[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 137 (Monday, July 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46739-46744]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16857]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78298; File No. SR-BX-2016-040]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Detection of Loss of Connection

July 12, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 8, 2016, NASDAQ BX, Inc. (``BX'' or

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

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 6, entitled
``Acceptance of Quotes and Orders'' to adopt functionality which is
designed to assist BX Participants in the event that they lose
communication with their assigned Financial Information eXchange
(``FIX'') \3\ or Specialized Quote Feed (``SQF'') \4\ Ports due to a
loss of connectivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ FIX permits the entry of orders.
    \4\ SQF permits the transmission of quotes to the Exchange by a
BX Options Market Makers using its Client Application. SQF Auction
Responses would not be cancelled pursuant to this Chapter VI,
Section 6(e) because other rules govern auction specific responses,
see Chapter VI, Section 9, entitled ``Price Improvement Auction
(``PRISM'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office
of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 6, entitled
``Acceptance of Quotes and Orders'' to adopt a new section ``e''
entitled ``Detection of Loss of Connection,'' a new automated process
which BX proposes to adopt for its SQF \5\ and FIX Ports in the event
that they lose communication with a Client Application due to a loss of
connectivity. This feature is designed to protect BX Options Market
Makers \6\ and other market participants from inadvertent exposure to
excessive risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Today, SQF and FIX have the capability to disconnect and
cancel quotes and orders, respectively, for technical disconnects
although there is no automated process triggered by pre-set
conditions. The rule change would adopt a formalized process to
automatically disconnect and cancel quotes for SQF and disconnect
and cancel orders, if elected, for FIX when there is a loss of
communication with the BX Participant's Client Application.
    \6\ The term ``BX Options Market Makers'' or ``Options Market
Makers'' (herein ``BX Options Market Makers'') means an Options
Participant registered with the Exchange for the purpose of making
markets in options contracts traded on the Exchange and that is
vested with the rights and responsibilities specified in Chapter VII
of these Rules.'' See BX Rules at Chapter I, Section 1(a)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By way of background, BX Participants currently enter quotes and
orders utilizing either an SQF or FIX Port. SQF is utilized by BX
Options Market Makers and FIX is utilized by all market participants.
These ports are System \7\ components through which a BX Participant
communicates its quotes and/or orders to the BX match engine through
the BX Participant's Client Application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term ``System'' shall mean the automated system for
order execution and trade reporting owned and operated by BX as the
BX Options market. See Chapter VI, Section 1(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule change, an SQF Port would be defined as the
Exchange's System component through which BX Participants communicate
their quotes from the BX Participant's Client Application at proposed
Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(i)(B). A FIX Port would be defined as the
Exchange's System component through which BX Participants communicate
their orders from the BX Participant's Client Application at proposed
Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(i)(C). BX Options Market Makers may submit
quotes to the Exchange from one or more SQF Ports. Similarly, market
participants may submit orders to the Exchange from one or more FIX
Ports. The proposed cancellation feature will be mandatory for each BX
Options Market Maker utilizing SQF for the removal of quotes and
optional for any market participant utilizing FIX for the removal of
orders.
    When the SQF Port detects the loss of communication with a BX
Participant's Client Application because the Exchange's server does not
receive a Heartbeat message \8\ for a certain period of time (a period
of ``nn'' seconds), the Exchange will automatically logoff the BX
Participant's affected Client Application and automatically cancel all
of the BX Participant's open quotes. Quotes will be cancelled across
all Client Applications that are associated with the same BX Options
Market Makers ID and underlying issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ It is important to note that the Exchange separately sends a
connectivity message to the BX Participant as evidence of
connectivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to define ``Client Application'' as the
System component of the BX Participant through which the BX Participant
communicates its quotes and orders to the Exchange at proposed Chapter
VI, Section 6(e)(i)(D). The Exchange proposes to define a ``Heartbeat''
message as a communication which acts as a virtual pulse between the
SQF or FIX Port and the Client Application at proposed Chapter VI,
Section 6(e)(i)(A). The Heartbeat message sent by the BX Participant
and subsequently received by the Exchange allows the SQF or FIX Port to
continually monitor its connection with the BX Participant.
SQF Ports
    The Exchange's System has a default time period, which will trigger
a disconnect from the Exchange and remove quotes, set to fifteen (15)
seconds for SQF Ports. A BX Participant may change the default period
of ``nn'' seconds of no technical connectivity to trigger a disconnect
from the Exchange and remove quotes to a number between one hundred
(100) milliseconds and 99,999 milliseconds for SQF Ports prior to each
session of connectivity to the Exchange. This feature is enabled for
each BX Options Market Maker and may not be disabled.
    There are two ways to change the number of ``nn'' seconds: (1)
Systemically or (2) by contacting the Exchange's operations staff. If
the BX Participant systemically changes the default number of ``nn''
seconds, that new setting shall be in effect throughout the current
session of connectivity \9\ and will then default back to fifteen
seconds.\10\ The BX Participant may change the default setting
systemically prior to each session of connectivity. The BX Participant
may also communicate the time to the Exchange by calling the Exchange's
operations staff. If the time period is communicated

to the Exchange by calling Exchange operations, the number of ``nn''
seconds selected by the BX Participant shall persist for each
subsequent session of connectivity until the BX Participant either
contacts Exchange operations and changes the setting or the BX
Participant systemically selects another time period prior to the next
session of connectivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Each time the BX Participant connects to the Exchange's
System is a new period of connectivity. For example, if the BX
Participant were to connect and then disconnect within a trading day
several times, each time the BX Participant disconnected the next
session would be a new session of connectivity.
    \10\ The Exchange's System would capture the new setting
information that was changed by the BX Participant and utilize the
amended setting for that particular session. The setting would not
persist beyond the current session of connectivity and the setting
would default back to 15 seconds for the next session if the BX
Participant did not change the setting again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FIX Ports
    The Exchange's System has a default time period, which will trigger
a disconnect from the Exchange and remove orders, set to thirty (30)
seconds for FIX Ports. The BX Participant may disable the removal of
orders feature but not the disconnect feature. If the BX Participant
elects to have its orders removed, in addition to the disconnect, the
BX Participant may determine a time period of no technical connectivity
to trigger the disconnect and removal of orders between one (1) second
and thirty (30) seconds for FIX Ports prior to each session of
connectivity to the Exchange.
    There are two ways to change the number of ``nn'' seconds: (1)
Systemically or (2) by contacting the Exchange's operations staff. If
the BX Participant systemically changes the default number of ``nn''
seconds, that new setting shall be in effect throughout that session of
connectivity and will then default back to thirty seconds at the end of
that session. The BX Participant may change the default setting
systemically prior to each session of connectivity. The BX Participant
may also communicate the time to the Exchange by calling the Exchange's
operations staff. If the time period is communicated to the Exchange by
calling Exchange operations, the number of ``nn'' seconds selected by
the BX Participant shall persist for each subsequent session of
connectivity until the BX Participant either contacts Exchange
operations and changes the setting or the BX Participant systemically
selects another time period prior to the next session of connectivity.
    Similar to SQF Ports, when a FIX Port detects the loss of
communication with a Participant's Client Application for a certain
time period (a period of ``nn'' seconds), the Exchange will
automatically logoff the BX Participant's affected Client Application
and if elected, automatically cancel all open orders. The BX
Participant may have an order which has routed away prior to the
cancellation, in the event that the order returns to the Order Book,
because it was either not filled or partially filled, that order will
be subsequently cancelled.
    The disconnect feature is mandatory for FIX users however the user
has the ability to elect to also enable a removal feature, which will
cancel all open orders submitted through that FIX Port. If the removal
of orders feature is not enabled, the System will simply disconnect the
FIX user and not cancel any orders. The FIX user would have to commence
a new session to add, modify or cancel its orders once disconnected.
The Exchange will issue an Options Trader Alert advising BX
Participants on the manner in which they should communicate the number
of ``nn'' seconds to the Exchange for SQF and FIX Ports.
    The trigger for the SQF and FIX Ports is event and Client
Application specific. The automatic cancellation of the BX Options
Market Maker's quotes for SQF Ports and open orders, if elected by the
BX Participant for FIX Ports entered into the respective SQF or FIX
Ports via a particular Client Application will neither impact nor
determine the treatment of the quotes of other BX Options Market Makers
entered into SQF Ports or orders of the same or other BX Participants
entered into the FIX Ports via a separate and distinct Client
Application. In other words, with respect to quotes, each BX Options
Market Maker only maintains one quote in a given option in the order
book. A new quote would replace the existing quote. Orders on the other
hand do not replace each other in the order book as multiple orders may
exist in a given option at once. Therefore the difference in the impact
as between BX Options Market Makers submitting quotes and BX
Participants submitting orders is that quotes may continue to be
submitted and/or refreshed by unaffected BX Options Market Makers
because these market participants are cancelled based on ID when an SQF
Port disconnects, whereas all of the open orders submitted by a given
firm will be impacted when a FIX port disconnects, if the firm elected
to have orders cancelled.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by imposing this mandatory removal functionality on BX
Options Market Makers to prevent disruption in the marketplace and also
offering this removal feature to other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BX Options Market Makers will be required to utilize this removal
functionality with respect to SQF Ports. This feature will remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and protect investors and the public interest
by requiring BX Options Market Makers quotes to be removed in the event
of a loss of connectivity with the Exchange's System. BX Options Market
Makers provide liquidity to the market place and have obligations
unlike other market participants.\13\ This risk feature is important
because it will enable BX Options Market Makers to avoid risks
associated with inadvertent executions in the event of a loss of
connectivity with the Exchange. The proposed rule change is designed to
not permit unfair discrimination among market participants, as it would
apply uniformly to all BX Options Market Makers utilizing SQF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Pursuant to BX Rules at Chapter VII, Section 5, entitled
``Obligations of BX Options Market Makers,'' in registering as a
market maker, an Options Participant commits himself to various
obligations. Transactions of a BX Options Market Makers must
constitute a course of dealings reasonably calculated to contribute
to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and BX Options
Market Makers should not make bids or offers or enter into
transactions that are inconsistent with such course of dealings.
Further, all BX Options Market Makers are designated as specialists
on BX for all purposes under the Act or rules thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The disconnect feature of FIX is mandatory, however market
participants will have the option to either enable or disable the
cancellation feature, which would result in the cancellation of all
orders submitted over a FIX port when such port disconnects. It is
appropriate to offer this removal feature as optional to all market
participants utilizing FIX, because unlike BX Options Market Makers who
are required to provide quotes in all products in which they are
registered, market participants utilizing FIX do not bear the same
magnitude of risk of potential erroneous or unintended executions. In
addition, market participants utilizing FIX may desire their orders to
remain on the order book despite a technical disconnect, so as not to
miss any opportunities for execution of such orders while the FIX
session is disconnected.
    Utilizing a time period for SQF Ports of fifteen (15) seconds and
permitting the BX Options Market Maker to modify

the setting to between 100 milliseconds and 99,999 milliseconds is
consistent with the Act because the Exchange does not desire to trigger
unwarranted logoffs of BX Options Market Makers and therefore allows BX
Options Market Makers the ability to set their time in order to enable
the Exchange the authority to disconnect the BX Options Market Maker
with this feature. Each BX Options Market Maker has different levels of
sensitivity with respect to this disconnect setting and each BX Options
Market Maker has their own system safeguards as well. A default setting
of fifteen (15) seconds is appropriate to capture the needs of all BX
Options Market Makers and high enough not to trigger unwarranted
removal of quotes.
    Further, BX Options Market Makers are able to customize their
setting. The Exchange's proposal to permit a timeframe for SQF Ports
between 100 milliseconds and 99,999 milliseconds is consistent with the
Act and the protection of investors because the purpose of this feature
is to mitigate the risk of potential erroneous or unintended executions
associated with a loss in communication with a Client Application. BX
Options Market Makers are able to better anticipate the appropriate
time within which they may require prior to a logoff as compared to the
Exchange. BX Options Market Makers are offered a timeframe by the
Exchange within which to select the appropriate time. The Exchange does
not desire to trigger unwarranted logoffs of BX Options Market Makers
and therefore permits BX Options Market Makers to provide an
alternative time to the Exchange, within the Exchange's prescribed
timeframe, which authorized the Exchange to disconnect the BX Options
Market Maker. The ``nn'' seconds serve as the BX Options Market Maker's
instruction to the Exchange to act upon the loss of connection and
remove quotes from the System. This range will accommodate BX Options
Market Makers in selecting their appropriate times within the
prescribed timeframes.
    Also, BX Options Market Makers have quoting obligations \14\ and
are more sensitive to price movements as compared to other market
participants. It is consistent with the Act to provide a wider
timeframe within which to customize settings for FIX Ports as compared
to SQF Ports. BX Options Market Makers need to remain vigilant of
market conditions and react more quickly to market movements as
compared to other BX Participants entering orders into the System. The
proposal acknowledges this sensitivity borne by BX Options Market
Makers and reflects the reaction time of BX Options Market Makers as
compared to other BX Participants entering orders. Of note, the
proposed customized timeframe for FIX would be too long for BX Options
Market Makers given their quoting requirements and sensitivity to price
movements. BX Options Market Makers would be severely impacted by a
loss of connectivity of more than several seconds. The BX Options
Market Maker would have exposure during the time period in which they
are unable to manage their quote and update that quote. The BX Options
Market Maker is best positioned to determine their setting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal is further consistent with the Act because
it will mitigate the risk of potential erroneous or unintended
executions associated with a loss in communication with a Client
Application which protects investors and the public interest. Also, any
interest that is executable against a BX Options Market Maker's quotes
that is received \15\ by the Exchange prior to the trigger of the
disconnect to the Client Application, which is processed by the System,
automatically executes at the price up to the BX Options Market Maker's
size. In other words, the System will process the request for
cancellation in the order it was received by the System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The time of receipt for an order or quote is the time such
message is processed by the Exchange book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The System operates consistently with the firm quote obligations of
a broker-dealer pursuant to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS. Specifically,
with respect to BX Options Market Makers, their obligation to provide
continuous two-sided quotes on a daily basis is not diminished by the
removal of such quotes triggered by the disconnect. BX Options Market
Makers are required to provide continuous two-sided quotes on a daily
basis.\16\ BX Options Market Makers will not be relieved of the
obligation to provide continuous two-sided quotes on a daily basis, nor
will it prohibit the Exchange from taking disciplinary action against a
BX Options Market Makers for failing to meet the continuous quoting
obligation each trading day as a result of disconnects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See note 13 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, BOX Options Exchange LLC offers its market makers a similar
feature to the one proposed by the Exchange for the automatic removal
of quotes when connectivity issues arise.\17\ BOX automatically cancels
a market maker's quotes for all appointed classes when BOX loses
communication with a market maker's trading host for a specified time
period. BX also proposes to similarly cancel BX Options Market Makers
open quotes associated with the same BX Options Market Makers ID and
underlyings. BX proposes to cancel all BX Options Market Maker's quotes
in options which are assigned to that particular BX Options Market
Makers. BOX appears to similarly cancel all open quotes in options
which are assigned to a specific market maker. BOX's timeframe is no
less than 1 second or no greater than 9 seconds. BX proposes a default
timeframe for SQF Ports of fifteen (15) seconds with the ability to
modify this setting with a value between 100 milliseconds and 99,999
milliseconds. The proposal to permit BX Options Market Makers to amend
the default setting at the beginning of each session of connectivity is
consistent with the Act because it avoids unwarranted logoffs of BX
Options Market Makers and provides BX Options Market Makers the
opportunity to set a time, within the prescribed timeframe, to
authorize the Exchange to disconnect the BX Options Market Maker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See BOX Rule 8140.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another distinction to note is that while BOX sets the time for
participants, BX permits BX Participants to modify the default setting
for SQF Ports to a more appropriate time within a set of parameters.
While BOX does not offer the cancellations of orders, Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated's (``CBOE'') does offer its participants
a similar mechanism to cancel orders. CBOE's proposal is discussed
further below.
    With respect to FIX Ports, the Exchange will offer this optional
removal functionality to all market participants. Offering the removal
feature on a voluntary basis to all other non-BX Options Market Makers
is consistent with the Act because it permits them an opportunity to
utilize this risk feature, if desired, and avoid risks associated with
inadvertent executions in the event of a loss of connectivity with the
Exchange. The removal feature is designed to mitigate the risk of
missed and/or unintended executions associated with a loss in
communication with a Client Application. The proposed rule change is
designed to not permit unfair discrimination among market participants,
as this removal feature will be offered uniformly to all BX
Participants utilizing FIX.
    The Exchange will disconnect BX Participants from the Exchange and
not cancel its orders if the removal feature

is disabled. The disconnect feature is mandatory and will cause the BX
Participant to be disconnected within the default timeframe or the
timeframe otherwise specified by the BX Participant. This feature is
consistent with the Act because it enables FIX users the ability to
disconnect from the Exchange, assess the situation and make a
determination concerning their risk exposure. The Exchange notes that
in the event that orders need to be removed, the BX Participant may
elect to utilize the Kill Switch \18\ feature. It is consistent with
the Act to require other market participants to be disconnected because
the BX Participant is otherwise not connected to the Exchange's System
and the BX Participant simply needs to reconnect to commence submitting
and cancelling orders. Requiring a disconnect when a loss of
communication is detected is a rational course of action for the
Exchange to alert the BX Participant of the technical connectivity
issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See BX Rule at Chapter VI, Section 6(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to set a default timeframe of thirty (30)
seconds and permit a FIX user to modify the timeframe for FIX ports to
between 1 second and 30 seconds for the removal of orders is consistent
with the Act and the protection of investors because the purpose of
this optional feature is to mitigate the risk of potential erroneous or
unintended executions associated with a loss in communication with a
Client Application. BX Participants selecting the removal feature are
able to better anticipate the appropriate time that they require prior
to a logoff as compared to the Exchange, within the Exchange's
prescribed timeframes. The Exchange does not desire to trigger
unwarranted logoffs of BX Participants and therefore permits BX
Participants to provide a time to the Exchange, within the Exchange's
prescribed timeframe, to authorize the Exchange to disconnect the BX
Participant and remove orders. The ``nn'' seconds serve as the BX
Participant's instruction to the Exchange to act upon the loss of
connection and remove orders from the System. The BX Participant is
also best positioned to determine that they only desire the disconnect
feature, which is mandatory, and do not desire to have their orders
removed.
    The Exchange's proposal to offer other market participants the
removal feature on a voluntary basis is similar to CBOE's Rule.\19\
CBOE offers market participants, on a voluntary basis, the ability to
cancel orders entered through FIX when a technical disconnect occurs,
similar to the BX proposal. CBOE's Rule offers participants the
opportunity to cancel orders within a timeframe determined by the
Trading Permit Holder. The default value selected by the CBOE is no
less than 5 seconds. The Exchange's default timeframe for the
disconnect and removal of orders for FIX is 30 seconds with the ability
to modify that timeframe to between 1 second and 30 seconds, on a
session by session basis, in contrast to CBOE. Also, in contrast to
CBOE, FIX users may choose to enable or disable the cancellation
feature when a disconnect occurs. The proposed timeframe for the FIX
feature is consistent with the Act because the Exchange seeks to
provide BX Participants with the ability to select the amount of time
that they desire for a loss of communication prior to taking action to
cancel open orders or simply disconnect. The BX Participant should have
the ability to select the appropriate time, within a prescribed
timeframe, for authorizing the Exchange to cancel its open orders or
simply disconnect from the Exchange. Inadvertent cancellations may
create a greater risk of harm to investors and the BX Participant is
better positioned to determine the appropriate time, with the
prescribed timeframe, to remove orders or disconnect. CBOE's rule also
offers participants the ability to cancel orders as proposed by BX, on
a voluntary basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See CBOE Rule 6.23C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change will help maintain a fair and orderly
market which promotes efficiency and protects investors. This mandatory
removal feature for BX Options Market Makers and optional removal for
all other market participants will mitigate the risk of potential
erroneous or unintended executions associated with a loss in
communication with a Client Application.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange does
not believe the proposed rule change will cause an undue burden on
intra-market competition because BX Options Market Makers, unlike other
market participants, have greater risks in the market place. Quoting
across many series in an option creates large principal positions that
expose BX Options Market Makers, who are required to continuously quote
in assigned options, to potentially significant market risk. Providing
a broader timeframe for the disconnect and removal of orders for FIX as
compared to the removal of quotes for SQF Ports does not create an
undue burden on competition. BX Options Market Makers have quoting
obligations \20\ and are more sensitive to price movements as compared
to other market participants. The proposal is consistent with the Act
because it provides a tighter timeframe for the disconnect and removal
of quotes for SQF Ports as compared to the removal of orders for FIX
Ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See note 13 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BX Options Market Makers need to remain vigilant of market
conditions and react more quickly to market movements as compared to
other BX Participants entering multiple orders into the System. The
proposal reflects this sensitivity borne by BX Options Market Makers
and reflects the reaction time of BX Options Market Makers as compared
to other BX Participants entering orders. Offering the removal feature
to other market participants on an optional basis does not create an
undue burden on intra-market competition because unlike BX Options
Market Makers, other market participants do not bear the same risks of
potential erroneous or unintended executions. FIX users have the
opportunity to disable the cancellation feature and simply disconnect
from the Exchange. FIX users may also set a timeframe that is
appropriate for their business. It is appropriate to offer this
optional cancellation functionality to other market participants for
open orders, because those orders are subject to risks of missed and/or
unintended executions due to a lack of connectivity which the BX
Participants need to weigh. Finally, the Exchange does not believe that
such change will impose any burden on inter-market competition that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Other options exchanges offer similar functionality.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See BOX's Rule 8140 and CBOE's Rule 6.23C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become

operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \22\ and subparagraph
(f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(iii).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing. However, Rule
19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \24\ permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the
30-day operative delay so that it may immediately offer the proposed
risk protection feature. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-
day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Exchange proposes to adopt a functionality
designed to assist BX Participants with managing certain risks in the
event that a BX Participant loses communication with its FIX or SQF
Ports due to a loss of connectivity. The Commission notes that two
other options exchanges currently have similar risk protection
functionalities for their members.\25\ Therefore, the Commission hereby
waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposal operative
upon filing.\26\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If
the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved
or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \25\ See BOX Rule 8140 and CBOE Rule 6.23C.
    \26\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-BX-2016-040 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2016-040. 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-BX-2016-040 and should be
submitted on or before August 8, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-16857 Filed 7-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 29440]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13517]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0408]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
Harvey, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Lapalco Boulevard Bridge, Harvey
Canal Route, mile 2.8, over the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, in Harvey,
LA. The deviation is necessary to accommodate maintenance and
replacement of various bridge components. This deviation allows the
bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position for two separate
seven-day periods.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. on July 23, 2018 through
6 a.m. on August 13, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0408 is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Ms. Donna Gagliano, Bridge Branch
Office, Eighth District, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The owner of the bridge, Jefferson Parish,
has requested a temporary deviation from the operating schedule for the
Lapalco Boulevard Bridge, Harvey Canal Route, mile 2.8 over the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway in Harvey, LA to remain in the closed-to-
navigation position to marine traffic for maintenance and component
replacement activities over two separate seven-day periods. The bascule
span drawbridge has a vertical clearance of 45 feet above mean high
water in the closed-to-navigation position.
    The current operating schedule is set out in 33 CFR 117.451(a).
This temporary deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-
navigation position from 6 a.m. on July 23, 2018 through 6 a.m. on July
30, 2018, and from 6 a.m. on August 6, 2018 through 6 a.m. on August
13, 2018. This temporary deviation is necessary in order to replace the
motors and brakes necessary for the operation of the bridge.
    Navigation on the waterway consists mainly of tugs with tows, with
some commercial fishing vessels and recreational craft. Vessels able to
pass through the bridge in the closed to navigation position may do so
at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies during
these repairs. However, an alternate route is available via the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway Algiers Alternate Route. The Coast Guard will
also inform the waterway users of the change in operating schedule for
the bridge through our Local Notice and Broadcast Notices to Mariners
so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any
impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of each of the
effective time periods. This deviation from the operating regulations
is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: June 19, 2018.
Douglas A. Blakemore,
Bridge Administrator, U.S. Coast Guard Eighth District.
[FR Doc. 2018-13517 Filed 6-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 44 (Monday, March 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 10554]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4868]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Dakota, Missouri Valley & Western Railroad

[Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-2009-0091]

    The Dakota, Missouri Valley & Western Railroad (DMVW) hereby
petitions FRA for a waiver from replacing rails with rail end vertical
split head type defects 4'' or less in size. These defects are rail
ends only and are confined within the area of the joint bars. These
rails are located on Class I track and the train speed is 10 mph. The
line does not have passenger service. DMVW will inspect these defects
with their normal inspections but will not note each one separately.
    Besides the elevators, DMVW serves the Coal Creek Power Station who
provides power for eastern North Dakota, and much of Minnesota. DMVW
also serves the Blue Flint Ethanol Plant which provides alternative
fuel sources.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2009-0091) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 3, 2010.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-4868 Filed 3-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 61 (Monday, March 30, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17507-17509]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06502]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 61 / Monday, March 30, 2020 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0209; Product Identifier 2020-NM-004-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Kidde Aerospace & Defense

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for Kidde Aerospace & Defense cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles
installed on various transport category airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by a report indicating that certain cargo fire extinguisher
halon bottles installed in the cargo compartment had low charge
pressure. This proposed AD would require an inspection to determine the
part number and serial number of the cargo fire extinguisher halon
bottles and replacement of affected parts with serviceable parts. 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 May 14,
2020.

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 Boeing service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. For
Kidde Aerospace & Defense service information identified in this NPRM
contact Kidde Aerospace & Defense, 4200 Airport Drive NW, Building B,
Wilson, NC 27896-8630; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; http://www.Kiddetechnologies.com/aviation. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th
St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0209; 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 regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel Belete, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Atlanta ACO Branch, 1701 Columbia
Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<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 the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-0209;
Product Identifier 2020-NM-004-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The FAA has received a report indicating that certain cargo fire
extinguisher halon bottles installed in the cargo compartment had low
charge pressure. An investigation revealed that a procedural change at
the manufacturer of the cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles resulted
in cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles being produced with lower than
required pressure. Indication of the low bottle pressure may not occur
until the bottles have been agitated from in-service use and a warning
is displayed in the flight deck. Low charge pressure of a cargo fire
extinguisher halon bottle installed in the cargo compartment, if not
addressed, could result in insufficient halon concentrations to
extinguish a fire in the cargo compartment.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed the following Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletins.
This service information describes procedures for an inspection to
determine the serial number of the cargo fire extinguisher halon bottle
having a certain part number and replacing affected parts with
serviceable parts. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different airplane models.
     Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-26A1150 RB, dated
September 27, 2019.
     Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-26A1151 RB, dated
September 27, 2019.
    The FAA reviewed the following Kidde Aerospace & Defense service
information. This service information describes, among other actions,
procedures for replacing affected fire extinguishers (referred to as
``cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles'' in this proposed AD) with
serviceable parts. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different airplane models.
     Service Bulletin 473919-26-521, Rev 02, dated November 7,
2019.
     Service Bulletin 473957-26-518, Rev 02, dated November 4,
2019.
    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

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service
Information.'' For information on the procedures, see this service
information at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0209.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    The Kidde Aerospace & Defense service information specifies a
compliance time of 12 months to accomplish the replacement. The Boeing
service information specifies a compliance time of 24 months to
accomplish the replacement. In developing an appropriate compliance
time for this action, we considered the urgency associated with the
subject unsafe condition, the availability of required parts, and the
practical aspect of accomplishing the required replacement within a
period of time that corresponds to the normal scheduled maintenance for
most affected operators. In light of these items, we have determined
that a 24-month compliance time is appropriate.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 3,308 appliances
installed on, but not limited to, the transport category airplanes
identified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (vii) of this AD. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection..........................  2 work-hour x $85 per                $0             $170         $562,360
                                       hour = $170.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection.
We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need
replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement..................................  4 work-hours x $85 per hour =           $25,305          $25,645
                                                $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles
manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this proposed AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all known costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The 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 (AD):

Transport Category Airplanes: Docket No. FAA-2020-0209; Product
Identifier 2020-NM-004-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by May 14, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to the Kidde Aerospace & Defense cargo fire
extinguisher halon bottles having part numbers and serial numbers
identified in Table 1 of the service

information identified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this AD.
    (i) Kidde Aerospace & Defense Service Bulletin 473957-26-518,
Rev 02, dated November 4, 2019
    (ii) Kidde Aerospace & Defense Service Bulletin 473919-26-521,
Rev 02, dated November 7, 2019.
    (2) These affected cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles are
installed on various transport category airplanes including, but not
limited to, the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through
(vii) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (i) Airbus Canada Limited Partnership (type certificate
previously held by C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership (CSALP);
Bombardier, Inc.) Model BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11 airplanes.
    (ii) Airbus SAS Model A330-200 and A330-300 series airplanes.
    (iii) The Boeing Company Model DC-9-81 (MD-81) airplanes, and
Model 737 series airplanes.
    (iv) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series
100 & 440) airplanes, Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701 & 702) airplanes, and Model CL-600-2C11 (Regional Jet Series
550) airplanes.
    (v) De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (type certificate
previously held by Bombardier, Inc.) Model DHC-8-400 series
airplanes.
    (vi) Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170-100 STD airplanes, and Model ERJ
190-100 STD, -300, and -400 airplanes.
    (vii) Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (formerly known as Saab AB, Saab
Aeronautics) Model SAAB 2000 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 26, Fire
protection.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that certain cargo
fire extinguisher halon bottles had low charge pressure. Low charge
pressure of a cargo fire extinguisher halon bottle installed in the
cargo compartment, if not addressed, could result in insufficient
halon concentrations to extinguish a fire in the cargo compartment.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definitions

    For this AD, the definitions specified in paragraphs (g)(1)
through (3) of this AD apply.
    (1) Group 1: Boeing Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes, and Model
737-700, 737-800, and 737-900ER series airplanes.
    (2) Group 2: Transport category airplanes other than those
identified as group 1.
    (3) Affected part: A cargo fire extinguisher halon bottle,
manufactured by Kidde Aerospace & Defense, having a part number and
serial number that is identified in the service information
identified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this AD.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g)(3):  The terms ``cargo fire extinguisher
halon bottles'' and ``fire extinguishers'' are used interchangeably
in this AD and the service information identified in paragraphs
(c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this AD and in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) and (ii)
of this AD.

(h) Inspection

    Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, do an
inspection to determine the part number and serial number of the
cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles installed in the cargo
compartment. A review of maintenance records can be done in lieu of
the inspection provided the part number and serial number of the
cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles can be conclusively determined
from that review.

(i) Replacement

    If, during the inspection or records review required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, it is determined that an affected part, as
identified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, is installed, before
further flight, replace the part with a serviceable part in
accordance with the applicable service information identified in
paragraph (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD.
    (1) For group 1 airplanes as identified in paragraph (g)(1) of
this AD: The Accomplishment Instructions of the service information
identified in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this AD, or the service
information identified in paragraph (i)(1)(i) or (ii) of this AD, as
applicable.
    (i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-26A1150 RB, dated
September 27, 2019.
    (ii) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-26A1151 RB, dated
September 27, 2019.
    (2) For group 2 airplanes as identified in paragraph (g)(2) of
this AD: The Accomplishment Instructions of the service information
identified in paragraph (c)(1)(i) or (ii) of this AD, as applicable.

(j) Parts Installation Limitation

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install on
any airplane an affected part as identified in paragraph (g)(3) of
this AD unless that part has a circled letter ``G'' stamped at a
distance of approximately one inch from the left edge of the
placard, indicating that the cargo fire extinguisher halon bottle
has been tested and refilled.

(k) Special Flight Permit

    If low pressure is detected or a warning is displayed in the
flight deck, special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 to operate the airplane to a location where
the cargo fire extinguisher halon bottles can be replaced or
modified.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta 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 (m)(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.
    (3) For service information that contains steps that are labeled
as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs
(l)(3)(i) and (ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Samuel Belete,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Atlanta ACO
Branch, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone: 404-
474-5580; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. For Kidde Aerospace & Defense service
information identified in this AD, contact Kidde Aerospace &
Defense, 4200 Airport Drive NW, Building B, Wilson, NC 27896-8630;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; http://www.Kiddetechnologies.com/aviation.
You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.

    Issued on March 23, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-06502 Filed 3-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 75 (Thursday, April 18, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16214-16216]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07715]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0496; FRL-9992-43-Region 5]

Air Plan Disapproval; Wisconsin; Redesignation Request for the
Wisconsin Portion of the Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin
Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is disapproving an
August 15, 2016 request from Wisconsin to redesignate the Wisconsin
portion of the Chicago-Naperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin (IL-IN-
WI) ozone nonattainment area (Chicago nonattainment area) to attainment
of the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or
standard), because the area is violating the standard with 2015-2017
monitoring data. EPA is also disapproving Wisconsin's maintenance plan
and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs), submitted with the State's
redesignation request, since approval of these State Implementation
Plan (SIP) components is contingent on attainment of the ozone
standard. The Chicago area includes Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry
and Will Counties, Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County,
and Oswego Township in Kendall County in Illinois; Lake and Porter
Counties in Indiana; and the area east of and including the corridor of
Interstate 94 in Kenosha County, Wisconsin.

DATES: This final rule is effective May 20, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0496. All documents in the docket are listed in

the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either through
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. What is the background for this action?

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in EPA's
February 15, 2019 proposed rule (84 FR 4426). In that proposed
rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50, the 2008
ozone standard is violated when the three-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour ozone concentrations at any
monitoring site in the subject area is greater than 0.075 parts per
million parts of air (ppm). See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012) for further
information regarding area designations for the 2008 ozone standard and
77 FR 34221 (June 11, 2012) for information regarding the designation
of the Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI area for the 2008 ozone standard.
See 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P to 40 CFR part 50 regarding the ozone
data requirements for a determination of whether an area has attained
the 2008 ozone standard. Under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA), EPA may redesignate a nonattainment area (or a portion
thereof) to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are
available to demonstrate that the nonattainment area as a whole has
attained the standard and if all other requirements of section
107(d)(3)(E) have been met.
    Wisconsin submitted a request for the redesignation of the
Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area to attainment of
the 2008 ozone standard on August 15, 2016. The redesignation request
included summarized ozone data for all monitors in the Chicago-
Naperville, IL-IN-WI ozone nonattainment area along with other
information specific to Kenosha County to demonstrate that all
requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA have been satisfied.
The February 15, 2019 proposed disapproval provides a detailed
discussion of the ozone data for the period of 2013 through 2017 (see
table 1 in the February 15, 2019 proposed rule at 84 FR 4428), which
show a violation of the 2008 ozone standard in the Chicago area based
on current, quality-assured ozone data. The proposal also notes that
preliminary monitoring data for 2018 indicate that the Chicago
nonattainment area will continue to violate the standard when that data
is considered. It does not, however, discuss in detail other components
of Wisconsin's submittal because EPA believes that Wisconsin failed to
meet the most basic requirement for redesignation, a demonstration that
the Chicago ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 ozone
standard. We proposed to disapprove Wisconsin's ozone redesignation
request based on the violation of the 2008 ozone standard and proposed
to disapprove Wisconsin's maintenance plan and MVEBs since approval of
these SIP components is contingent on attainment of the ozone standard.

II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?

    EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period for the February
15, 2019, proposed rule. The comment period ended on March 18, 2019. We
received one comment in support of EPA's proposed action. We received
no adverse comments on the proposed rule.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    Based on the above and the information contained in EPA's proposed
rule, EPA is disapproving Wisconsin's August 15, 2016 request to
redesignate the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago nonattainment area to
attainment of the 2008 ozone standard, because the Chicago
nonattainment area continues to violate this standard based on the most
recent three years of quality-assured, certified air quality monitoring
data. Because this area continues to violate the 2008 ozone NAAQS, we
are also disapproving the ozone maintenance plan and MVEBs included in
the State's submittal.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is not a
``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs

    This action is an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because
this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely proposes to disapprove state law as not meeting
Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule proposes to disapprove pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty
beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This action merely proposes to disapprove a state rule, and
does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA.

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it proposes to disapprove a state rule.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this action. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve or disapprove state choices, based on the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this action merely disapproves certain state requirements
for inclusion into the SIP under section 110 and subchapter I, part D
of the CAA and will not in-and-of itself create any new requirements.
Accordingly, it does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898.

Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 17, 2019. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 4, 2019.
Cheryl L. Newton,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

0
2. Section 52.2585 is amended by adding paragraph (gg) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2585  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (gg) Disapproval--EPA is disapproving Wisconsin's August 15, 2016,
ozone redesignation request for the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago-
Naperville, IL-IN-WI nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone standard.
EPA is also disapproving Wisconsin's maintenance plan and motor vehicle
emission budgets submitted with the redesignation request.

[FR Doc. 2019-07715 Filed 4-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P