposes to remove the airway segment between the Cape Girardeau, MO,
VOR/DME and the intersection of the Cape Girardeau, MO, VOR/DME
347[deg] and St Louis, MO, VORTAC 148[deg] radials (NIKEL fix).
Additionally, the NIKEL fix would be amended in the airway description
to describe it as the intersection of the Farmington, MO, VORTAC
046[deg](T)/047[deg](M) and Marion, IL, VOR/DME 282[deg](T)/286[deg](M)
radials. The unaffected portion of the existing airway would remain as
charted.
    V-178: V-178 currently extends between the Hallsville, MO, VORTAC
and the Bluefield, WV, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to remove the airway
segment between the Farmington, MO, VORTAC and the Cunningham, KY, VOR/
DME. Concurrent changes to other portions of the airway are being
proposed in separate NPRMs. The unaffected portions of the existing
airway would remain as charted.
    V-313: V-313 currently extends between the Malden, MO, VORTAC and
the Pontiac, IL, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to remove the airway segment
between the Malden, MO, VORTAC and the Centralia, IL, VORTAC. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway would remain as charted.
    V-429: V-429 currently extends between the Cape Girardeau, MO, VOR/
DME and the Bible Grove, IL, VORTAC; and between the Champaign, IL,
VORTAC and the Joliet, IL, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to remove the
airway segment between the Cape Girardeau, MO, VOR/DME and the Marion,
IL, VOR/DME. The unaffected portions of the existing airway would
remain as charted.
    All radials in the route descriptions below that are unchanged are
stated in True degrees only. Radials that are stated in True (T) and
Magnetic (M) degrees are new computations based on available NAVAIDS.

    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order
7400.11D dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15, 2019, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways
listed in this document would be subsequently published in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019 and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-125 [Amended]

    From INT Farmington, MO, 046[deg](T)/047[deg](M) and Marion, IL,
282[deg](T)/286[deg](M) radials; to St Louis, MO.
* * * * *

V-178 [Amended]

    From Hallsville, MO; INT Hallsville 183[deg] and Vichy, MO,
321[deg] radials; Vichy; to Farmington, MO. From Cunningham, KY;
Central City, KY; New Hope, KY; Lexington, KY; to Bluefield, WV.
* * * * *

V-313 [Amended]

    From Centralia, IL; Adders, IL; to Pontiac, IL.
* * * * *

V-429 [Amended]

    From Marion, IL; INT Marion 011[deg] and Bible Grove, IL,
207[deg] radials; to Bible Grove. From Champaign, IL; Roberts, IL;
to Joliet, IL.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 9, 2020.
Rodger A. Dean Jr.,
Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2020-00775 Filed 1-17-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 69)]
[Notices]
[Page 16850-16851]
[DOCID:fr13ap09-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

April 7, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP99-301-235.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Company submits Rate Schedule FSS
negotiated rate agreement between ANR and Wisconsin Public Service
Corporation.
    Filed Date: 04/03/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090406-0093.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 15, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-222-001.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Company submits Substitute Ninth Revised
Sheet No 159 to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 04/03/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090406-0092.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 15, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-389-001.
    Applicants: Steckman Ridge, LP.
    Description: Steckman Ridge, LP submits Sheet No 66 et al. to FERC
Gas Tariff, Original Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 04/03/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090406-0094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 15, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-428-001.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company
    Description: ANR Pipeline Company submits Twenty Seventh Revised
Sheet No 19 to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 04/02/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090406-0095.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 14, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-463-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Co.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company submits
Nineteenth Revised Sheet 17 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised
Volume 1, to be effective 5/1/09.
    Filed Date: 03/20/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090323-0035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-500-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC submits First
Revised Sheet No 2 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume No
1.
    Filed Date: 04/03/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090406-0096.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 15, 2009.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor

must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8257 Filed 4-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 20, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38242-38245]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15299]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0572; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00391-R]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Leonardo S.p.a. Helicopters

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 Leonardo S.p.a. Model A119 and AW119 MKII helicopters. This
proposed AD was prompted by reports of abnormal play on the collective
torque tube on two Model AW119 MKII helicopters. This proposed AD would
require repetitive inspections of affected torque tube assemblies for
any deficiency and corrective action if necessary; and the replacement
of any affected part with a serviceable part, which is terminating
action for the repetitive inspections, as specified in a European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation
by reference (IBR). 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 September
3, 2021.

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 EASA material that is proposed for IBR in this AD, contact
EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You
may find this IBR material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view the EASA material at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of the
EASA material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. EASA material is also
available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2021-0572.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0572; 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 EASA AD,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer,
COS Program Management Section, Operational Safety Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600 Stewart Ave., Mail Stop: Room 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2021-0572; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-00391-R'' 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
this 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
Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section,
Operational Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA,
1600 Stewart Ave., Mail Stop: Room 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone
(516) 228-7330; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the
FAA receives that is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed
in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0096, dated March 31, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0096), to correct an unsafe condition for Leonardo S.p.A.
Helicopters, formerly Finmeccanica S.p.A., AgustaWestland S.p.A.,
Agusta S.p.A.; and AgustaWestland Philadelphia Corporation, formerly
Agusta Aerospace Corporation, Model A119 and AW119MKII helicopters, all
serial numbers.
    This proposed AD was prompted by reports of abnormal play on the
collective torque tube on two Model AW119 MKII helicopters.
Investigations revealed that these events were due to an erroneous
manufacturing process, affecting certain collective torque tube
assemblies. The affected batch numbers were identified. Leonardo S.p.a.
Model A119 helicopters are similar in design and may be subject to the
same unsafe condition revealed on the Model AW119 MKII helicopters. The
FAA is proposing this AD to address abnormal play on the collective
torque tube, which could result in reduced control of the helicopter,
resulting in a forced landing and consequent damage to the helicopter
and injury to occupants. See EASA AD 2021-0096 for additional
background information.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA about the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA is proposing this AD
after evaluating all known relevant information and determining that
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
on other helicopters of these same type designs.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0096 requires repetitive inspections of the affected
torque tube assemblies for any deficiency (i.e., any play) by marking
the torque tube assembly and the collar and applying specific loads to
determine if there is any play; and replacement of any affected part
that has any play with a serviceable part. EASA AD 2021-0096 also
requires the eventual replacement of any affected part with a
serviceable part, and specifies that replacement of an affected part on
a helicopter constitutes terminating action for the repetitive
inspections for that helicopter.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2021-0096, described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this proposed AD and except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the EASA AD.''

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use certain civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result,
EASA AD 2021-0096 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final
rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance EASA AD
2021-0096 in its entirety, through that incorporation, except for any
differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this
proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a
particular section in EASA AD 2021-0096 does not mean that operators
need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2021-
0096. Service information specified in EASA AD 2021-0096 that is
required for compliance with it will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0572 after the FAA final rule is published.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    EASA AD 2021-0096 supersedes EASA AD 2019-0057, dated March 20,
2019 (EASA AD 2019-0057). The Group 1 helicopters identified in both
EASA AD 2021-0096 and EASA AD 2019-0057 are helicopters with collective
stick torque tube assemblies having part number (P/N) 109-0011-03-105
and batch number 823207 or earlier. Paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2021-0096
addresses Group 1 helicopters that have incorporated the actions
required by paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2019-0057. The FAA did not issue
an AD that corresponds to EASA AD 2019-0057, therefore, this proposed
AD would require, for Group 1 helicopters, an initial inspection of the
torque tube assembly within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the
effective date of the FAA AD and repetitive inspections thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS.
    In addition, where paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2021-0096 specifies,
for Group 1 helicopters, replacement of an affected part with a
serviceable part ``within 36 months after April 3, 2019 [the effective
date of EASA AD 2019-0057]'', for this proposed AD, the compliance time
would be within 24 months after the effective date of the FAA AD.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 136 helicopters of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost          Parts cost     Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.....................  2 work-hours x $85 per               $0  $170 per            $23,120 per
                                  hour = $170 per                          inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                  inspection cycle..
Replacement....................  16 work-hours x $85 per           9,928  $11,288...........  $1,535,168
                                  hour = $1,360.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost
impact on affected operators.

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:

Leonardo S.p.a.: Docket No. FAA-2021-0572; Project Identifier MCAI-
2021-00391-R.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by September 3, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Leonardo S.p.a. Model A119 and AW119 MKII
helicopters, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6700, Rotorcraft
Flight Control

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of abnormal play on the
collective torque tube on two Model AW119 MKII helicopters. The FAA
is issuing this AD to address abnormal play on the collective torque
tube, which could result in reduced control of the helicopter,
resulting in a forced landing and consequent damage to the
helicopter and injury to occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0096, dated March 31, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0096).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0096

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0096 refers to flight hours (FH), this AD
requires using hours time-in-service (TIS).
    (2) Where EASA AD 2021-0096 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA AD 2021-0096 specify
the compliance times for Group 1 helicopters to inspect the affected
part, this AD requires an initial inspection within 50 hours TIS
after the effective date of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not
to exceed 100 hours TIS.
    (4) Where paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2021-0096 specifies, for
Group 1 helicopters, replacement of an affected part with a
serviceable part ``within 36 months after April 3, 2019 [the
effective date of EASA AD 2019-0057],'' for this AD, that
replacement must be done within 24 months after the effective date
of this AD.
    (5) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-
0096 specifies to return a torque tube assembly to the manufacturer,
this AD does not include that requirement.
    (6) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-
0096 specifies to contact the manufacturer ``in case of doubt''
regarding the batch number on a torque tube assembly, determining
the batch number is required by this AD but contacting the
manufacturer is not required.
    (7) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0096 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0096
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2021-0096, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may view this
material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(817) 222-5110. This material may be found in the AD docket at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-0572.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section, Operational
Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600
Stewart Ave., Mail Stop: Room 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone
(516) 228-7330; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on July 13, 2021.
Lance T. Gant, Director,
Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-15299 Filed 7-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 161 (Monday, August 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50193-50198]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20319]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67656; File No. SR-BYX-2012-018]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by BATS Y-
Exchange, Inc. To Amend BYX Rules Related to Price Sliding
Functionality

August 14, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 3, 2012, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with
the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.9, entitled ``Orders and
Modifiers'' to modify the operation of the Exchange's price sliding
functionality described in Rule 11.9. The Exchange also proposes other
minor changes, including changes to the terms used to describe price
sliding and a cross-reference contained in Rule 11.13.

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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
Background
    The Exchange currently offers various forms of sliding which, in
all cases, result in the re-pricing of an order to, or ranking and/or
display of an order at, a price other than an order's limit price in
order to comply with applicable securities laws and/or Exchange rules.
Specifically, the Exchange currently offers price sliding to ensure
compliance with Regulation NMS and Regulation SHO. Price sliding
currently offered by the Exchange re-prices and displays an order upon
entry and in certain cases again re-prices and re-displays an order at
a more aggressive price one time if and when permissible, but does not
continually re-price an order based on changes in the national best bid
(``NBB'') or national best offer (``NBO'', and together with the NBB,
the ``NBBO''). The Exchange proposes to modify both forms of price
sliding in order to create an optional order handling behavior
functionality that will continue to re-price, re-rank and/or re-display
an order based on changes to the NBBO (``multiple price sliding''), as
further described below. Multiple price sliding in the contexts for
which it is being proposed will have to be elected by a User \5\ in
order to be applied by the Exchange. If a User elects to apply multiple
price sliding to an order submitted to the Exchange, multiple price
sliding will apply with respect to both display-price sliding and short
sale price sliding in connection with the handling of the order by the
Exchange. The Exchange also proposes to add language to make clear that
display-price sliding is based on Protected Quotations \6\ at equities
exchanges other than the Exchange. If the Exchange has a Protected
Quotation that an incoming order to the Exchange locks or crosses then
such order either executes against the resting order, or, if the
incoming order is a BATS Post Only Order or Partial Post Only at Limit
Order, such order is executed in accordance with Rules 11.9(c)(6) and
(c)(7), respectively, or cancelled back to the entering User, as
described in further detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As defined in BYX Rule 1.5(cc), a User is ``any Member or
Sponsored Participant who is authorized to obtain access to the
System pursuant to Rule 11.3.''
    \6\ As defined in BYX Rule 1.5(t), a ``Protected Quotation'' is
``a quotation that is a Protected Bid or Protected Offer.'' In turn,
the term ``Protected Bid'' or ``Protected Offer'' means ``a bid or
offer in a stock that is (i) displayed by an automated trading
center; (ii) disseminated pursuant to an effective national market
system plan; and (iii) an automated quotation that is the best bid
or best offer of a national securities exchange or association.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Display-Price Sliding
    With respect to price sliding offered to ensure compliance with
Regulation NMS (``display-price sliding''),\7\ under the Exchange's
current rules, if, at the time of entry, a non-routable order would
cross a Protected Quotation displayed by another trading center the
Exchange re-prices and ranks such order at the locking price, and
displays such order at one minimum price variation below the NBO for
bids and above the NBB for offers. Similarly, in the event a non-
routable order that, at the time of entry, would lock a Protected
Quotation displayed by another trading center, the Exchange displays
such order at one minimum price variation below the NBO for bids and
above the NBB for offers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange's Rules currently describe this functionality
as ``NMS price sliding'' but the Exchange proposes to rename such
functionality ``display-price sliding.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example of display-price sliding, assume the Exchange has a
posted and displayed bid to buy 100 shares of a security priced at
$10.10 per share and a posted and displayed offer to sell 100 shares at
$10.13 per share. Assume the NBBO is $10.10 by $10.12. If the Exchange
receives a non-routable bid to buy 100 shares at $10.12 per share the
Exchange will rank the order to buy at $10.12 and display the order at
$10.11 because displaying the bid at $10.12 would lock an external
market's Protected Offer to sell for $10.12. If the NBO then moved to
$10.13, the Exchange would un-slide the bid to buy and display it at
its ranked price (and limit price) of $10.12.
    The Exchange proposes to modify the description of price sliding to
make clear that price sliding is generally applied to orders that are
eligible for display, as such orders would violate Rule 610(d) of
Regulation NMS if they were displayed by the Exchange at a price that
locked or crossed a Protected Quotation. As described in further detail
below, certain price sliding is also applied to Non-Displayed Orders,
and the Exchange has proposed certain changes intended to clarify the
application of such price sliding.
    The Exchange currently permits Users to instruct the Exchange not
to apply price sliding functionality to their orders. As one variation
of this instruction, the Exchange currently allows Users to elect to
apply display-price sliding only to the extent a display-eligible order
at the time of entry would create a violation of Rule 610(d) of
Regulation NMS by locking a Protected Quotation of an external market
(``lock-only display-price sliding''). For Users that select this order
handling, price sliding is not applied and any display-eligible order
is instead cancelled if, upon entry, such order would create a
violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS by crossing a Protected
Quotation of an external market. The lock-only display-price sliding
option is a variation of display-price sliding that is intended to
allow Users to re-evaluate their orders and/or strategies in the event
they are submitting orders to the Exchange that are crossing the
market. Consistent with the goal of increasing the clarity of its price
sliding rule, the Exchange proposes to modify its description of
display-price sliding to clearly define the lock-only display-price
sliding option.
    As an example of lock-only display-price sliding, assume the
Exchange has a posted and displayed bid to buy 100 shares of a security
priced at $10.10 per share and a posted and displayed offer to sell 100
shares at $10.14 per share. Assume the NBBO is $10.10 by $10.12. If the
Exchange receives a non-routable bid to buy 100 shares at $10.13 per
share and the User has elected lock-only display-price sliding, the
Exchange will cancel the order back to the User. To reiterate a basic
example of display-price sliding, if instead the User applied display-
price sliding (and not lock-only display-price sliding), the Exchange
would rank the order to buy at $10.12 and display the order at $10.11
because displaying the bid at $10.13 would cross an external market's
Protected Offer to sell for $10.12. If the NBO then moved to $10.13,
the Exchange would un-slide the bid to buy and display it at $10.12.
    The Exchange proposes to modify the description of display-price
sliding so that any order subject to display-price sliding will retain
its original limit price irrespective of the prices at which such

order is ranked and displayed. Accordingly, the Exchange also proposes
to clarify language throughout its descriptions of display-price
sliding to refer to the ranking and display of an order rather than
using the term re-price. In order to ensure compliance with Regulation
NMS, as it does today, the Exchange will rank orders subject to
display-price sliding at the locking price and will display such orders
at one minimum price variation below the current NBO (for bids) or to
one minimum price variation above the current NBB (for offers).
    The Exchange also proposes to amend its existing description of
display-price sliding to state that when an order is displayed by the
Exchange through the display-price sliding process the Exchange will
display such order at the most aggressive permissible price. The
Exchange's current description of display-price sliding states that
orders that are re-displayed by the Exchange receive new timestamps
when this new display price is established. The Exchange proposes to
retain this language but also to make clear that all orders that are
re-ranked and re-displayed pursuant to display-price sliding will
retain their priority as compared to other orders subject to display-
price sliding based upon the time such orders were initially received
by the Exchange. Finally, the proposed description of price sliding
also states that following the initial ranking and display of an order
subject to display-price sliding, an order will only be re-ranked and
re-displayed to the extent it achieves a more aggressive price.
    In order to offer multiple price sliding to Exchange Users, the
Exchange proposes to make clear that the ranked and displayed prices of
an order subject to display-price sliding may be adjusted once or
multiple times depending upon the instructions of a User and changes to
the prevailing NBBO. As noted above, multiple price sliding is optional
and must be explicitly selected by a User before it will be applied.
The Exchange proposes to make clear that the default display-price
sliding process will only adjust the ranked and displayed prices of an
order upon entry and then the displayed price one time following a
change to the prevailing NBBO. As explained throughout this filing,
orders subject to multiple price sliding will be permitted to move all
the way back to their most aggressive price, whereas orders subject to
the current handling may not be adjusted to their most aggressive
price, depending upon market conditions.
    As an example of multiple price sliding, assume the Exchange has a
posted and displayed bid to buy 100 shares of a security priced at
$10.10 per share and a posted and displayed offer to sell 100 shares at
$10.14 per share. Assume the NBBO is $10.10 by $10.12. If the Exchange
receives a non-routable bid to buy 100 shares at $10.13 per share, the
Exchange would rank the order to buy at $10.12 and display the order at
$10.11 because displaying the bid at $10.13 would cross an external
market's Protected Offer to sell for $10.12. If the NBO then moved to
$10.13, the Exchange would un-slide the bid to buy, rank it at $10.13
and display it at $10.12. Under current price sliding functionality,
the Exchange would not further adjust the ranked or displayed price
following this un-slide. However, under multiple price sliding, if the
NBO then moved to $10.14, the Exchange would un-slide the bid to buy
and display it at its full limit price of $10.13.
    The Exchange offers display-price sliding functionality to avoid
locking or crossing other markets' Protected Quotations, but does not
price slide to avoid executions on the Exchange's order book (``BATS
Book'').\8\ Specifically, when the Exchange receives an incoming order
that could execute against resting displayed liquidity but an execution
does not occur because such incoming order is designated as an order
that will not remove liquidity (i.e., a BATS Post Only Order),\9\ then
the Exchange will cancel the incoming order. The Exchange proposes to
make clear in the description of display-price sliding that any
display-eligible BATS Post Only Order that locks or crosses a Protected
Quotation displayed by the Exchange upon entry will not be price slid
upon entry but will be executed as set forth in Rule 11.9(c)(6) or
cancelled. Similarly, the Exchange proposes to make clear that any
display-eligible Partial Post Only at Limit Order that locks or crosses
a Protected Quotation displayed by the Exchange upon entry will be
executed as set forth in Rule 11.9(c)(7) or cancelled. The Exchange
also proposes to make clear that any display-eligible BATS Post Only
Order or Partial Post Only at Limit Order that locks or crosses a
Protected Quotation displayed by an external market upon entry will be
subject to the display-price sliding process. Consistent with the
principal of not price sliding to avoid executions, in the event the
NBBO changes such that a BATS Post Only Order subject to display-price
sliding would un-slide and would be ranked at a price at which it could
remove displayed liquidity from the BATS Book (i.e., when the Exchange
is at the NBB or NBO) the Exchange proposes to execute \10\ or cancel
such order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange notes that it inadvertently constructed an
example in a previous rule filing that contradicts this statement.
Specifically, in Example 5 of SR-BYX-2011-009, in order to establish
the possibility of an order that has been price slid and has a
working price ranked at the same price as an order displayed by the
Exchange on the opposite side of the market, the Exchange explained
that an incoming BATS Post Only bid at $10.11 would price slide if
it locked an offer displayed by the Exchange at $10.11. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64476 (May 12, 2011), 76 FR
28826, 28828 (May 18, 2011) (SR-BYX-2011-009) (the ``Order Handling
Filing''). However, at the time of the Order Handling Filing, under
the current behavior, and as proposed, the Exchange would not price
slide a BATS Post Only order to avoid an execution against an order
displayed by the Exchange. The Exchange notes that Example 5 from
the Order Handling Filing would be accurate if instead the incoming
bid at $10.11 locked a protected offer displayed by an external
market and not also displayed by the Exchange, was price slid and
displayed at $10.10, ranked at $10.11, and BATS subsequently
received a BATS Post Only offer at $10.11. In other words, the
outcome would be the same as set forth in Example 5, insofar as the
price slid order could ultimately have a ranked price that locks the
contra-side, however the sequence leading up to that outcome neither
is nor was possible as described because the Exchange does not price
slide to avoid executions against the BATS Book.
    \9\ The Exchange notes that it recently proposed and implemented
a change to Rule 11.9(c)(6) regarding the Exchange's handling of
BATS Post Only Orders to permit such orders to remove liquidity from
the BATS Book if the value of price improvement associated with such
execution equals or exceeds the sum of fees charged for such
execution and the value of any rebate that would be provided if the
order posted to the BATS Book and subsequently provided liquidity.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67092 (June 1, 2012), 77 FR
33800 (June 7, 2012) (SR-BYX-2012-009).
    \10\ As noted above, the Exchange will execute a BATS Post Only
Order in certain circumstances where it would receive price
improvement. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange previously proposed changes to its existing order
handling procedures to permit BATS Post Only Orders to be posted to the
BATS Book to join the NBB or NBO, as applicable, even when such orders
would be posted at prices equal to opposite-side orders ranked at the
same price.\11\ Consistent with this previously adopted change, the
Exchange proposes to add language stating that BATS Post Only Orders
will be permitted to post and be displayed opposite the ranked price of
orders subject to display-price sliding. As is the case today, in the
event an order subject to display-price sliding is ranked on the BATS
Book with a price equal to an opposite side order displayed by the
Exchange, it will be subject to processing as set forth in Rule
11.13(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Order Handling Filing, supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example of the Exchange's handling of BATS Post Only Orders
in the context of price sliding, assume the Exchange has a posted and
displayed

bid to buy 100 shares of a security priced at $10.10 per share and a
posted and displayed offer to sell 100 shares at $10.12 per share.
Assume the NBBO (including Protected Quotations of other external
markets) is also $10.10 by $10.12. If the Exchange receives a BATS Post
Only Order bid to buy 100 shares at $10.12 per share, unless executed
pursuant to Rule 11.9(c)(6),\12\ the Exchange would cancel the order
back to the User because absent the BATS Post Only designation the
$10.12 bid would be able to remove the $10.12 offer, and, as explained
above, the Exchange does not offer price sliding to avoid executions
against orders displayed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the Exchange did not have a displayed offer to sell at $10.12 in
the example above, but instead the best offer on the Exchange's book
was $10.13, the Exchange would apply price sliding to the incoming bid
by ranking such order at $10.12 and displaying the order at $10.11. The
Exchange's order book would now be displayed as $10.11 by $10.13.
Assume, however, that after price sliding the incoming bid from $10.12
to a display price of $10.11, the Exchange received a BATS Post Only
offer to sell for $10.12, thus joining the NBO. As noted above,
pursuant to previously adopted changes, BATS Post Only Orders are
permitted to post and be displayed opposite the ranked price of orders
subject to display-price sliding. Accordingly, the Exchange would allow
such the incoming BATS Post Only offer at $10.12 to post and display on
the Exchange's order book, as described above, with an opposite side
price slid order ranked at $10.12 but displayed at $10.11. Assume that
next the Protected Offers displayed by all external markets other than
the Exchange moved to $10.13. In this situation the Exchange would un-
slide but then cancel the bid at $10.12 because, as proposed, in the
event the NBBO changes such that a BATS Post Only Order subject to
display-price sliding would un-slide and would be ranked at a price at
which it could remove displayed liquidity from the BATS Book (i.e.,
when the Exchange is at the NBB or NBO) the Exchange proposes to
execute \13\ or cancel such order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ As noted above, the Exchange will execute a BATS Post Only
Order in certain circumstances where it would receive price
improvement. See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently applies display-price sliding to Non-
Displayed Orders that cross Protected Quotations of external markets as
well. The Exchange proposes language that makes clear that this
functionality is offered both upon entry and once an order has been
posted to the Exchange's order book in order to avoid potentially
trading through Protected Quotations of external markets. The proposed
rule states that Non-Displayed Orders that are subject to display-price
sliding are ranked at the locking price on entry. The proposed
description also makes clear that display-price sliding for Non-
Displayed Orders is functionally equivalent to the handling of
displayable orders except that such orders will not have a displayed
price and will not be re-priced again unless such orders cross a
Protected Quotation of an external market (i.e., such orders are not
unslid).
    As an example of the Exchange's handling of Non-Displayed Orders in
the context of price sliding, assume the Exchange has a posted and
displayed bid to buy 100 shares of a security priced at $10.10 per
share and a posted and displayed offer to sell 100 shares at $10.13 per
share. Assume the NBBO is $10.10 by $10.11. If the Exchange receives a
Non-Displayed Order bid to buy 100 shares at $10.12 per share, the
Exchange would re-price the order to a $10.11 bid to buy to avoid
potentially trading through the $10.11 offer displayed as the NBO
(i.e., to ensure the Exchange will not allow the bid to trade at $10.12
per share). In the event the NBBO moved to $10.09 by $10.10, the
Exchange would again re-price the Non-Displayed bid to buy 100 shares
to $10.10 per share. If the NBBO then moved to $10.10 by $10.11, the
Non-Displayed bid would not be re-priced to $10.11, but would remain on
the Exchange's order book at $10.10.
    As described above, the Exchange has proposed to offer multiple
price sliding to Exchange Users that opt-in to the functionality. The
remaining changes described above are intended to clarify and expand
upon the written description of display-price sliding, but do not
represent changes to the existing functionality offered by the
Exchange. Consistent with achieving better clarity, the Exchange has
proposed structural changes to the description of display-price sliding
by separating the description into several sub-paragraphs.
Short Sale Price Sliding
    With respect to price sliding offered to ensure compliance with
Regulation SHO (``short sale price sliding''), when an order cannot be
executed or displayed in compliance with Rule 201 of Regulation
SHO,\14\ the Exchange currently re-prices short sale orders to one
minimum price variation above the current NBB (``Permitted Price''). In
order to describe this re-pricing, the Exchange proposes to add the
term ``Permitted Price'' to its description of short sale price
sliding. In order to offer multiple price sliding in the short sale
price sliding context, the Exchange proposes to amend its rules to
state that depending upon the instructions of a User, to reflect
declines in the NBB the System will continue to re-price a short sale
order at the Permitted Price down to the order's original limit price.
Accordingly, short sale orders subject to multiple price sliding that
are adjusted to lower price levels due to a decline to the NBB will be
priced at one minimum price variation above the current NBB. As is true
for display-price sliding, multiple price sliding is optional and must
be explicitly selected by a User before it will be applied. The
Exchange's default short sale sliding process will only re-price an
order upon entry. Accordingly, there will be no change to existing
Users of short sale price sliding due to the proposed introduction of
multiple price sliding unless such Users opt-in to the functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example of the Exchange's current short sale price sliding,
which adjusts the price of an order only upon entry, assume the
Exchange has a posted and displayed bid to buy 100 shares of a security
priced at $10.10 per share and a posted and displayed offer to sell 100
shares at $10.13 per share.\15\ Assume the NBBO is $10.10 by $10.12. If
the Exchange receives a non-routable offer to sell 100 shares at $10.10
per share and the order is marked ``short'' the Exchange will rank and
display the order to sell at $10.11 because executing the short sale at
$10.10, the NBB, would be in contravention of Regulation SHO. The
result would be the same if the Exchange had no bids at $10.10 because
the Exchange cannot display an order marked ``short'' at the current
NBB (such display would also lock the protected quote of an external
market). If the NBB then moved to $10.09, under existing handling, the
Exchange would not re-price or re-display the order, but instead would
leave it as a displayed offer to sell 100 shares at $10.11. Under
multiple price sliding, however, the Exchange would re-price and
display the offer at $10.10 if the NBB moved to $10.09. If, in the
example above, the NBB instead moved upwards to $10.11, the Exchange
would not re-price or

restrict execution of the resting $10.11 offer under either type of
short sale price sliding. The Exchange notes that if this were the
case, its quotation would be locked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For purposes of these examples, Rule 201's short sale price
test is assumed to be in effect for the security at the time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to changes to the description of short sale price
sliding to add the option of multiple price sliding, the Exchange
proposes various changes to improve the accuracy and the clarity of the
description of short sale price sliding. For instance, the Exchange
proposes to make clear that when a short sale price test restriction
under Rule 201 of Regulation SHO is in effect, the System may execute a
displayed short sale order at a price below the Permitted Price if, at
the time of initial display of the short sale order, the order was at a
price above the then current NBB. The Exchange also proposes to make
clear that orders marked ``short exempt'' will not be subject to short
sale price sliding.
2. Statutory Basis
    The rule change proposed in this submission is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\16\ Specifically, the
proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\17\
because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to, and perfect
the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to price sliding
are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\18\ as well as Rule 610
of Regulation NMS \19\ and Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.\20\ The Exchange
is not modifying the overall functionality of price sliding, which, to
avoid locking or crossing quotations of other market centers or to
comply with applicable short sale restrictions, displays orders at
permissible prices while retaining a price at which the User is willing
to buy or sell, in the event display at such price or an execution at
such price becomes possible. Instead, the Exchange is making changes to
adopt an optional form of price sliding, multiple price sliding, and to
clarify portions of its Rules that describe price sliding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id.
    \19\ 17 CFR 242.610.
    \20\ 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 610(d) requires exchanges to establish, maintain, and enforce
rules that require members reasonably to avoid ``[d]isplaying
quotations that lock or cross any protected quotation in an NMS
stock.'' \21\ Such rules must be ``reasonably designed to assure the
reconciliation of locked or crossed quotations in an NMS stock,'' and
must ``prohibit * * * members from engaging in a pattern or practice of
displaying quotations that lock or cross any quotation in an NMS
stock.'' \22\ Thus, display-price sliding offered by the Exchange,
assists Users by displaying orders at permissible prices. Similarly,
Rule 201 of Regulation SHO \23\ requires trading centers to establish,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to prevent the execution or display of a short sale order at a
price at or below the current NBB under certain circumstances. The
Exchange's short sale price sliding will continue to operate consistent
with this rule, however, if a User opts-in to multiple price sliding,
the Exchange will re-price a short sale order based on declines to the
NBB. If, instead, a User maintains the default form of price sliding,
the Exchange will only re-price and display an order subject to short
sale price sliding upon entry but will not update the order to reflect
declines to the NBB. The Exchange notes that the proposed descriptions
of price sliding will also more closely mirror the description used by
at least one of its competitors, the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
(``Nasdaq''), and thus will help to avoid confusion amongst Exchange
Users that also utilize analogous functionality at Nasdaq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 242.610(d).
    \22\ Id.
    \23\ 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change imposes
any burden on competition.

(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 written comments on
the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Changes 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 \24\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change along with a
brief description and the 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BYX-2012-018 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BYX-2012-018. 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 the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; 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-BYX-2012-018 and should be
submitted on or before September 10, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-20319 Filed 8-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 25, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47504-47505]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18303]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-D-1216]

Electronic Common Technical Document; Data Standards;
Specifications for the Electronic Common Technical Document Validation
Criteria

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA or Agency) Center for
Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and Center for Biologics Evaluation
and Research (CBER) are announcing the date that FDA will begin
rejecting submissions which fail Electronic Common Technical Document
(eCTD) validations 1306 or 1323 that have been raised to high
validation errors as described in the ``Specifications for eCTD
Validation Criteria.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Resnick, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 3160, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-7997<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Stephen Ripley, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Bldg.
71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is issuing this Federal Register notice
to announce that eCTD validations 1306 and 1323, described in
``Specifications for eCTD Validation Criteria,'' have been raised to
high validation errors. Beginning March 1, 2022, FDA will reject
submissions that fail either of these validations.
    According to the guidance for industry entitled ``Providing
Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format--Certain Human
Pharmaceutical Product Applications and Related Submissions Using the
eCTD Specifications,'' submissions subject to section 745A(a) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act must be submitted in eCTD format
using the version of eCTD currently supported by FDA (unless such
submission is exempt from the electronic submission requirements or if
FDA has granted a waiver). The version of eCTD currently supported by
FDA is specified in the Data Standards Catalog. eCTD submissions must
follow FDA eCTD technical specification entitled ``The Comprehensive
Table of Contents Headings and Hierarchy.'' Documents which are not
properly referenced in the eCTD backbone as described in the ``M2 eCTD:
Electronic Common Technical Document Specification'' and ``The eCTD
Backbone Files Specification for Module 1,'' result in content that is
not accessible within FDA eCTD technical specification ``The
Comprehensive Table of Contents Headings and Hierarchy.'' eCTD
validations 1306 (``No leaf element for file'') and 1323 (``No file for
leaf element''), within the ``Specifications for eCTD Validation
Criteria,'' describe parts of the eCTD specifications which were not
followed correctly. Rejection for failing to pass either eCTD
validations 1306 or 1323 will begin on March 1, 2022.

    Dated: August 18, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-18303 Filed 8-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P