[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69099-69102]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22174]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1989; Project Identifier AD-2023-00512-E]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines, LLC Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain International Aero Engines, LLC (IAE) Model PW1124G1-JM,
PW1127G-JM, PW1127GA-JM, PW1129G-JM, PW1130G-JM, PW1133G-JM, and
PW1133GA-JM engines. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that
certain high-pressure compressor (HPC) 2nd stage rotors and HPC 4th
stage rotors have potentially degraded knife-edge seals and abrasive
coating of the rear wing 4th stage rotor due to having been cleaned in
alkaline solution without masking the knife-edge seal coating.
Operating in this condition could result in material degradation and
fracture of the HPC 2nd stage rotor and HPC 4th stage rotor. This
proposed AD would require replacement of certain HPC 2nd stage rotors
and HPC 4th stage rotors. 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 November
20, 2023.

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 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.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2023-1989; 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, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For Pratt & Whitney service information identified in this
NPRM, contact International Aero Engines, LLC, 400 Main Street, East
Hartford, CT 06118; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected];
website: connect.prattwhitney.com.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Taylor, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; phone: (781) 238-
7229; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-1989; Project Identifier
AD-2023-00512-E'' 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
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 Mark
Taylor, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des
Moines, WA 98198. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA was notified that on certain IAE Model PW1124G1-JM,
PW1127G-JM, PW1127GA-JM, PW1129G-JM, PW1130G-JM, PW1133G-JM, and
PW1133GA-JM engines, a batch of HPC 2nd stage rotors and HPC 4th stage
rotors could have degraded knife-edge seals and abrasive coating on the
rear wing 4th stage rotor due to having been cleaned in alkaline
solution without masking the knife-edge seal coating. Operating in this
condition could result in material degradation and fracture of the HPC
2nd stage rotor and HPC 4th stage rotor. This condition, if not
addressed, could result in uncontained part release or dual-engine
shutdown, damage to the engine, damage to the airplane, and loss of the
airplane.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletin (SB) PW1000G-C-
72-00-0208-00A-930A-D, Issue 001, dated September 13, 2022. This
service information identifies the affected HPC 2nd stage rotors and
HPC 4th stage rotors and specifies procedures for inspection and repair
of the HPC 2nd stage rotors and HPC 4th stage rotors. 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 ADDRESSES.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require replacement of the affected HPC 2nd
stage rotor and HPC 4th stage rotor with parts eligible for
installation.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 6 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA
estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace HPC 2nd stage rotor and HPC   73 work-hours x $85 per              $0           $6,205          $37,230
 4th stage rotor with repaired parts.  hour = $6,205.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Operators may choose to use new parts instead of repaired parts to
comply with this proposed AD. For replacement with new parts, the FAA
estimates the following costs:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace HPC 2nd stage rotor...................  32 work-hours x $85 per hour =          $312,000        $314,720
                                                 $2,720.
Replace HPC 4th stage rotor...................  32 work-hours x $85 per hour =           244,000         246,720
                                                 $2,720.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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:

International Aero Engines, LLC: Docket No. FAA-2023-1989; Project
Identifier AD-2023-00512-E.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by November 20, 2023.

 (b) Affected ADs

    None.

 (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to International Aero Engines, LLC Model
PW1124G1-JM, PW1127G-JM, PW1127GA-JM, PW1129G-JM, PW1130G-JM,
PW1133G-JM, and PW1133GA-JM engines having a high-pressure
compressor (HPC) 2nd stage rotor or HPC 4th stage rotor having a
part number and serial number identified in the Applicability, Table
2, of Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletin (SB) PW1000G-C-72-00-0208-
00A-930A-D, Issue 001, dated September 13, 2022 (Pratt & Whitney SB
PW1000G-C-72-00-0208-00A-930A-D).

 (d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7230, Turbine Engine
Compressor Section.

 (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that certain HPC 2nd stage
rotors and HPC 4th stage rotors have potentially degraded knife-edge
seals and abrasive coating of the rear wing 4th stage rotor due to
having been cleaned in alkaline solution without masking the knife-
edge seal coating. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent material
degradation and fracture of the HPC 2nd stage rotor and HPC 4th
stage rotor. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
uncontained part release or dual-engine shutdown, damage to engine,
damage to airplane, and loss of the airplane.

 (f) Compliance

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

 (g) Required Actions

    (1) At the next engine shop visit after the effective date of
this AD, remove the HPC 2nd stage rotor having a part number and
serial number identified in the Applicability, Table 2, of Pratt &
Whitney SB PW1000G-C-72-00-0208-00A-930A-D and replace with a part
eligible for installation.
    (2) At the next engine shop visit after the effective date of
this AD, remove the HPC 4th stage rotor having a part number and
serial number identified in the Applicability, Table 2, of Pratt &
Whitney SB PW1000G-C-72-00-0208-00A-930A-D and replace with a part
eligible for installation.

 (h) Definitions

    (1) For the purposes of this AD, a ``part eligible for
installation'' is:
    (i) Any HPC 2nd stage rotor or HPC 4th stage rotor, as
applicable, that does not have a part number and serial number
identified in the Applicability, Table 2, of Pratt & Whitney SB
PW1000G-C-72-00-0208-00A-930A-D; or
    (ii) Any HPC 2nd stage rotor or HPC 4th stage rotor, as
applicable, that has incorporated Pratt & Whitney SB PW1000G-C-72-
00-0208-00A-930A-D.
    (2) For the purposes of this AD, an engine shop visit is the
induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the
separation of the ``H'' flange.

 (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, AIR-520 Continued Operational Safety 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 AIR-520 Continued
Operational Safety Branch, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (j) of this AD and email to: [email protected].
    (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

    For more information about this AD, contact Mark Taylor,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines,
WA 98198; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

 (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) Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletin PW1000G-C-72-00-0208-00A-
930A-D, Issue 001, dated September 13, 2022.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For Pratt & Whitney service information identified in this
AD, contact International Aero Engines, LLC, 400 Main Street, East
Hartford, CT 06118; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected];
website: connect.prattwhitney.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety 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, email: [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on September 29, 2023.
Victor Wicklund,
Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-22174 Filed 10-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                                 Attachment E

     Work Sheets used to Calculate EPA and Federal Government Labor Costs
This attachment is available as part of the electronic docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0749 and is part of the ICR's Supporting Statement

NAICS: 999100
Federal Executive Branch
Labor Category:
Formula
                                  Managerial
                                   Technical
                                   Clerical
Unloaded Hourly Rate1
 = W
                                    $63.67
                                    $42.00
                                    $23.24
Benefits Percentage2
Lb = B/W
                                     44.9%
                                     44.9%
                                     44.9%
Benefits per hour
B = W*Lb
                                    $28.60
                                    $18.86
                                    $10.44
Loaded Hourly Rate
Wb = W + B = W(1+Lb)
                                    $92.27
                                    $60.86
                                    $33.68
Overhead Percentage3
Lo = OH/Wb
                                      50%
                                      50%
                                      50%
Overhead per hour
OH = Wb*Lo
                                    $46.13
                                    $30.43
                                    $16.84
Fully Loaded Hourly Rate
Wf = Wb + OH
 = W + B + OH
                                   $138.40
                                    $91.30
                                    $50.52
1.  Data Source:  BLS http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999100.htm     May 2020 data
     NAICS  999100 -  Federal Executive Branch
     Standard Occupational Codes:
       Management:   11-0000, Management Occupations
       Technical:        19-0000, Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations
       Clerical:           43-0000, Office and Administrative Support Occupations
2. Fringe benefits/wage per hour.
3. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual, Sixth Edition, EPA-452-02-001, January 2002, pg. 2-34.  The loading for indirect costs is within the range of 20-70% of the load labor rate (wage + benefits) suggested in EPA guidance.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 88 (Monday, May 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24951-24956]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09776]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91748; File No. SR-MEMX-2021-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MEMX LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to the
Handling of Displayed Odd Lot Orders and Non-Displayed Orders That
Become Locked or Crossed

May 4, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 30, 2021, MEMX LLC (``MEMX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-
controversial'' proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
related to: (1) The handling of a Limit Order of Odd Lot size with a
Displayed instruction that is resting on the MEMX Book and subsequently
becomes locked or crossed by an away Trading Center's Protected
Quotation; and (2) the handling of a Limit Order with a Non-Displayed
instruction that is resting on the MEMX Book and subsequently becomes
crossed by an away Trading Center's Protected Quotation.\5\ The text of
the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ All terms as further defined below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
Introduction
    The Exchange proposes to make changes to the Exchange's Rules
related to the handling of a Limit Order \6\ of Odd Lot \7\ size with a
Displayed \8\ instruction (a ``Displayed Odd Lot Order'') that is
resting on the MEMX Book \9\ and subsequently becomes locked or crossed
by an away Trading Center's \10\ Protected Quotation.\11\ In addition,
the Exchange proposes to make changes to the Exchange's Rules related
to the handling of a Limit Order with a Non-Displayed \12\ instruction
(a ``Non-Displayed Order'') that is resting on the MEMX Book and
subsequently becomes crossed by an away Trading Center's Protected
Quotation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Limit Orders are described in Exchange Rule 11.8(b) and
generally defined as an order to buy or sell a stated amount of a
security at a specified price or better.
    \7\ The term ``Odd Lot'' refers to any amount less than a Round
Lot. Orders of Odd Lot size are only eligible to be Protected
Quotations if aggregated to form a Round Lot. The term ``Round Lot''
refers to one hundred (100) shares or any multiple thereof, unless
an alternative number of shares is established as a Round Lot by the
listing exchange for the security. Orders that are a Round Lot are
eligible to be Protected Quotations. See Exchange Rule 11.6(q).
    \8\ The term ``Displayed'' refers to an instruction a User may
attach to an order stating that the order is to be displayed by the
System on the MEMX Book. See Exchange Rule 11.6(c)(1).
    \9\ The term ``MEMX Book'' refers to the System's electronic
file of orders. See Exchange Rule 1.5(q). The term ``System'' refers
to the electronic communications and trading facility designated by
the Board through which securities orders of Users are consolidated
for ranking, execution and, when applicable, routing. See Exchange
Rule 1.5(gg). The term ``User'' refers to any Member or Sponsored
Participant who is authorized to obtain access to the System. See
Exchange Rule 1.5(jj).
    \10\ The term ``Trading Center'' refers to other securities
exchanges, facilities of securities exchanges, automated trading
systems, electronic communications networks or other brokers or
dealers.
    \11\ The term ``Protected Quotation'' refers to a quotation that
is a Protected Bid or Protected Offer. The term ``Protected Bid'' or
``Protected Offer'' refers to 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. See Exchange Rule 1.5(z).
    \12\ The term ``Non-Displayed'' refers to an instruction a User
may attach to an order stating that the order is not to be displayed
by the System on the MEMX Book. See Exchange Rule 11.6(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's Rules currently describe all functionality with
respect to orders of Round Lot, Mixed Lot and Odd Lot size without
distinction because the Exchange generally handles these orders the
same. However, the Exchange's System currently handles Displayed Odd
Lot Orders differently than other orders in specific market
circumstances, as described below. The Exchange proposes to codify this
behavior as set forth in proposed Rules 11.6(j) and 11.8(b)(8). In
addition, the Exchange proposes a change to current functionality with
respect to orders with an Odd Lot size and orders with a Non-Displayed
instruction that are eligible to be routed, as further described below.

Displayed Odd Lot Orders
    Currently, when an away Trading Center publishes a Protected
Quotation that locks or crosses the displayed price of a Displayed Odd
Lot Order and the Exchange does not have a Protected Quotation
displayed at such price, such order will be cancelled by the System
unless such order contains a multiple price sliding instruction, in
which case such order will be re-priced pursuant to Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A).
The Exchange proposes to add language to this effect to Rule
11.8(b)(8), which currently addresses the handling of Limit Orders in
certain circumstances where such orders would cross Protected
Quotations of other Trading Centers. As proposed, under Rule
11.8(b)(8), when an away Trading Center publishes a Protected Quotation
that locks or crosses the displayed price of a resting Limit Order of
Odd Lot size with a Displayed instruction and the Exchange does not
have a Protected Quotation displayed at such price, such order will be
cancelled by the System unless such order contains a multiple price
sliding instruction, in which case such order will be re-priced
pursuant to Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A), or the order is routed, as described
below. The Exchange also proposes to rename Rule 11.8(b)(8) as ``Locked
or Crossed Market.''
    In addition to the changes described above with respect to Rule
11.8(b)(8), the Exchange proposes to codify the re-pricing
functionality applied to Displayed Odd Lot Orders with a multiple price
sliding instruction that are subsequently locked or crossed by other
Trading Centers. As background, the Exchange currently offers price
sliding functionality that allows display-eligible orders to be
permissibly ranked and displayed in accordance with Regulation NMS.
Pursuant to this price sliding functionality, an order that would be a
Locking or Crossing Quotation of an away Trading Center if displayed by
the System on the MEMX Book at the time of entry will be ranked at the
Locking Price in the MEMX Book (i.e., executable at that price but not
displayed) and displayed by the System one Minimum Price Variation away
(i.e., lower for a bid or higher for an offer).\13\ In turn, once an
order has been permissibly displayed by the System, such order will
generally only be re-ranked and re-displayed to the extent it achieves
a more aggressive price.\14\ In other words, once an order is displayed
on the MEMX Book it will stand its ground and not be re-priced to a
less aggressive price even if other Trading Centers publish Protected
Quotations that lock or cross its displayed price, except in two
circumstances described below; one of these circumstances is already
described in MEMX Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A)(ii) and the other circumstance the
Exchange proposes to codify in such Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See MEMX Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A)(i).
    \14\ See MEMX Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A)(ii) (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As currently set forth in Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A)(ii), the Exchange will
re-price an order resting on the MEMX Book that is subject to display-
price sliding when an away Trading Center publishes a Protected
Quotation at a price that locks or crosses such order's displayed
price. In such circumstance, the Exchange will re-rank the order
subject to display-price sliding so that the order's ranked price is
the same price as the displayed price. The Exchange re-ranks an order
to a less aggressive price in this circumstance to avoid potentially
trading through a Protected Quotation displayed by another Trading
Center (i.e., the ranked price, which is not displayed and not
permitted to stand its ground, is changed to a less aggressive price to
be the same price as the displayed price).
    In addition to the exception set forth in Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A)(ii)
described above, the Exchange also currently re-prices a Displayed Odd
Lot Order with a multiple price sliding instruction to a less
aggressive price when the Exchange is not displaying a Protected
Quotation at the displayed price of such order and such order's
displayed price is locked or crossed by a Protected Quotation published
by an away Trading Center. Specifically, when an away Trading Center
publishes a Protected Quotation that locks or crosses the displayed
price of a resting Displayed Odd Lot Order with a multiple price
sliding instruction and the Exchange does not have a Protected
Quotation displayed at such order's displayed price, the resting
Displayed Odd Lot Order is re-ranked at the Locking Price in the MEMX
Book and re-displayed by the System at one Minimum Price Variation
lower (higher) than the Locking Price for orders to buy (sell). The
Exchange proposes to codify this behavior through both the proposed
amendment to Rule 11.8(b)(8), discussed above, and a proposed amendment
to Rule 11.6(j)(1)(A)(ii).
    The final codification of existing behavior proposed by the
Exchange relates to the Exchange's handling of a Displayed Odd Lot
Order subject to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO that is subsequently locked
or crossed. As set forth in Rule 11.6(j)(2)(A), the Exchange cancels
any order with a Non-Displayed instruction subject to Rule 201 of
Regulation SHO when the NBB changes such that the order would be a
Locking Quotation or Crossing Quotation. Because Displayed Odd Lot
Orders are displayed on the Exchange's proprietary data feed but not on
the consolidated market data feeds, the Exchange applies this same
logic to Displayed Odd Lot Orders when such orders are subject to Rule
201 of Regulation SHO (i.e., marked short and a Short Sale Circuit
Breaker is in effect). Accordingly, the Exchange cancels any Displayed
Odd Lot Order subject to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO when the NBB locks
or crosses the price of such an order and proposes to add language to
this effect to Rule 11.6(j)(2)(A) to codify this behavior.
    In addition to codifying the current functionality regarding the
handling of Displayed Odd Lot Orders that are locked or crossed by
other Trading Centers as described above, the Exchange proposes to add
functionality to route such orders in this circumstance to the extent
the orders are eligible to be routed. Based on the proposed amendment
to Rule 11.8(b)(8), when a Displayed Odd Lot Order is locked or crossed
by a Protected Quotation published by another Trading Center and such
order is eligible for routing such order will be routed according to
the User's instructions. The Exchange believes that a User that has
originally designated an order as a routable order (thus willing to
remove liquidity from an away Trading Center on entry), instead of
having an order of Odd Lot size canceled or price slid, would prefer to
have such order routed if it is subsequently locked or crossed by a
Protected Quotation published by another Trading Center.
Examples
    The below examples illustrate the proposed behavior for a Displayed
Odd Lot Order.
    Assume the National Best Bid and Offer (``NBBO'') is $10.00 by
$10.10. An order to sell 5 shares of security ABC is displayed on the
MEMX Book at $10.07 (``Order 1''). Order 1 has a Short Sale
instruction, however, security ABC is not currently subject to a Short
Sale Circuit Breaker pursuant to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO. There are
no other orders to buy or sell security ABC resting on the MEMX Book.
An away Trading Center publishes a Protected Bid to buy 100 shares of
security ABC at $10.08, thus updating the NBBO to $10.08 by $10.10. The
handling of Order 1 will depend on the User's instructions for the
order, with three potential outcomes:
     If Order 1 has a multiple price sliding instruction, then
the order will

be re-priced and ranked to sell at $10.08 and re-displayed at $10.09.
     If Order 1 is eligible for routing, then the order will be
routed with a limit price of $10.07 to attempt to execute against the
Protected Bid displayed at $10.08 by the away Trading Center.
     If Order 1 does not have a multiple price sliding
instruction and is ineligible for routing, then the order will be
cancelled.
    Assume the same example as above, however, instead assume that
security ABC is currently subject to a Short Sale Circuit Breaker
pursuant to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO. If an away Trading Center
publishes a Protected Bid to buy 100 shares of security ABC at $10.08,
thus updating the NBBO to $10.08 by $10.10, Order 1 will be cancelled.
This outcome is the same even if such order has a multiple price
sliding instruction or was submitted as a routable order.
Non-Displayed Orders
    As set forth in current Rule 11.8(b)(8), when a Non-Displayed Order
would be a Crossing Quotation if displayed at the price at which it is
ranked (i.e., when an away Trading Center publishes a Protected
Quotation that crosses the ranked price of such an order), the Exchange
cancels such order in order to prevent a trade-through that would occur
if such order were instead executed at its ranked price. The Exchange
proposes to maintain this behavior for Non-Displayed Orders (including
orders of Round Lot, Mixed Lot and Odd Lot size) that are not routable;
however, consistent with the proposed change above regarding routable
Displayed Odd Lot Orders, the Exchange proposes to route a Non-
Displayed Order in such circumstance if the order is routable.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.8(b)(8) so that a
Non-Displayed Order that is eligible for routing will route according
to a User's instructions when such order would be a Crossing Quotation
of another Trading Center. As is the case today, if a Non-Displayed
Order is not eligible for routing and an away Trading Center publishes
a Protected Quotation that crosses the ranked price of such order, the
order will be canceled.
Examples
    The below examples illustrate the proposed behavior for a Non-
Displayed Order.
    Again, assume the National Best Bid and Offer (``NBBO'') is $10.00
by $10.10. An order to sell 100 shares of security ABC is resting non-
displayed on the MEMX Book at $10.07 (``Order 2''). Order 2 has a Short
Sale instruction, however, security ABC is not currently subject to a
Short Sale Circuit Breaker pursuant to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.
There are no other orders to buy or sell security ABC resting on the
MEMX Book. An away Trading Center publishes a Protected Bid to buy 100
shares of security ABC at $10.08, thus updating the NBBO to $10.08 by
$10.10. The handling of Order 2 will depend on the User's instructions
for the order, with two potential outcomes:
     If Order 2 is eligible for routing, then the order will be
routed with a limit price of $10.07 to attempt to execute against the
Protected Bid displayed at $10.08 by the away Trading Center.
     If Order 2 is ineligible for routing, then the order will
be cancelled.
    Assume the same example as above, however that security ABC is
currently subject to a Short Sale Circuit Breaker pursuant to Rule 201
of Regulation SHO. If an away Trading Center publishes a Protected Bid
to buy 100 shares of security ABC at $10.08, thus updating the NBBO to
$10.08 by $10.10, Order 2 will be cancelled. This outcome is the same
even if such order was submitted as a routable order.
Additional Discussion
    The Exchange has implemented its System functionality in order to
maintain compliance with Regulation NMS, Regulation SHO and other
applicable regulations. The functionality described above, both current
and proposed, is designed to ensure that the Exchange does not display
quotations that would lock or cross Protected Quotations of other
Trading Centers nor maintain orders at price levels at which, if
executed, would trade through Protected Quotations (or at the NBB in
the context of an order subject to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO).
Although the exact treatment of orders of Odd Lot size described above
is not explicitly required by these regulations, and indeed the
Exchange could have adopted a different implementation with respect to
certain points, the Exchange does believe that its implementation is
consistent with such regulations and the Act, generally. In particular,
although Displayed Odd Lot Orders are technically displayed by the
System and thus can be accessed by market participants, such orders are
not Protected Quotations and are not displayed on consolidated market
data feeds. As such, the Exchange's current implementation that it is
proposing to codify treats such orders in certain ways similar to the
manner in which the Exchange handles Non-Displayed Orders. Further, the
Exchange believes that its proposed new functionality with respect to
routing proposes sufficient optionality for Users of the Exchange to
determine how they wish to have their Displayed Odd Lot Orders handled
in the event such orders are locked or crossed by a Protected Quotation
published by an away Trading Center. In particular, by offering the
ability to either be canceled, re-priced or routed away from the
Exchange, the Exchange believes that Users will be able to select their
preferred order handling. The Exchange similarly believes that its
proposed new functionality with respect to routing Non-Displayed Orders
would enable Users to select their preferred order handling with
respect to such orders when an away Trading Center publishes a
Protected Quotation that crosses the ranked price of such an order.
    Based on a review of the current rules of other exchanges, certain
aspects of the Exchange's current handling of Displayed Odd Lot Orders
is unique and some exchanges allow such orders to stand their ground
when an odd lot order is crossed by a Protected Quotation published by
another Trading Center.\15\ However, other exchanges have previously
maintained similar functionality to instead cancel, route or re-price
odd lot orders in such a circumstance. For instance, the Chicago Stock
Exchange (``CHX'') previously offered functionality approved by the
Commission that, like the Exchange's proposed functionality, treated
odd lot orders and unexecuted odd lot remainders in a manner similar to
non-displayed orders when CHX had no displayed round lots at a
particular price level and thus allowed such orders to be cancelled or
routed away from CHX.\16\ Similarly, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Arca'')
previously maintained special functionality to re-price odd lot orders
when such orders were resting on the Arca order book based on changes
to the protected best bid and offer (``PBBO'').\17\

While the Exchange is not aware of another exchange that currently
cancels a Displayed Odd Lot Order subject to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO
when the NBB locks or crosses the price of such order, other exchanges
have implemented functionality to treat displayed odd lots the same way
that non-displayed orders are treated in the context of functionality
to comply with Regulation SHO.\18\ As described above, the Exchange
cancels a Displayed Odd Lot Order subject to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO
when the NBB locks or crosses the price of such an order to maintain
consistent functionality with that used to handle orders resting on the
MEMX Book with a Non-Displayed instruction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See, e.g., NYSE Rule 7.38, which states that round lot,
mixed lot and odd lot orders are treated in the same manner on NYSE,
and NYSE Rule 7.36(b)(4), which states that NYSE does not adjust the
display price of limit orders on NYSE that have been locked or
crossed.
    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60353 (July 21,
2009), 74 FR 37076 (July 27, 2009) (SR-CHX-2009-02) (Order Granting
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Related to the Rejection of
Undisplayed Odd-lot Orders from the Exchange's Matching System).
    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85265 (March 7,
2019), 84 FR 9175 (March 13, 2019) (SR-NYSEARCA-2019-08) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Changes to Amend
Certain Trading Rules including 7.38-E, relating to Odd Lots).
    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75467 (July 16,
2015), 80 FR 43515, 43521 (July 22, 2015) (SR-NYSEARCA-2015-58). In
describing proposed functionality to re-price sell short orders of
odd lot size in circumstances where round lot orders stand their
ground, the following description was used: ``because Rule 201
refers to displayed in the context of an order displayed via the
public data feeds, for the purposes of proposed Rule 7.16P the
Exchange proposes to process all sell short odd lot orders the same
as sell short orders that are ranked Priority 3--Non-Display Orders.
. . .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the proposed option to have a resting Displayed Odd
Lot Order or Non-Displayed Order that is locked and/or crossed by
another Trading Center, as applicable, routed to such Trading Center,
the Exchange notes that similar behavior is available on other
exchanges with a variety of options and other distinct
implementations.\19\ Thus, the Exchange believes that its proposed
implementation, allowing Displayed Odd Lot Orders and Non-Displayed
Orders to route away from the Exchange when locked and/or crossed by a
Protected Quotation published by an away Trading Center, is consistent
with such features currently offered by other exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See, e.g., Cboe EDGX Rule 11.6(n)(2), which defines the
``Super Aggressive'' instruction as an instruction that an EDGX user
may use to direct EDGX to route an order if an away Trading Center
locks or crosses the limit price of an order resting on EDGX;
further, the Super Aggressive instruction may be applied to routable
orders posted to the EDGX Book with remaining size of an Odd Lot.
See also Nasdaq Rules 4758(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (viii), which describe
two routing strategies that route orders (including displayed odd
lot orders and non-displayed orders) resting on the Nasdaq order
book when such orders are locked or crossed by an away market
center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \20\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \21\ in particular, in that it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes to the Exchange's Rules currently are designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. As set forth
above, the Exchange's Rules describe all functionality with respect to
orders of Round Lot, Mixed Lot and Odd Lot size without distinction
because the Exchange generally handles these orders the same. However,
in the specific circumstances set forth above, namely when an away
Trading Center has published a Protected Quotation that locks or
crosses the displayed price of a Displayed Odd Lot Order and the
Exchange does not have a Protected Quotation at such price, the
Exchange's implementation of logic to comply with Regulation NMS
results in the cancellation of such orders unless a User has selected a
multiple price sliding instruction, in which case an order is re-
priced. The Exchange proposes to codify this behavior in its Rules and
to adopt additional functionality that would route such an order that
is eligible for routing. Thus, the Exchange will offer three options to
Users with Displayed Odd Lot Orders on the MEMX Book. As is the case
today, such orders can be repriced pursuant to the Exchange's display-
price sliding logic (if entered with a multiple price sliding
instruction) or cancelled when locked or crossed by an away Trading
Center's Protected Quotation. In addition, the Exchange will offer
routing to such away Trading Center to the extent a User submitted a
routable order in the first instance. The Exchange believes that this
functionality enables Users to elect an order instruction consistent
with their intent to execute their orders in the marketplace. The
amended functionality would ensure executions at the best available
price displayed on another Trading Center, for an order to be returned
to a User or to remain on the MEMX Book pursuant to the Exchange's
display-price sliding functionality according to the User's
instructions. The Exchange notes that other exchanges have previously
maintained functionality specific to orders of odd lot size that
resulted in such orders being routed, cancelled or their price
adjusted.\22\ Finally, by limiting this aspect of the proposed change
to Displayed Odd Lot Orders that are locked or crossed by the Protected
Quotation published by an away Trading Center, the proposal retains
existing functionality with respect to the handling of all other orders
with a Displayed instruction and remains consistent with the Exchange's
general handling of Non-Displayed Orders. Although aspects of the
Exchange's implementation of order handling rules for odd lots that are
subsequently locked or crossed by a Protected Quotation published by an
away Trading Centers are unique compared to existing functionality on
other exchanges and the because prohibitions against both locked and
crossed markets and trade-throughs do not apply to odd lot orders,
pursuant to guidance published by Commission staff, exchanges are
permitted to establish their own rules for handling odd-lot orders and
the odd-lot portions of mixed-lot orders, and the Exchange believes its
implementation is consistent with such guidance and the applicable
regulations, generally.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra notes 16-18.
    \23\ See Response No. 7.03 in ``Responses to Frequently Asked
Questions Concerning Rule 611 and Rule 610 of Regulation NMS,''
Division of Trading and Markets, dated June 8, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes that routing orders away from the
Exchange, whether Displayed Odd Lot Orders or Non-Displayed Orders,
when such orders were routable upon initial entry to the Exchange and
such orders would otherwise be cancelled is consistent with the Act, as
it avoids unnecessary cancellations of orders that could instead be
executed by away Trading Centers. Further, as described above, the
Exchange notes that similar behavior is in place on other
exchanges.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See supra note 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons set forth above, the Exchange believes the proposal
promotes just and equitable principles of trade, fosters cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protects
investors and the public interest.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in

any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. On the contrary,
certain of the proposed changes are intended to codify current behavior
on the Exchange related to the Exchange's implementation of applicable
regulations and the other proposed changes are intended to provide
additional optionality to the User, including the routing of orders
that are already resting on the MEMX Book to away Trading Centers if
such orders were routable upon initial entry to the Exchange. Thus, to
the extent the change is intended to improve transparency regarding the
Exchange's handling of Displayed Odd Lot Orders, such proposal does not
have any direct impact on the competitive environment. The proposed
change to functionality on the Exchange that would route certain orders
resting on the MEMX Book is designed to encourage Users to direct their
orders to the Exchange, however, while the change is competitive, the
Exchange does not believe the proposed change will result in any burden
on intermarket competition as it is a minor change to already available
functionality. Further, the proposed new functionality is similar to
functionality offered by other exchanges and would also result in
additional volume on away Trading Centers instead of the Exchange, to
the extent such orders are executed when routed away from the Exchange.
The proposed changes to the Exchange's Rules also promote intramarket
competition because they will facilitate the execution of orders that
would otherwise remain unexecuted, thereby increasing the efficient
functioning of the Exchange. All participants on the Exchange can
utilize each of the potential features that will impact the handling of
their Displayed Odd Lot Orders and Non-Displayed Orders in the event
such orders are resting on the Exchange at a price that is subsequently
locked or crossed by a Protected Quotation displayed by an away Trading
Center. Therefore, the Exchange does not believe the proposed rule
change will result in any burden on intramarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \25\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\26\
Because the 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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \27\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4thereunder.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b-(3)(A).
    \28\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \29\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of its
filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \30\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative upon filing. The Exchange believes a waiver is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because, among other things, it would allow the Exchange to route
certain odd lot orders as soon as practicable, thus helping market
participants to obtain timely executions even if not on the Exchange.
The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the proposed rule change does not raise any new or novel
issues. Among other things, the proposed order handing functionalities
are similar to the past practices of other exchanges. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the
proposed rule change operative upon filing so that the benefits of this
proposed rule change can be realized immediately.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \31\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \32\ to determine whether the proposed rule change
should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-MEMX-2021-06 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-MEMX-2021-06. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
MEMX-2021-06 and should be submitted on or before June 1, 2021.

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

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-09776 Filed 5-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21557-21558]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8496]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9657-2]

Clean Water Act: Final Agency Action on 32 Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDLs) in Louisiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces final agency action on 32 TMDLs prepared
by EPA Region 6 for waters listed in Louisiana's, Lake Pontchartrain
Basin, under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Documents
from the administrative record file for the 32 TMDLs, including TMDL
calculations and responses to comments, may be viewed at www.epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/tmdl/index.htm. The administrative record file may
be examined by calling or writing Ms. Diane Smith at the address below.
Please contact Ms. Smith to schedule an inspection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Smith, Environmental Protection
Specialist, Water Quality Protection Division, U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445
Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202-2733,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1996, two Louisiana environmental groups,
the Sierra Club and Louisiana Environmental Action Network
(plaintiffs), filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against the EPA, styled
Sierra Club, et al. v. Clifford et al., No. 96-0527, (E.D. La.). Among
other claims, plaintiffs alleged that EPA failed to establish Louisiana
TMDLs in a timely manner. EPA established 32 of these TMDLs pursuant to
a consent decree entered in this lawsuit.

EPA Takes Final Agency Action on 32 TMDLs

    By this notice EPA is taking final agency action on the following
32 TMDLs on waters located within the Louisiana Lake Pontchartrain
Basin:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Subsegment                               Waterbody name                         Pollutant
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
040102..................................  Comite River--Wilson-Clinton Hwy to         Fecal Coliform
                                           entrance of White Bayou (East Baton Rouge
                                           Parish) (Scenic).
040103..................................  Comite River--Entrance of White Bayou to    Fecal Coliform.
                                           Amite River.
040201..................................  Bayou Manchac--Headwaters to Amite River..  Fecal Coliform.
040302..................................  Amite River--LA Hwy 37 to Amite River       Fecal Coliform.
                                           Diversion Canal.
040304..................................  Grays Creek--Headwaters to River Amite....  Fecal Coliform.
040305..................................  Colyell Creek System (includes Colyell      Fecal Coliform.
                                           Bay).
040503..................................  Natalbany River--Headwaters to Tickfaw      Fecal Coliform.
                                           River.
040504..................................  Yellow Water River--Origin to Ponchatoula   Fecal Coliform.
                                           Creek.
040505..................................  Ponchatoula Creek and Ponchatoula River...  Fecal Coliform.
040603..................................  Selsers Creek--Origin to South Slough.....  Fecal Coliform.
040703..................................  Big Creek and Tributaries--Headwaters to    Fecal Coliform.
                                           confluence with Tangipahoia River.
040909..................................  W-14 Main Diversion Canal--from its origin  Fecal Coliform.
                                           in the north end of the City of Slidell
                                           to its junction with Salt Bayou.
040910..................................  Salt Bayou--Headwaters to Lake              Fecal Coliform.
                                           Pontchartrain (Estuarine).

041302..................................  Lake Pontchartrain Drainage Canals........  Fecal Coliform.
041401..................................  New Orleans East Leveed Waterbodies         Fecal Coliform.
                                           (Estuarine).
040501..................................  Tickfaw River--From MS State Line to LA     TDS.
                                           Hwy 42 (Scenic).
040504..................................  Yellow Water River--Origin to Ponchatoula   TDS.
                                           Creek.
040301..................................  Amite River--MS State Line to LA Hwy 37     TSS.
                                           (Scenic).
040401..................................  Blind River--From Amite River Diversion     TSS.
                                           Canal to mouth at Lake Maurepas (Scenic).
040903..................................  Bayou Cane--Headwaters to U.S. Hwy 190      TSS.
                                           (Scenic).
040303..................................  Amite River--Amite River Diversion Canal    Mercury.
                                           to Lake Maurepas.
040401..................................  Blind River--From Amite River Diversion     Mercury.
                                           Canal to mouth at Lake Maurepas (Scenic).
040403..................................  Blind River--Source to confluence with      Mercury.
                                           Amite River Diversion Canal (Scenic).
040501..................................  Tickfaw River--From MS State Line to LA     Mercury.
                                           Hwy 42 (Scenic).
040701..................................  Tangipahoa River--MS State Line to          Mercury.
                                           Interstate Hwy 1-12 (Scenic).
040801..................................  Tchefuncte River and Tributaries--          Mercury.
                                           Headwaters to confluence with Bogue
                                           Falaya River (Scenic).
040905..................................  Bayou Liberty--Headwaters to LA Hwy 433
                                           Mercury..
040906..................................  Bayou Liberty--LA Hwy 433 to confluence     Mercury.
                                           With Bayou Bonfouca (Estuarine).
040505..................................  Ponchatoula Creek and Ponchatoula           Oxygen.
                                           Dissolved River.
041201..................................  Bayou Labranche...........................  Dissolved Oxygen.
041805..................................  Lake Borgne Canal (Violet Canal)..........  Dissolved Oxygen.
041401..................................  New Orleans East Leveed Waterbodies.......  Dissolved (Estuarine)
                                                                                Oxygen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA requested the public provide to EPA any significant water
quality related data or information that might impact the 32 TMDLs in
the Federal Register Notices: volume 76, number 219, pages 70442 and
70443 (November 14, 2011), volume 76, number 234, page 76161 (December
6, 2011), and volume 76, number 247, page 80366 (December 23, 2011).
The comments which were received, EPA's response to comments, as well
as the TMDLs may be found at www.epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/tmdl/index.htm.

    Dated: March 28, 2012.
 William K. Honker,
P.E., Acting Director, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2012-8496 Filed 4-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11548-11550]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4691]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63959; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2011-031]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Regarding the NASDAQ Order Imbalance Snapshot

February 24, 2011.
    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 February 23, 2011, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (the
``Exchange'' or ``NASDAQ'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by
NASDAQ. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on
the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing this proposed rule change regarding the
NASDAQ Order Imbalance Snapshot, a data feed of electronic messages for
newswire providers to monitor the NASDAQ Opening Cross, Closing Cross,
IPO Cross and Halt Cross. The text of the proposed rule change is
available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/, at NASDAQ's principal
office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ facilitates participation in electronic auctions by
disseminating the

Order Imbalance Indicator, a data feed containing information regarding
the status of the NASDAQ book just prior to a crossing auction. The
data contained in the Order Imbalance Indicator is set forth in NASDAQ
Rules governing the crosses for the Opening Cross (Rule 4752), Halt/IPO
Cross (Rule 4753), and Closing Cross (Rule 4754).
    The NASDAQ Order Imbalance Snapshot (``NOIS'') is a separate
service that provides a snapshot version of the Order Imbalance
Indicator that is streamlined and filtered for use by newswire
services. Rather than providing continuous order imbalance data, NOIS
provides the data for certain stocks at selected time intervals in a
format designed to optimize systems used by newswire providers. In
other words, NOIS contains a subset of information already approved to
be disseminated via the Order Imbalance Indicator.
    Specifically, for the NASDAQ Opening and Closing Crosses, NOIS
disseminates messages only for exchange-listed securities that show an
imbalance shares amount equal to or more than 50,000 shares. For those
messages NOIS disseminates, the message includes all imbalance
information set forth in the Order Imbalance Indicator set forth in
NASDAQ Rule 4752(a), 4753(a), and 4754(a). NOIS disseminates messages
for securities listed on any national securities exchange, not just
those listed on NASDAQ.
    For NASDAQ IPO Crosses, NOIS messages are disseminated
approximately 3 minutes and 13 minutes after the ``Trading Action--
Quote Resumption'' message, which signals imminent launch of trading,
is disseminated for the issue. NOIS will also disseminate a message if
the quotation window is extended for the IPO security. There is no
share size filter for the IPO cross. NASDAQ currently disseminates IPO
Cross messages only for NASDAQ-listed securities.
    For the NASDAQ Halt Cross, which NASDAQ uses to release securities
subject to a regulatory trading halt or single security trading pause,
NOIS messages will be disseminated approximately 3 minutes after the
``Trading Action--Quote resumption'' message is transmitted for the
issue. NOIS will also disseminate a message if the quotation window is
extended for the halted or paused security. There is no share size
filter for the Halt cross. For the Halt Cross, NOIS disseminates
messages for NASDAQ-listed issues only.
    NOIS data elements are disseminated to newswires for further
dissemination to newswire subscribers. Therefore, the NOIS feed is not
directly actionable by investors for quoting, order entry or trade
execution.
2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\3\ in general and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\4\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory
organizations and broker-dealers increased authority and flexibility to
offer new and unique market data to the public. It was believed that
this authority would expand the amount of data available to consumers,
and also spur innovation and competition for the provision of market
data. Nasdaq believes that this proposal is in keeping with those
principles by promoting increased transparency through the
dissemination of more useful proprietary data and also by clarifying
its availability to market participants.
    Additionally, NASDAQ is making a voluntary decision to make this
data available. NASDAQ is not required by the Exchange Act in the first
instance to make the data available, unlike the best bid and offer
which must be made available under the Act. NASDAQ chooses to make the
data available as proposed in order to improve market quality, to
attract order flow, and to increase transparency. Once this filing
becomes effective, NASDAQ will be required to continue making the data
available until such time as NASDAQ changes its rule.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. NASDAQ provides
routing services in a highly competitive market in which participants
may avail themselves of a wide variety of routing options offered by
self-regulatory organizations, alternative trading systems, other
broker-dealers, market participants' own proprietary routing systems,
and service bureaus. In such an environment, system enhancements such
as the changes proposed in this rule filing do not burden competition,
because they can succeed in attracting order flow to NASDAQ only if
they offer investors higher quality and better value than services
offered by others. Encouraging competitors to provide higher quality
and better value is the essence of a well-functioning competitive
marketplace.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \5\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-031 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-NASDAQ-2011-031. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 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-
NASDAQ-2011-031 and should be submitted on or before March 23, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-4691 Filed 3-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 117 (Friday, June 17, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39556-39557]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14105]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2016-0021; Airspace Docket No. 16-ANM-1]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Ogden-Hinckley, UT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies the Class E airspace designated as an
extension to the Class D surface area at Ogden-Hinckley Airport, Ogden,
UT. The FAA's Aeronautical Information Services identified that the
width of the Class E extension to the Class D surface area did not meet
the current criteria. This action redefines the controlled airspace
area and enhances the safety and management of Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures for Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the
airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, September 15, 2016. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy 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 7400.9Z at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Clark, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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
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 establishes controlled airspace at Ogden-Hinckley Airport, Ogden,
UT.

History

    On March 1, 2016, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to modify Class E airspace
designated as an extension to a Class D surface area airspace at Ogden-
Hinckley Airport, Ogden, UT. (81 FR 10551) Docket FAA-2016-0021.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    The legal description language was changed slightly from that
contained in the NPRM to add clarity however, no changes to the lateral
or horizontal dimensions of the airspace have occurred.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6004 of
FAA Order 7400.9Z, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B,
C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 modifies the Class E airspace designated as an extension to the
Class D surface area. The airspace would be expanded to 4 miles either
side of the 225[deg] radial extending 16 miles southwest of Ogden-
Hinckley airport, Ogden, UT. The FAA found this action necessary for
the safety and management of aircraft departing and arriving under IFR
operations at the airport. Class E airspace designations are published
in paragraph 6004 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, dated August 6, 2015, and
effective September 15, 2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 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
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 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 7400.9Z,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and
effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANM UT E4 Ogden-Hinckley Airport, UT [Modified]

Ogden-Hinckley Airport, UT
    (Lat. 41[deg]11'44'' N., long. 112[deg]00'47'' W.)
Hill AFB, UT
    (Lat. 41[deg]07'26'' N., long. 111[deg]58'23'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within the area
bounded by a line 4 miles northwest and parallel to the 225[deg]
radial of Ogden-Hinckley Airport, extending from the 4.3-mile radius
to 16 miles southwest of the airport, thence to lat. 40[deg]57'3''
N., long. 112[deg]12'44'' W., thence to lat. 41[deg]10'59'' N.,
long. 111[deg]54'31'' W., thence to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 2, 2016.
Tracey Johnson,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-14105 Filed 6-16-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Including these variables, either individually or including all in the same regression model, does not change the general results of the baseline NHTSA regression model: that mass reduction is associated with an increase in crash frequency in all three types of vehicles, while footprint reduction is associated with an increase in crash frequency in cars and light trucks, but with a decrease in crash frequency in CUVs/minivans.  The variable with the biggest effect is initial vehicle purchase price, which dramatically reduces the estimated increase in crash frequency in heavier-than-average cars and light trucks, and all CUVs/minivans.  These results suggest that other, more subtle, differences in vehicles and their drivers account for the unexpected finding that lighter vehicles have higher crash frequencies than heavier vehicles, for all three types of vehicles.

5. References

Dynamic Research, Inc. 2012. Updated Analysis of the Effects of Passenger Vehicle Size and Weight on Safety, Phase II: Preliminary Analysis Base on 2002 to 2008 Calendar Year Data for 2000 to 2007 Model Year light Passenger Vehicles.  Report prepared for the International Council on Clean Transportation, the Energy Foundation, and American Honda Motor Company.  June.  DRI-TR-12-01-01.

Kahane, C.J. 2012. Relationships Between Fatality Risk, Mass, and Footprint in Model Year 2000-2007 Passenger Cars and LTVs. Final report prepared for the National Center for Statistics and Analysis, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT HS 811 665, 2012; August.

Wenzel, Tom.  2012a.  Assessment of NHTSA's Report "Relationships Between Fatality Risk, Mass, and Footprint in Model Year 2000-2007 Passenger Cars and LTVs".  Final report prepared for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, US Department of Energy. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.  August.  LBNL-5698E.

Wenzel, Tom.  2012b.  An Analysis of the Relationship between Casualty Risk per Crash and Vehicle Mass and Footprint for Model Year 2000-2007 Light-Duty Vehicles.  Final report prepared for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, US Department of Energy.  Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.  August.  LBNL-5697E.