1 CAIR Emissions Inventory Overview 23 July 2004 For more information, contact: Marc Houyoux, U. S. EPA Houyoux. marc@ epa. gov 2 1 Introduction This document provides an overview of the revised emissions modeling efforts for the Clean Air Interstate Rule ( CAIR). It has been prepared in the context of a Notice of Data Availability ( NODA) for the rulemaking process.

The emissions modeling effort has involved preparation of emissions input data for the Community Multiscale Air Quality ( CMAQ) model. The model required hourly emissions for the entire year of 2001 on a 36 km national grid of the following pollutants: carbon monoxide ( CO), nitrogen oxides ( NOX), volatile organic compounds ( VOC), sulfur dioxide ( SO2), ammonia ( NH2), particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns ( PM10), and particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns ( PM25).

The emissions effort has included development of emission inventories for 2001, updates to the emissions modeling input files ( including inventory and ancillary files), updates to the growth and control approaches, and updates to the emissions modeling tools. This NODA provides the updated data and tools we used in our modeling, and this document provides a roadmap to the emissions information available in the NODA. The emissions modeling described here created emissions files for every hour of the year 2001 using emission inventories for a 2001 base year, and 2010 base case, and a 2015 base case. Control case emissions are not included in the NODA. Section 2 describes the emissions modeling, Section 3 describes the 2001 inventories and ancillary file updates, Section 4 describes the growth and control approach that we used, and Section 5 includes some references.

2 Emissions modeling summary To support CMAQ model, the emissions modeling involved converting the emission inventory data into the hourly, grid cell, and model species resolution needed by CMAQ. Our emission inventories were available as annual total emissions and average day per month emissions by county or facility; consequently, our emissions modeling involved transforming the emission inventories using emissions modeling steps known as temporal allocation, chemical speciation, and spatial allocation. This section provides some basic information about the tools and data files used for performing the emissions modeling.

2.1 Emissions modeling tool and configuration We used the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel ( SMOKE) emissions to perform the emissions modeling. The SMOKE source code and scripts can be found in the docket in the file CAIR_ SMOKE_ 072104. zip. The file README_ SMOKE. txt describes the contents of the zip file, the SMOKE scripts, and how to install and modify the zip file contents to be able to run SMOKE on a Linux computer platform containing the Portland Group Fortran compiler. The SMOKE run scripts described in the README_ SMOKE. txt file contain all of the settings that we used to configure the emissions modeling. The documentation of SMOKE ( including the script settings) can be found in the SMOKE user documentation, available online at: http:// www. cep. unc. edu/ empd/ products/ smoke/ version2/. 3 Some revisions were made to SMOKE for this modeling. These are:

  Updated biogenics modeling to use BEIS3.12 ( SMOKE version 2 included BEIS3.09).   Updated the projection capability to allow same year adjustments. Adjustment factors can now be applied to an inventory without changing the year of the inventory ( e. g., application of transportable fractions for fugitive dust sources)   Updated reporting capabilities to include reporting by standard industrial codes ( SIC).   Updated scripting capabilities to allow for easier configuration for annual simulations for the many emissions sectors processed separately ( e. g., separating fires from area sources).

2.2 Emissions modeling ancillary files In this section, we summarize the ancillary files that we used in the new emissions modeling. During emissions modeling, the ancillary data are combined with the emission inventory data to convert the inventories into the gridded, hourly resolution, and chemical species needed by CMAQ. In the emission inventory sections to follow ( Section 3), we will further describe additions that we made to these ancillary files.

The SMOKE input ancillary files that we use in this effort are available in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip, in the " ge_ dat" directory. A list of all of the ancillary files and their locations is available in the docket file README_ 2001. txt.

2.2.1 Spatial allocation The national 36 km spatial surrogates that we used for this effort were updated to have 65 different spatial surrogates for allocating nonpoint sources to the CMAQ model grid cells. The new approach is an improvement over the spatial allocation used in the CAIR proposal because it ( 1) has more detailed spatial surrogates and ( 2) has been closely reviewed for surrogate assignment to the inventory by source category code ( SCC). We took particular care in ensuring all significant emission sources were assigned a valid surrogate. Detailed documentation about the spatial surrogates, their development, and the data itself is available online: http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ emch/ spatial/ newsurrogate. html.

2.2.2 Chemical speciation The VOC and PM25 speciation factors that are the basis of the chemical speciation approach are relatively unchanged from the CAIR proposal, with some notable exceptions. Documentation for these speciation profiles is available online at http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ emch/ speciation/. For our new modeling efforts, we updated five new PM25 speciation profiles for the largest PM25 sectors in the inventory. The specific new profiles are listed along with the sectors to which they apply in the sections below. Also, the speciation cross references ( assignments to the inventory sources by SCC) were updated for the 2001 inventories to ensure the default speciation was only used for very small emission sources that are inconsequential to the modeling results. 4 2.2.3 Temporal allocation The monthly, weekly, and diurnal temporal profiles were created based on the data available at http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ emch/ temporal/. Several changes were made to these profiles: adding new monthly and diurnal state specific profiles for fires, California specific monthly profiles for on road mobile sources, and new livestock monthly profiles. More details are provided below on these changes.

3 2001 emission inventories and approaches The basis for the 2001 emission inventory is the National Emission Inventory ( NEI), which includes emissions of CO, NOX, VOC, SO2, NH3, PM10, and PM25. Ordinarily, the NEI is provided in four sectors: stationary area sources, point sources, nonroad mobile sources, and onroad mobile sources. For purposes of this modeling, EPA has split the 2001 emissions inventory into several source sectors for use in emissions modeling, and we have added biogenic emissions as follows in the list below. The headings for this list include the sector abbreviations in parentheses; these abbreviations are used in the modeling scripts and directory names.

  IPM sector ( ptipm): Point source facilities that were matched to facilities in the NEEDS 2003 database   Non IPM sector( ptnonipm): All point sources neither in the IPM sector nor in the " point fugitive dust" sector, and including Canadian, Mexican, and offshore point source emissions   Point fugitive dust sector ( pfdust): Fugitive dust point sources   Fire sector ( fire): Wildfires, prescribed burning fires, agricultural fires, and open burning ( area sources). Included in a 2001 year model simulation performed for the purpose of model performance evaluation only   Average fire sector ( avefire): Average year wildfire and prescribed burning calculated from 1996 2002 acres burned data, and 2001 agricultural burning and open burning. Used for the 2001 base year and the 2010 and 2015 base model runs.   Agricultural sector ( ag): 2002 NH3 emissions from livestock and fertilizer application   Area fugitive dust sector ( afdust): Fugitive dust stationary area sources   Other area sector ( oarea): Nonpoint ( stationary area) sources not in the fire, ag, or afdust sectors and including Canadian and Mexican nonpoint ( area) and mobile emissions ( includes Mexican on road vehicle refueling emissions; excludes Canadian and Mexican fire emissions).   Nonroad ( nonroad): Nonroad mobile sources from the NONROAD 2004 model via the National Mobile Inventory Model ( NMIM) and from commercial marine, airports, and locomotives. Also includes Canadian data.   On road ( mobile): On road mobile sources from the MOBILE6 model via NMIM ( not including refueling emissions). Also includes Canadian data.   Biogenic: Hour specific emissions from the BEIS3.12 model ( includes emissions in Canada and Mexico)

The annual total emission inventories by state and sector ( except future year IPM totals) can be found in the docket Microsoft ® Excel ® file Emissions_ summary_ state_ sector_ 2001 2010 5 2015. xls. Annual total emissions by state and sector ( except future year IPM totals) after application of chemical speciation factors and differences between 2001, 2010, and 2015 are also available in the docket Excel file Emissions_ summary_ state_ sector_ speciation_ 2001 2010 2015. xls.

3.1 2001 Area sources The 2001 area sources are based on the 2001 stationary area inventory, but many modifications were made to that inventory, as documented here.

The SMOKE input data files used for SMOKE are available in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ ar_ 072104. zip. A list of the files included in this file can also be found in the README_ 2001. txt file. Included in this zip file is a Microsoft ® Access ® reader for all of the 2001 SMOKE input files, which can be found in the directory inventory/ 2001/ access_ IDA/. Instructions for using this reader are available in the file: inventory/ multi year/ README_ ACCESS_ convert_ 20XX. pdf. Finally, SMOKE output ASCII SCC and state SCC summaries are also available for 2001 in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip in the directory inventory/ summaries/ 2001/ access_ checks/.

3.1.1 2001 stationary area source NEI The documentation for the 2001 stationary area sources is essentially included in the documentation for the 1999 stationary area source NEI, available at:

ftp:// ftp. epa. gov/ EmisInventory/ finalnei99ver3/ haps/ documentation/ nonpoint/ nonpt99ver3_ aug2003. pdf To calculate the 2001 stationary area source NEI, we applied growth factors to the 1999 NEI for some SCCs. The growth factors that we used are available in the docket in a zipped Microsoft ® Access ® file called 1999to2001_ StatAreaProjection. zip. For other SCCs, we recalculated the 2001 emissions using the same approaches as the 1999 inventory using the EPA estimation methods described for the 1999 inventory. The SCCs for which we recalculated the emissions are shown in Table 1, below: 6 Table 1: Source category codes recalculated for the 2001 NEI SCCs Type 2104008001 2104008002 2104008003 2104008004 2104008010 2104008030 2104008050 Residential Wood Combustion 2294000000 2296000000 Paved/ Unpaved Roads 2311010000   Residential 2311020000  Non residential 2311030000   Roadway Construction 2325000000 Mining & Quarrying 2610000100  Residential Leaf burning 2610000400  Residential Brush burning 2610000500  Land Clearing Debris Burning 2610030000  Residential MSW burning Open Burning 2801000000 Cotton Ginning ( PM only) 2801000003 Ag Tilling ( PM only) 2801700001 2801700002 2801700003 2801700004 2801700005 2801700006 2801700007 2801700008 2801700009 2801700010 Fertilizer ( NH3 emissions from fertilizer application)

2805001000 Beef Cattle Feedlots ( PM only) 2810001000 2810015000 Wildfire/ Prescribed Burning 2810030000 Structure Fires 3.1.2 Fires The fire category includes U. S. only wildfires, prescribed burning, agricultural burning, and open burning. This sector was included in a 2001 year model simulation performed for the purpose of model performance evaluation only.

We modified the monthly temporal profiles used for modeling all fire sectors and the diurnal profiles used for modeling wildfires and prescribed fires. EPA developed new monthly and diurnal temporal profiles by state for wildfires and prescribed burning, as described in the docket file Fire_ Temporal_ Documentation. pdf. For AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN, VA, and WV, we used monthly temporal profile data provided by the VISTAS regional planning organization, 7 which includes monthly profiles for agricultural burning and open burning sectors. If statespecific or region specific data were available for VISTAS, we used that data instead of the EPA developed data.

We also updated the PM2.5 speciation profile. The profile we are now using for the wildfires and prescribed burning sectors is " NWFIR," and for agricultural burning and open burning fires, we are using the " NAGBN" profile. Both of these profiles are described in more detail in the docket Excel ® file PM25_ Emissions_ Speciation_ Updates. xls, which provides some description, raw data, relevant SCCs and references for the new profiles.

3.1.3 Average fires The average fire sector was included in the 2001 base year, 2010 base case, and 2015 base case modeling. We created it based on the 2001 fire emissions data just described. Since fires have very high emissions, the purpose of the average fire inventory is to prevent undue influence of the fire inventory to any single state's overall emission inventory. The average fire sector is comprised of a 1996 2002 average fire inventory for wildfires and prescribed burning, and 2001 fires for agricultural burning and open burning; these latter two subsectors were maintained at 2001 levels even in the 2010 and 2015 modeling.

We calculated the average wildfire and prescribed burning inventories using the following formula for all pollutants:

burned acres burned acres average fire fire average 2001 2001 × =

The average acres burned was calculated base on 1996 through 2002 data; therefore, the average fire inventory represent average fires from 1996 through 2002, with the assumption of 2001 emissions rates and counties with fires from 2001.

Average year temporal profiles were developed for wildfires and prescribed burning fires to prevent undue weighting of any particular month that had large fires in 2001. We calculated the average monthly profiles from monthly acres burned data from 1999 through 2002. The approach for calculating the average temporal profiles is described in the docket file Fire_ Temporal_ Documentation. pdf.

The same PM25 revised speciation approach was used for the average year fire sector.

3.1.4 Fugitive dust The area source fugitive dust inventory was extracted from the 2001 NEI and the paved and unpaved road dust part of the emissions was replaced with emissions using improved emission factors and other assumptions. The SCCs extracted from the NEI as area source fugitive dust are the 10 digit SCCs in the list available at http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ emch/ invent/ fugitive_ dust_ sccs. xls. 8 The paved and unpaved road dust emissions ( SCCs 2294000000 and 2296000000) from the 2001 NEI were replaced with emissions calculated using the latest approach. This approach is described by the document:

ftp:// ftp. epa. gov/ pub/ EmisInventory/ prelim2002nei/ nonpoint/ documentation/ 2002prelimneinonpt_ 032004. pdf We also updated the PM2.5 speciation profile for the paved road dust sector. These updates are described in more detail in the docket Microsoft ® Excel ® file PM25_ Emissions_ Speciation_ Updates. xls, which provides some description, raw data, relevant SCCs and references for the new profile.

During emissions modeling with SMOKE, we applied a transportable fraction to the PM10 and PM25 emissions from these sources. The transportable fractions were applied by county. The county fractions and the approach used to get them is available online at http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ emch/ invent/, at the bottom of the included table.

3.1.5 Agricultural Ammonia The agricultural NH3 sector is comprised of livestock emissions and 2001 NEI emissions for agricultural fertilizer application. We replaced the NEI livestock NH3 emissions with emissions from the improved approach emissions of the 2002 preliminary NEI. The documentation for the new approach for these emissions is available at:

ftp:// ftp. epa. gov/ EmisInventory/ prelim2002nei/ nonpoint/ documentation/ nh3inventorydraft_ jan2004. pdf The SCCs replaced from the 2001 NEI are shown in Table 2 below:

Table 2: Livestock SCCs in the original 2001 NEI 2805020000 2805025000 2805030000 2805035000 2805040000 2805045001 If these SCCs had PM10 or PM25 emissions, those emissions were included in the area source fugitive dust sector.

The fertilizer emissions for this sector were extracted from the 2001 NEI based on SCCs shown in Table 3. 9 Table 3: Fertilizer SCCs in the 2001 NEI 2801700001 2801700002 2801700003 2801700004 2801700005 2801700006 2801700007 2801700008 2801700009 2801700010 We improved the monthly temporal profiles for this sector using the following approaches:

  For fertilizer emissions, we used state specific monthly profiles from the Carnegie Mellon University ( CMU) ammonia model   For dairy cow emissions, we used state specific monthly profiles developed by calculating a weighted average state specific monthly profile from the county specific monthly profiles available in the CMU ammonia model. The weighting factors used to average from the county level to the state level were the dairy cow emissions from the 2002 livestock inventory referenced above.   For all other livestock sectors, we used a temporal profile based on inverse modeling using the modeling approach taken in the CAIR proposal. The original inverse modelingbased profile is described by Gilliland, et al. [ 2003], and it has an overall reduction of emissions of about 30%. Because of the new approach that we used to develop the livestock emissions, this artificial reduction was no longer necessary; therefore, we renormalized the original profile to keep the monthly variation, but to exclude the 30% reduction.

3.1.6 Other area sources The other area sources sector includes all 2001 NEI stationary area source emissions not included in the fire/ avefire, ag, and afdust sectors. The main documentation for this sector is the documentation described previously for the 2001 stationary area NEI.

We improved the PM25 speciation approach by updating the speciation profiles for wood waste boilers and coal combustion. The profiles for these sectors were updated because they comprised a large proportion of the PM2.5 emissions in the NEI. These updates are described in more detail in the docket Excel ® file PM25_ Emissions_ Speciation_ Updates. xls, which provides some description, raw data, relevant SCCs and references for the new profiles.

Additionally, the other area sector contains stationary area emissions from Canada and stationary area and mobile emissions from Mexico. For Canada, the emission inventory used is the same 1995 inventory that was used in the CAIR proposal, since that inventory was the most current available during the time that this modeling was undertaken. We removed all records in the Canadian inventory for wildfires, prescribed fires, windblown dust, and biogenic emissions, because these emissions are very dependent on the modeling year ( and we weren't modeling 10 1995) and the data were deemed too unreliable for this modeling effort. The Mexican inventory is the 1999 Big Bend Regional Aerosol & Visibility Observational Study ( BRAVO) Emissions Inventory. More information on this inventory is available at http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ net/ mexico. html.

3.2 Biogenic sources The biogenic emissions were computed based on 2001 meteorology data using the BEIS3.12 model from SMOKE. This model computes gridded, hourly, model species, emissions for combination with the anthropogenic emissions to put into CMAQ. Emissions are calculated for the U. S., Mexico, and Canada and accounts for VOC and NOX emissions from vegetation and soils. The BEIS3.12 model is described further in the docket by the file named BEIS312_ Documentation. pdf. The meteorology data on which the biogenic emissions depend is the same as the meteorology data input to the CMAQ model.

The biogenic emissions data output from SMOKE/ BEIS3.12 are available in the docket zip files named as follows: 2001CAIR_ bg_ 1_ 072104. zip: Contains land use, and emissions for the year 2000 10 day spinup period and for January through March of 2001. 2001CAIR_ bg_ 2_ 072104. zip: Contains emissions for April through June of 2001 2001CAIR_ bg_ 3_ 072104. zip: Contains emissions for July through September of 2001 2001CAIR_ bg_ 4_ 072104. zip: Contains emissions for October through December of 2001 County/ monthly summaries of the biogenic emissions data are also available in the docket from the zip file 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip in the Excel ® file entitled inventory/ summaries/ multiyear 2002 biogenic CERR default. xls.

As part of the biogenic modeling, we added the speciation profiles for BEIS3.12 to the default SMOKE speciation profiles for CMAQ. One correction in the profiles was needed from the officially released version of BEIS3.12.

3.3 2001 Mobile sources For this effort, the EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality ( OTAQ) regenerated most of the on road and nonroad mobile emissions using the National Mobile Inventory Model ( NMIM); the only exceptions were for on road mobile emissions from California and nonroad mobile emissions from commercial marine, airport, and locomotive sources. The NMIM model relies on calculations from the MOBILE6 and NONROAD 2004 models. We used version 6.2.03 of MOBILE6 and the version of the NONROAD model was the same as the version used to develop the final Nonroad Rule. More documentation on the NMIM model is available in the docket in the file called Mobile_ NMIM_ Documentation. pdf. Additionally, some summary information about how the NMIM model was used for this modeling is available in the document Mobile_ NMIM_ usage_ for_ CAIR. pdf ( please note that the Mobile_ NMIM_ Documentation. pdf is the " attached paper" referenced in Mobile_ NMIM_ usage_ for_ CAIR. pdf). 11 3.3.1 On road mobile sources With the exception of California, we obtained our on road mobile emissions from the NMIM model, using the MOBILE6 model, version 6.2.03. These emissions were created and used on a month specific basis that accounted for temperature, fuel types, and other variables on a monthby month basis. None of the on road emissions from the annual 2001 NEI were used in our modeling.

The SMOKE input data files used for SMOKE are available in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ or_ 072104. zip. A list of the files included in this file can also be found in the README_ 2001. txt file. Included in this zip file is a Microsoft ® Access ® reader for all of the 2001 SMOKE input files, which can be found in the directory inventory/ 2001/ access_ IDA/. Instructions for using this reader are available in the file from 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip: inventory/ multi year/ README_ ACCESS_ convert_ 20XX. pdf. Finally, SMOKE output ASCII SCC and state SCC summaries are also available for 2001 in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip in the directory inventory/ summaries/ 2001/ access_ checks/.

For all states but California, the vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) that we used is available in the docket. These data are in the 2001CAIR_ or_ 072104. zip file in the Microsoft ® Access ® database inventory/ multi year/ VMT4yrs. mdb. The VMT in this database is provided in units of millions of miles per year.

California provided EPA with annual total on road mobile emissions that match their most recent publicly available emission estimates for this sector. To obtain the monthly variation that was available for the other states, we developed state/ pollutant specific temporal profiles based on the NMIM monthly results. To do this, we summed the emissions from each month from NMIM and calculated a monthly temporal profile by dividing each month's NMIM total for California by the annual total. This approach resulted in seven California specific temporal profiles for VOC, NOX, CO, SO2, NH3, PM coarse ( PMC), and PM2.5.

Additional Canadian emissions from on road mobile sources were included in this sector. This 1995 inventory is the same inventory that was used in the CAIR proposal, since that was the most currently available inventory at the time that this work was performed.

3.3.2 Nonroad mobile sources With the exception of commercial marine, airports, and locomotives, the nonroad mobile emissions were calculated by the NMIM model using the version of NONROAD used for the final Nonroad Rule. The emissions were created and used on a monthly basis, so no monthly temporal profiles were needed or used for the NMIM based emissions. Please see Section 3.3 for the references to the NMIM documentation.

The SMOKE input data files used for SMOKE are available in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ nr_ 072104. zip. A list of the files included in this file can also be found in the README_ 2001. txt file. Included in this zip file is a Microsoft ® Access ® reader for all of the 2001 SMOKE input files, which can be found in the directory inventory/ 2001/ access_ IDA/. Instructions for using this reader are available in 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip inthe file: inventory/ multi year/ README_ ACCESS_ convert_ 20XX. pdf. Finally, SMOKE output ASCII 12 SCC and state SCC summaries are also available for 2001 in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip in the directory inventory/ summaries/ 2001/ access_ checks/.

For commercial marine, airports, and locomotives, we started with the SCCs, counties, and emissions in the 2001 NEI. The approach taken for this subsector in the 2001 NEI is available in several PDF files at:

ftp:// ftp. epa. gov/ pub/ EmisInventory/ prelim2002nei/ mobile/ nonroad/ documentation/ airrailcmv/

For commercial marine vehicles, we matched the national commercial marine total inventory with the most recent data from OTAQ that was assumed in the final Nonroad Rule. The details of this approach are described in the docket in the file CommercialMarine_ Airports_ Trains_ Approach. pdf and based on data available in the docket file CommercialMarine_ Airports_ Trains_ Data. xls.

This sector also contained 1995 Canadian nonroad mobile emissions, which are the same as the emissions used in the CAIR proposal.

3.4 2001 Point sources The 2001 point source emissions are based on the 2001 NEI with some exceptions as described next. The SMOKE input data files used for SMOKE are available in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ pt_ 072104. zip. A list of the files included in this file can also be found in the README_ 2001. txt file. Included in this zip file is a Microsoft ® Access ® reader for all of the 2001 SMOKE input files, which can be found in the directory inventory/ 2001/ access_ IDA/. Instructions for using this reader are available in 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip in the file: inventory/ multi year/ README_ ACCESS_ convert_ 20XX. pdf. Finally, SMOKE output ASCII SCC and state SCC summaries are also available for 2001 in the docket zip file 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip in the directory inventory/ summaries/ 2001/ access_ checks/.

3.4.1 IPM sector The emissions in this sector are from facilities in the 2001 NEI that we were able match to the NEEDS 2003 database. A description of what we did and the matches we used are available in the docket in the Excel ® file named NEI_ 2001_ to_ IPM NEEDS_ matches. xls. We modified the stack parameters from the 2001 to correct problems in the stack heights, stack diameters, stack gas exit temperatures, and stack gas exit velocities. We also made changes in stack parameters to ensure that the stack parameters would be the same in 2001, 2010, and 2015 emission inventories, even though the 2010 and 2015 emissions come from the Integrated Planning Model ( IPM).

3.4.2 Point source fugitive dust The point source fugitive dust inventory was extracted from the 2001 NEI. The SCCs extracted from the NEI as point source fugitive dust are the 8 digit SCCs in the list available at http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ emch/ invent/ fugitive_ dust_ sccs. xls. 13 During emissions modeling with SMOKE, we applied a transportable fraction to the PM10 and PM25 emissions from these sources in a consistent way as was done for the area source fugitive dust sector. The transportable fractions were applied by county. The county fractions and the approach used to get them is available online at http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ emch/ invent/, at the bottom of the table available on the page.

3.4.3 Non IPM sector The remaining emissions sources in the 2001 NEI that were not put into the IPM or point fugitive dust sectors were included in the non IPM sector. The stack parameters in this part of the Non IPM sector were also updated to correct problems in the stack heights, stack diameters, stack gas exit temperatures, and stack gas exit velocities.

Additionally, this sector includes 1995 Canadian point sources for Eastern Canada that were used as part of the Ozone Transport Assessment Group ( OTAQ) modeling. Canadian data privacy regulations prevented us from obtaining a more current point source inventory for Canada. These privacy regulations have been changed so that inventories developed for 2002 and beyond will not be subject to privacy limitations; however, the 2002 inventories were not available in time for our use in this effort.

This sector also includes offshore sources provided by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ( TCEQ). The inventory provided included emissions for 1992, which we grew to 2002 based on instructions from TCEQ. The resulting offshore inventory is available in the inventory/ 2001/ ptnonipm/ directory of the 2001 point source zip file mentioned at the start of Section 3.4.

This sector also includes major Mexican point sources from the 1999 BRAVO Mexican emission inventory, previously referenced with the other area sector.

We improved the PM25 speciation approach by updating speciation profiles for wood waste boilers and coal combustion. The profiles for these sectors were updated because they comprised a large proportion of the PM2.5 emissions in the NEI. These updates are described in more detail in the docket Excel ® file PM25_ Emissions_ Speciation_ Updates. xls, which provides some description, raw data, relevant SCCs and references for the new profiles.

4 2010 and 2015 emission inventories and approaches 4.1 Growth approach summary We used different approaches for different sectors of the emission inventory. The same approaches were used for both 2010 and 2015 though the projection values for each year were different.

  IPM sector: The Integrated Planning Model ( IPM)   Non IPM sector: Canadian, Mexican, and offshore emissions were held constant at the values used in the 2001 modeling. For U. S. emissions, we used three sources of data as 14 follows. For more information on the first two sources of data, please refer to the document available in the docket called " nonEGUnonpoint_ GrowthDevelopment. pdf." o For 2010 only, regional or national fuel use forecast data from the U. S. Department of Energy for SCCs that map to fuel use sectors ( e. g., commercial coal, industrial natural gas). Assigned to sources by state/ SCC. o Otherwise, used state specific growth rates from the Regional Economic Model, Inc. ( REMI) Policy Insight ® model, version 5.5 ( being used in the development of the Economic Growth Analysis System ( EGAS), version 5.0. Assigned to sources by state and standard industrial code ( SIC), unless the inventory SIC was invalid or missing, in which case state and SCC were used. o A review of REMI based rates lead to changes to the growth rates for some sectors where they were unrealistic or highly uncertain:

All 2001 to 2010 and 2001 to 2015 factors of 0 changed to a factor of 1

All factors for " miscellaneous" SCCs and SICs were changed to 1 because these rates were generally very high from REMI without adequate justification.

Specific changes ( e. g., cement manufacturing, secondary metal production) based on industry group forecasts, bureau or labor statistics ( BLS) projections and Bureau of Economic Analysis ( BEA) historical growth from 1987 2002.   Point fugitive dust sector ( pfdust): State specific REMI growth rates as described for non IPM sector   Average fires sector ( avefire): No growth or control   Agricultural sector ( ag): 2010 and 2015 livestock estimates included with 2002 inventory database as part of new livestock NH3 approach ( ftp:// ftp. epa. gov/ EmisInventory/ prelim2002nei/ nonpoint/ documentation/ nh3inventorydraft_ jan2004. pdf). Fertilizer NH3 had no growth or control.   Area fugitive dust sector ( afdust): State specific REMI growth rates as described for non IPM sector   Other area sector ( oarea): Same approach as for non IPM sector ( combination of REMI and fuel use growth).   Nonroad: Differences approaches for different subsectors: o Nonroad mobile sources from the NONROAD 2004 model via NMIM o Commercial marine, airports, and locomotives consistent with the Nonroad rule ( see " CommercialMarine_ Airtports_ Trains_ Approach. pdf")   On road ( mobile): On road mobile sources from the MOBILE6 model ( not including refueling emissions) via NMIM   Biogenic: No growth or control; held constant at values used in 2001 base.

4.2 Regional Economic Model, Inc. ( REMI) Policy Insight ® model REMI Policy Insight ® includes cause and effect relationships for economic forecasts. The model shares two key underlying assumptions with mainstream economic theory: households maximize utility and producers maximize profits. In the modeled world of Policy Insight ® , businesses produce goods to sell to other firms, consumers, investors, governments and purchasers outside of the region. 15 The model forecasts economic activity by region and for individual sectors of the economy. By making assumptions about which economic indicators can represent emissions growth, growth factors can be developed for projecting emission inventories.

A full listing of articles about the Policy Insight ® model can be found at the following website: http:// www. remi. com.

4.3 Control approach The only sectors controlled in our 2010 and 2015 base year inventory approach were IPM, nonIPM, and other area sources. The IPM sector base year emissions are computed by the IPM model; therefore, the controls we implemented only affected the non IPM and other area sectors. No controls were applied to the Canadian, Mexican, or offshore emission inventories in these two sectors.

We included the same control programs for both the 2010 and 2015 non EGU point inventory, since we anticipated that all control programs considered would be fully implemented by 2010. Table 4 summarizes the control programs that were included in applying controls to the 2010 and 2015 base emissions. For nonpoint ( stationary area) sources, additional reductions ( for the same programs) were included in 2015 than were included in 2010. Table 5 summarizes the control programs considered in developing the 2010 and 2015 base emissions for the other area sector.

For more information on how the control programs were developed and the actual control factors applied, please refer to the technical report " nonEGUnonpoint_ ControlDevelopment. pdf".

Table 4: Non EGU point source control packet strategies.

Control Strategies ( Grouped by Affected Pollutants or Standard) Pollutants Affected Data Source NOx SIP Call ( Phase II) NOx EPA, 2000 EPA, 2004b Solid waste rules ( Sections 129/ 111( d)) Hospital/ Medical/ Infectious Waste Incinerator Regulations Municipal Waste Combustors NOx, PM, SO2 PM, SO2 EPA, 2000 EPA, 2004a DOJ Settlements NOx, SO2 EPA, 2004b 1 hr ozone nonattainment SIPs NOx, VOC Pechan, 2002 Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines ( RICE) MACT ( 10 year) NOx, VOC EPA, 2004b Rules affecting PM Portland Cement Manufacturing MACT ( 7 year) Secondary Aluminum Production MACT ( 7 year) Hazardous Waste Combustion MACT ( 4 year) PM EPA, 2000 Rules affecting PM and SO2 Industrial, Commercial, & Institutional Boilers & Process Heaters MACT Lime Manufacturing MACT Taconite Ore Processing MACT PM, SO2 EPA, 2004a EPA, 2004b 2 year rules affecting VOCs Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry ( SOCMI) Hazardous Organic NESHAP ( HON) VOC EPA, 2000 16 Control Strategies ( Grouped by Affected Pollutants or Standard) Pollutants Affected Data Source Acrylonitrile manufacture Ethylene manufacture Ethylene oxide manufacture Phenol manufacture Polyethylene manufacture Polypropylene manufacture SOCMI fugitives ( equipment leak detection and repair) SOCMI processes SOCMI wastewater Volatile organic liquid storage Dry Cleaning Perchloroethylene Other Benzene National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAP) By product coke  excess NH3 liquor tank By product coke  flushing liquor circulation tank By product coke manufacture  other By product coke manufacture  oven charging By product coke mfg By product coke mfg.  equipment leaks By product coke mfg.  light oil dec/ cond vents By product coke mfg.  light oil sump By product coke mfg.  naphthalene processing By product coke mfg.  tar bottom final cooler By product coke mfg.  tar storage Coke oven by product plants Coke ovens  door and topside leaks VOC EPA, 2000 4 year MACTs affecting VOCs ( national) Aircraft surface coating ( aerospace) Polymers and resins II Polymers and resins IV Shipbuilding and repair Styrene butadiene rubber manufacture ( polymers & resins group I) TSDFs ( offsite waste operations) Wood furniture surface coating Petroleum Refineries: other sources Fixed roof petroleum product tanks Fixed roof gasoline tanks External floating roof petroleum product tanks External floating roof gasoline tanks Petroleum refinery wastewater treatment Petroleum refinery fugitives   Petroleum refineries  Blowdown w/ o control   Vacuum distillation Degreasing Organic Cleaners ( Halogenated Solvent Cleaners) Open top degreasing  halogenated In line ( conveyorized) degreasing  halogenated Printing and Publishing VOC EPA, 2000 17 Control Strategies ( Grouped by Affected Pollutants or Standard) Pollutants Affected Data Source Flexographic Gravure Gasoline Distribution ( Stage 1) Balanced loading Leaks Splash loading Storage Submerged loading Transit 7/ 10 year MACTs affecting VOCs ( national) Pestide Active Ingredient Production Alkyd resins Chelating agents Explosives Fabric Printing, Coating, and Dyeing Flatwood surface coating Green tire spray Large Appliances Nylon 6 production Oil and natural gas production Paint and varnish manufacture Paper surface coating Petroleum refineries  fluid catalytic cracking Pharmaceutical production Phthalate plasticizers Plywood/ particle board Polyester resins Polyesters Polymers and resins III Polyvinyl chloride Publicly Owned Treatment Works ( POTWs) Pulp and paper production Rayon production Reinforced plastics Rubber tire manufacture Spandex production VOC EPA, 2000 Post 2002 MACT Asphalt Processing and Roofing MACT Auto and Light Duty Truck Manufacturing MACT Coke Ovens MACT Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda and Sulfite Paper Mills MACT Fabric Printing, Coating and Dyeing MACT Iron & Steel Foundries MACT Metal Can MACT Metal Coil MACT Metal Furniture MACT Misc. Metal Parts and Products MACT Municipal Solid Waste Landfills MACT Paper and Other Web MACT Plastic Parts MACT Plywood & Composite Wood Products MACT VOC EPA, 2004b Pechan, 2004 18 Control Strategies ( Grouped by Affected Pollutants or Standard) Pollutants Affected Data Source Wet Formed Fiberglass Production MACT Wood Building Products MACT Table 5: Nonpoint ( stationary area) source control packet strategies.

Control Strategies ( Grouped by Affected Pollutants or Standard) Pollutants Affected Data Source 1 hr ozone nonattainment SIPs NOx, VOC Pechan, 2002 Federal Control Measures ( National) Consumer Solvents Onboard Vapor Recovery Systems; and Stage II for Gasoline Service Stations VOC EPA, 2000 EPA, 2003b Title III MACT ( National) Wood Furniture Surface Coating Aerospace Surface Coating Marine Vessel Surface Coating ( Shipbuilding) Halogenated Solvent Cleaners ( Cold Cleaning) Petroleum Refinery Fugitives Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry ( SOCMI) Fugitives ( Hazardous Organic NESHAP) Motor Vehicle Surface Coating Large Appliances Wood Building Products Open Top & Conveyorized Degreasing Publicly Owned Treatment Works ( POTWs) Metal Furniture & Appliances Surface Coating Miscallaneous Metal Parts Electronic Coating VOC EPA, 2000 Title I RACT Petroleum Dry Cleaning Paper Surface Coating VOC EPA, 2000 Residential Wood Combustion CO, PM, VOC EPA, 2000 4.4 2010 and 2015 base year emission inventories With the exception of the IPM sector, the inventories obtained and developed from the approaches described above are available in the docket in zip files as follows:

2010CAIR_ ar_ 072104. zip: 2010 stationary area data 2010CAIR_ nr_ 072104. zip: 2010 nonroad mobile data 2010CAIR_ or_ 072104. zip: 2010 on road mobile data 2010CAIR_ pt_ 072304. zip: 2010 point data ( except IPM sector)

2015CAIR_ ar_ 072104. zip: 2015 stationary area data 2015CAIR_ nr_ 072104. zip: 2015 nonroad mobile data 2015CAIR_ or_ 072104. zip: 2015 on road mobile data 2015CAIR_ pt_ 072304. zip: 2015 point data ( except IPM sector) 19 A list of the files included in these files can also be found in the README_ 2010. txt and README_ 2015. txt files. Included in these zip files are Microsoft ® Access ® readers for all of the 2010 and 2015 SMOKE input files. The 2010 reader is in the directory inventory/ 2010/ access_ IDA of the file 2010CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip, and the 2015 reader is in the directory inventory/ 2015/ access_ IDA of the file 2015CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip. Instructions for using these readers are available in the zip file 2001CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip in inventory/ multi year/ README_ ACCESS_ convert_ 20XX. pdf.

The zip file 2010CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip also contains SMOKE output ASCII SCC and state SCC summaries in the directory inventory/ summaries/ 2010/ access_ checks/. Similarly, the zip file 2015CAIR_ misc_ 072304. zip contains summaries for 2015 in the directory inventory/ summaries/ 2015/ access_ checks.

In these zip files, we have not provided the data files for the avefire and biogenic sectors, since these are the same as the files in the 2001 zip files.

We used the same approaches for spatial allocation, temporal allocation, and chemical speciation in 2010 and 2015 as was used in 2001. The only known major discrepancy in the approach between any of the years is that the 2015 growth did not use any fuel use data, but the 2010 growth did.

For all states but California, the vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) that we used for computing 2010 and 2015 is available in the docket. These data are in the 2001CAIR_ or_ 072104. zip file in the Microsoft ® Access ® database inventory/ multi year/ VMT4yrs. mdb. The VMT in this database is provided in units of millions of miles per year. 20 5 References EPA, 2000. Procedures for Developing Base Year and Future Year Mass and Modeling Inventories for The Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel ( HDD) Rulemaking, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emissions Analysis and Monitoring Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA420 R 00 020, October 2000. http:// www. epa. gov/ otaq/ models/ hd2007/ r00020. pdf EPA, 2003a. Procedures for Developing Base Year and Future Year Mass Emission Inventories for the Nonroad Diesel Engine Rulemaking, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. EPA 454/ R 03 009, April 2003.

EPA, 2003b. Draft 1999 National VOC Inventory for Gasoline Distribution. April 2003. http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ eiip/ techreport/ volume03/ index. html EPA, 2004a. Technical Support Document for the Interstate Air Quality Rule Air Quality Modeling Analyses, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emissions Analysis and Monitoring Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, January 2004.

EPA, 2004b. Personal communication [ by contractor] with EPA EMAD staff.

Gilliland, A. B.; Dennis. R. L.; Roselle, S. J.; Pierce, T. E; " Seasonal NH3 emission estimates for the eastern United States based on ammonium wet concentrations and an inverse modeling method"; Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 108, no. D15, 4477, doi: 10.1029/ 2002JD003063; 2003.

Pechan, 2002. VOC and NOx Control Measures Adopted by States and Nonattainment Areas for 1999 NEI Base Case Emissions Projection Calculations, Draft Report, prepared for EPA Contract No. 68 D 00 283, Work Assignment No. 1 22, by E. H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., September, 2002 Pechan, 2004. Personal communication [ by contractor] with Jim Wilson.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 3 (Tuesday, January 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 594-597]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30903]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73967; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2014-128]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend NASDAQ Rules 7014 and 7018

December 30, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 19, 2014, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and
III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.

The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ is proposing to lower access fees in order to attract more
investor orders to the public markets. In response to claims that
public markets are too expensive, NASDAQ is proposing to amend Rule
7018(a) to lower execution fees for a select group of securities where
access fees may be discouraging the use of public markets. NASDAQ
believes that the data generated by this experimental approach will
contribute to the on-going debate on the structure of U.S. markets.
NASDAQ is also making clarifying changes to Rule 7014.
    While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated that the amendments be operative on February 2,
2015. The text of the proposed rule change is available at
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, NASDAQ included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Hundreds of exchange-listed securities trade more volume on off-
exchange markets than on exchange markets. Off-exchange orders do not
generate quotes on public markets, do not interact with orders on
public markets and consequently do not promote or contribute to price
discovery to the same extent as do orders posted and executed on
exchanges.\3\ Economic studies from markets spanning the world conclude
that as more orders migrate away from exchanges, the price discovery
process weakens, trading spreads widen, and overall investor trading
costs increase.\4\ NASDAQ has been an advocate for improvements to the
market structure regulations that have enabled--and even exacerbated--
this shift by failing to evolve as technological advances have
transformed trading over the last decade. In the absence of market-wide
regulatory changes, NASDAQ OMX, through its subsidiary exchanges
including NASDAQ, has attempted multiple times and in multiple ways to
improve market structure to the extent possible by a single player in
an interconnected, multi-player ecosystem. While these programs have
met mixed success, NASDAQ believes that each one makes an important
contribution to the continued evolution of U.S. market structure by
showing regulators and market participants potential paths to positive
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ NASDAQ notes that a displayed order at the NBBO of an
exchange, and the subsequent execution thereof, contributes
significantly to price discovery because both the displayed order
prior to execution, and the execution itself, provide a reference
price to the market. Further, a non-displayed order on an exchange
contributes to price discovery as it is part of the continuous
auction on a market with publicly displayed orders and quotes--
albeit the contribution of a non-displayed order on an exchange is
less than the contribution of a displayed order on the exchange. A
non-displayed order on an off-exchange venue contributes less to
price discovery because it is resting in a less transparent trading
venue that is not part of the continuous auction of a ``lit''
exchange.
    \4\ See, e.g., Australian Securities and Investments Commission,
Report 331 ``Dark Liquidity and High-Frequency Trading'' (March
2013) (available at: http://download.asic.gov.au/media/1344182/rep331-published-18-March-2013.pdf); see also International
Organization of Securities Commissions, Technical Committee, Final
Report ``Principals for Dark Liquidity'' (May 2011) (available at:
http://www.iosco.org/library/pubdocs/pdf/IOSCOPD353.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Now, in response to assertions that the shift in trading away from
public markets is caused by high exchange access fees, NASDAQ is
proposing another market structure experiment: To significantly reduce
access fees, and related credits in a select set of securities. As
discussed below, NASDAQ believes that proposed changes may improve
price discovery in the select securities. Perhaps more importantly, the
experimental fee reduction will generate much-needed data about the
impact of access fees on the level of off-exchange trading and,
potentially, on price discovery, trading costs, displayed liquidity and
execution quality as well. NASDAQ further believes that a data driven,
empirically-based review of the impacts of fees and rebates on market
quality is the sound and prudent method to drive the equity markets to
the right conclusion. NASDAQ believes the proposal is a means to that
end.
    Specifically, NASDAQ is proposing to amend NASDAQ Rule 7018(a) by
reducing the fee assessed for accessing liquidity, and also reducing
the credits provided for adding liquidity, on NASDAQ in certain
securities. The proposed reduced fees and credits will be provided in
lieu of other fees and credits under the fee schedule.\5\ Currently,
NASDAQ assesses fees and provides credits under Rule 7018(a) in
securities that trade at $1 or more based on the market on which it is
listed.\6\ Under each section of the rule, NASDAQ provides various
tiers of fees and rebates based on a member's trading activity. NASDAQ
is proposing to modify the fees and credits applicable to trading
activity in fourteen equity securities, denoted in the proposed rule by
their ticker symbols (``Select Symbols'').\7\ NASDAQ is also amending
Rule 7014 to make clear that the fees and credits described in Rule
7014 do not apply to Select Symbols. The proposed change is a part of
NASDAQ's continuing efforts to improve market quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For example, through the Investor Support Program and
Qualified Market Maker Program NASDAQ provides certain credits and
reduced fees for member firms that improve the market significantly.
See Rule 7014. NASDAQ notes that although the proposed new fees and
credits are in lieu of other fees and credits, the trading activity
in these securities will be accounted for in calculations of
measures used to qualify for fees and credits under Rule 7018(a)
applied to securities not in the proposed program (for example,
Consolidated Volume as defined under Rule 7018(a)).
    \6\ Namely, NASDAQ, The New York Stock Exchange, or other
exchanges.
    \7\ Each of the Select Symbol securities trade in excess of $1.
NASDAQ notes that the proposed fees and credits applicable to the
Select Symbols do not apply to participation in the NASDAQ Opening,
Closing, and Halt Crosses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 610 of Regulation NMS generally limits the fees that any
trading center \8\ can charge for accessing the best bid and offer of
an exchange to no more than $0.0030 per share; however, there is no
limit on how low an access fee may be under the regulation. Most
national securities exchanges operate what is commonly known as a
``maker-taker'' model of pricing, whereby a liquidity maker is provided
with a rebate if its order is executed and a liquidity taker is
assessed a fee for removing that liquidity. By using the maker-taker
model, exchanges are able to provide an

incentive to liquidity makers to expose their orders, supported by the
fee paid by the liquidity taker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``Trading Center'' is defined by Regulation NMS as a
national securities exchange or national securities association that
operates an SRO trading facility, an alternative trading system, an
exchange market maker, an OTC market maker, or any other broker or
dealer that executes orders internally by trading as principal or
crossing orders as agent. See 17 CFR 242.600(b)(78).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Rule 7018(a), NASDAQ currently assesses a fee of $0.0030 per
share executed for accessing liquidity on NASDAQ, and provides various
credits under the rule for providing liquidity. NASDAQ is proposing to
reduce the fees assessed for accessing liquidity on the Exchange in the
Select Symbols in an effort to attract more liquidity to the Exchange
in those securities and thereby improve the quality of the market in
them on NASDAQ. In terms of the fee assessed for accessing all
liquidity on NASDAQ, the Exchange proposes to lower the fee from
$0.0030 to $0.0005 for the fourteen Select Symbols, which are comprised
of securities listed on either NASDAQ or the New York Stock Exchange
(``NYSE''). NASDAQ is proposing to reduce the access fee regardless of
whether the liquidity removed is displayed or not.
    Concurrent with lowering the fee assessed for removing liquidity
from NASDAQ in the Select Symbols, NASDAQ is also proposing to reduce
the credits provided for adding liquidity in them. Currently, NASDAQ
provides various credits to member firms that provide displayed
liquidity \9\ based on various measures of the nature and consistency
of the member firm's beneficial market activity.\10\ The credits NASDAQ
provides for displayed liquidity range from $0.0015 to $0.00305 per
share executed. NASDAQ is proposing to reduce the credit provided to a
member firm that provides displayed liquidity in the select securities
to $0.0004 per share executed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Other than Supplemental Orders and Designated Retail Orders,
which have separate credits and eligibility requirements.
    \10\ For example, NASDAQ provides a credit of $0.00305 per share
executed to member firms that have (i) shares of liquidity provided
in all securities through one of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that
represent 1.60% or more of Consolidated Volume during the month, or
(ii) shares of liquidity provided in all securities through one or
more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that represent 1.60% or more
of Consolidated Volume during the month, and shares of liquidity
provided in all securities through one of its Nasdaq Market Center
MPIDs that represent 0.75% or more of Consolidated Volume during the
month. Consolidated Volume is defined under the rule as the total
consolidated volume reported to all consolidated transaction
reporting plans by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities
during a month in equity securities, excluding executed orders with
a size of less than one round lot. As such, to qualify for the
credit a member firm must consistently contribute significantly
toward improving price discovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also provides a credit to member firms that contribute
non-displayed mid-point liquidity to NASDAQ. Like the credits provided
for displayed liquidity, NASDAQ provides several credits to member
firms that provide non-displayed midpoint liquidity based on the nature
and consistency of the member firm's beneficial contribution to market
quality. These credits NASDAQ provides for non-displayed midpoint
liquidity range from $0.0010 to a credit of $0.0025 per share executed.
NASDAQ notes that, while displayed liquidity provides the greatest
contribution to market quality, non-displayed mid-point liquidity often
provides liquidity takers with significant price improvement.
Accordingly, NASDAQ provides an incentive to market participants to
provide non-displayed midpoint liquidity, albeit at a level generally
lower than what is provided for displayed liquidity. NASDAQ is
proposing to provide a credit to a member firm that provides non-
displayed midpoint liquidity in the select securities of $0.0002 per
share executed.
    Lastly, NASDAQ provides credits that range from $0.0018 to $0.0000
per share executed for certain other non-displayed orders, including
Supplemental Orders,\11\ if that member firm contributes a significant
level of non-displayed liquidity during the month. Under the proposal,
NASDAQ will not provide a credit for other non-displayed orders in the
Select Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As defined by Rule 4751(f)(14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ notes that it may, from time to time, alter the securities
that are included in the list of Select Symbols and will file the
appropriate rule filing if such a chance [sic] is proposed. NASDAQ will
consider the impact the pricing has had on market quality and off-
exchange volume of existing Select Symbols, and will also consider
similar factors when selecting securities to be added as Select
Symbols.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\12\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which NASDAQ operates or controls, and 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; and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ believes that the proposed fee and credits for trading in
the Select Symbols are reasonable and equitably allocated because they
are designed to improve market quality in securities that currently
trade significantly off-exchange. NASDAQ notes that the proposed access
fee is significantly lower than the access fee assessed by NASDAQ for
all equity securities trading above $1. Although access fees have been
debated before Regulation NMS was adopted, these fees and related
credits have recently been the subject of intense debate and part of
the larger discussion on U.S. market structure. Many commenters have
noted that the exchange's fee and rebate structures have become too
complex, which has resulted in a significant number of market
participants to [sic] direct order flow to venues other than exchanges.
NASDAQ believes that orders interacting on ``lit'' exchanges provide
the greatest contribution to price competition and transparency.
Accordingly, NASDAQ is proposing to reduce the access fee significantly
in certain securities that have greater than average off-exchange
transactions, which it believes may attract order flow that is
currently directed to off-exchange trading venues. As a consequence of
the access fee reduction in these securities, NASDAQ is also generally
reducing the credit provided to liquidity makers for providing
liquidity in the Select Symbols. As noted above, exchanges using the
maker-taker model use, in part, the access fee assessed the liquidity
taker to cover the credit provided to the liquidity maker. As such,
NASDAQ believes that it reasonable to reduce the credits provided to
liquidity makers in the Select Symbols given the reduction in the fee
assessed liquidity takers. The Exchange notes that the credits provided
for adding liquidity in the Select Symbols are tiered to provide the
greatest credit to liquidity makers that provide the most beneficial
liquidity. NASDAQ believes that providing such tiered credits is
reasonable and an equitable allocation of the credit because doing so
is consistent with the current structure under the rule,

whereby member firms that provide displayed liquidity are generally
provided the greatest credit and those that provide non-displayed
liquidity receive the lowest.
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed changes are not unfairly
discriminatory because they will apply uniformly to all member firms
that trade in the Select Symbols. Moreover, applying the reduced access
fee to the Select Symbols is not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange seeks to provide incentive to member firms to direct order
flow away from off-exchange venues and on to NASDAQ. NASDAQ notes that
it is also reducing the credits provided to liquidity makers in the
Select Symbols, which will offset the reduced fee received by NASDAQ
from liquidity takers. As such, liquidity makers will continue to be
rewarded for providing liquidity to NASDAQ, while liquidity takers will
continue to be assessed a fee for removing liquidity. Lastly, NASDAQ is
continuing its practice of providing greater credits to liquidity
makers that provide liquidity that contributes most to price discovery.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule changes will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.\14\ NASDAQ notes
that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels
at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities
available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment,
NASDAQ must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with
other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been
exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, NASDAQ believes that the degree to which fee
changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited. In this instance, NASDAQ is making a significant
reduction in the access fee assessed for removing liquidity in the
Select Symbols. NASDAQ's goal in doing so is to attract liquidity to
NASDAQ in these securities, thereby improving the level of price
discovery. NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed changes will serve
as a burden on competition in any way, but rather may promote
competition among exchanges in the fees assessed and credits provided
in the Select Symbols. Moreover, the proposed changes are reflective of
the competition that exists between exchanges and off-exchange venues
that are subject to lesser regulatory burdens than the exchanges,
including transparency. Lastly, the proposed changes are designed to
benefit market quality and ultimately, price competition among market
participants on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In sum, if the changes proposed herein are unattractive to market
participants, it is likely that NASDAQ will lose market share as a
result. To the extent the proposed changes are effective at attracting
order flow to the Exchange, the changes will promote competition among
exchanges and other trading venues. Accordingly, NASDAQ does not
believe that the proposed changes will unnecessarily impair the ability
of members or other order execution venues to compete in the financial
markets.

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

    The foregoing change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \15\. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NASDAQ-2014-128 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-128. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange.
All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-
128, and should be submitted on or before January 27, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-30903 Filed 1-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 100 (Thursday, May 23, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23740-23742]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10772]

========================================================================
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. 84, No. 100 / Thursday, May 23, 2019 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0389; Product Identifier 2018-SW-035-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2018-10-
07, which applies to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S-
76C helicopters. AD 2018-10-07 requires inspecting the engine
collective position transducer (CPT). Since we issued AD 2018-10-07, we
determined that an additional part-numbered engine CPT is affected by
the same unsafe condition. This proposed AD would retain the
requirements of AD 2018-10-07 and expand the applicability to include
the additional engine CPT. We are proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 8, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact your local
Sikorsky Field Representative or Sikorsky's Service Engineering Group
at Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, 124 Quarry Road, Trumbull, CT 06611;
telephone 1-800-Winged-S or<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Operators may also log on to the
Sikorsky 360 website at https://www.sikorsky360.com. You may view this
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0389; 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 (phone: 800-647-
5527) is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Rediess, Aerospace Engineer,
Boston ACO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0389;
Product Identifier 2018-SW-035-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because
of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We issued AD 2018-10-07, Amendment 39-19282 (83 FR 23355, May 21,
2018), (``AD 2018-10-07''), for Sikorsky Model S-76C helicopters with a
Turbomeca, S.A., Arriel 2S1 or Arriel 2S2 engine with an engine CPT
part number (P/N) 76900-01821-104 installed. AD 2018-10-07 requires
initial and recurring inspections of each CPT by measuring resistance,
linearity resistance movement, and differential voltage, and depending
on the outcome of the inspections, replacing the CPT. AD 2018-10-07
resulted from 20 reports of One Engine Inoperative (OEI) incidents
resulting from wear of an engine CPT. We issued AD 2018-10-07 to detect
wear of a CPT prior to it causing an OEI condition and possible
emergency landing.

Actions Since AD 2018-10-07 Was Issued

    Since AD 2018-10-07 was issued, Sikorsky has introduced CPT P/N
76900-01821-105. While this part is expected to be an improvement over
CPN P/N 76900-01821-104 in regard to the frequency of the potential
unsafe condition, there is not enough service history on this new part
to indicate that it will eliminate the unsafe condition.
    This NPRM would retain the requirements of AD 2018-10-07 and would
expand the applicability to include engine CPT P/N 76900-01821-105.
Inspections of engine CPT P/N 76900-01821-105 are necessary since it is
subject to the same unsafe condition as P/N 76900-01821-104 due to
design similarity.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
76-73-8, Revision A, dated December 4, 2015 (ASB 76-73-8A), which
specifies a one-time inspection of total resistance, linearity
resistant movement, excitation voltage, and differential voltage of the
CPTs using CPT Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042.
    We reviewed Sikorsky Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2, Temporary
Revision No. 73-07, dated August 17, 2016 (TR 73-07), which specifies
removing, installing, and adjusting the CPTs, and inspecting total
resistance,

linearity resistant movement, excitation voltage, and differential
voltage of the CPTs. TR 73-07 also divides the procedures by CPT Test
Box P/N by providing separate procedures for test boxes modified by
Sikorsky Special Service Instructions (SSI) No. 76-96, dated August 19,
2016, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    We also reviewed Sikorsky Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2,
Temporary Revision No. 73-08, dated September 20, 2017 (TR 73-08),
which updates the procedures in TR 73-07. TR 73-08 does not divide the
procedures by CPT Test Box P/N as it eliminates the procedures for CPT
Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042. TR 73-08 omits obsolete figures and it
provides inspection results as pass or fail.
    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.

Other Related Service Information

    We reviewed Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter ASB 76-73-8, Basic Issue,
dated August 21, 2015 (ASB 76-73-8). ASB 76-73-8 contains the same
procedures as ASB 76-73-8A; however, ASB 76-73-8A updates Sikorsky's
contact information for submitting a purchase order.
    We also reviewed Sikorsky SA 4047-76C-2-1, Temporary Revision No.
5-181, dated August 21, 2015 (TR 5-181); Task 5-20-00 of Sikorsky
Airworthiness Limitations and Inspection Requirements, Publication No.
SA 4047-76C-2-1, Revision 24, dated December 15, 2015 (Task 5-20-00);
and Section 73-22-04 of Chapter 73 Engine Fuel and Control, of Sikorsky
Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2, Revision 31, dated December 15, 2015
(Section 73-22-04). TR 5-181 specifies adding CPT inspections
referenced in Section 73-22-04 to the 300-hour inspection checklist
contained in Task 5-20-00.
    We reviewed Sikorksy Safety Advisory No. SSA-S76-11-0002, dated May
17, 2011. This service information provides precautionary instructions
to minimize hazardous situations that might result from an unreliable
CPT.
    We also reviewed Sikorsky SSI No. 76-96, dated August 19, 2016,
which contains procedures to modify CPT Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042
and re-identify it as P/N 76700-40009-043. This one-time modification
reduces the instructions to inspect the CPT and improves the inspection
accuracy.
    We reviewed Sikorsky SSI No. 76-87, dated July 24, 2015, and SSI
No. 76-87A, Revision A, dated August 21, 2015. These SSIs specify a
one-time inspection of total resistance, linearity resistant movement,
excitation voltage, and differential voltage of the CPTs using CPT Test
Box P/N 76700-40009-042.

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 retain all of the requirements of AD 2018-
10-07, but would add engine CPT P/N 76900-01821-105 to the
applicability.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Sikorsky ASB 76-73-8A, TR 73-07, and TR 73-08 specify using and
returning Sikorsky's CPT data sheet and any failed CPT to Sikorsky.
This proposed AD would not.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD to be an interim action. The design
approval holder is currently developing a modification that will
address the unsafe condition identified in this proposed AD. Once this
modification is developed, approved, and available, we might consider
additional rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 115 helicopters of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour.
    The inspections would take about 3.75 work-hours for an estimated
cost of $319 per helicopter and $36,685 for the U.S. fleet per
inspection cycle. Replacing a CPT would take about 6 work-hours and
parts would cost $3,072 for an estimated replacement cost of $3,582.

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 have 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 that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2018-10-07, Amendment 39-19282 (83 FR 23355, May 21, 2018), and adding
the following new AD:

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2019-0389; Product
Identifier 2018-SW-035-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by July 8, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2018-10-07, Amendment 39-19282 (83 FR 23355,
May 21, 2018).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Model S-76C
helicopters, certificated in any category, with a Turbomeca, S.A.,
Arriel 2S1 or Arriel 2S2 engine with an engine collective position
transducer (CPT) part number (P/N) 76900-01821-104 or 76900-01821-
105 installed.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC): 7300, Engine Fuel and
Control.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of wear of the CPT that has
resulted in several One Engine Inoperative (OEI) incidents. We are
issuing this AD to prevent failure of a CPT. The unsafe condition,
if not addressed, could result in a reduction in power to one engine
resulting in an annunciated momentary OEI condition and subsequent
emergency landing.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Within 130 hours time-in-service (TIS):
    (i) Measure resistance of each engine CPT and replace the CPT if
the measured resistance is not within tolerance by following the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.C.(1) through 3.C.(8)(b),
of Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin ASB 76-73-8,
Revision A, dated December 4, 2015 (ASB 76-73-8A), if using Test Box
P/N 76700-40009-042 or by following paragraph 3.B.(11) of Sikorsky
Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2, Temporary Revision No. 73-08,
dated September 20, 2017 (TR 73-08), if using Test Box P/N 76700-
40009-043. You are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or
submit a data sheet to Sikorsky.
    (ii) Measure the linearity resistance movement of each engine
CPT and replace the CPT if there is a linear abnormality or change
in resistance that is not within tolerance by following the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.D.(1) through 3.D.(14)(b),
of ASB 76-73-8A, if using Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042 or by
following paragraph 3.B.(12) of TR 73-08, if using Test Box P/N
76700-40009-043. You are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data
sheet or submit a data sheet to Sikorsky.
    (iii) Measure the differential voltage of each engine CPT and
replace the CPT if the measured voltage is not within tolerance by
following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.E. through
3.G.(1) of ASB 76-73-8A, if using Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042 or by
following paragraph 3.B.(13) of TR 73-08, if using Test Box P/N
76700-40009-043. You are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data
sheet or submit a data sheet to Sikorsky.
    (2) Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 300 hours TIS:
    (i) If using Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042:
    (A) Measure resistance of each engine CPT and replace the CPT if
the resistance is not within tolerance by following paragraph
4.B.(11) of Sikorsky Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2, Temporary
Revision No. 73-07, dated August 17, 2016 (TR 73-07), except you are
not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or return a failed CPT
to Sikorsky.
    (B) Measure the linearity resistance movement of each engine CPT
and replace the CPT if the movement exceeds tolerance by following
paragraphs 4.B.(12)(a) through 4.B.(13)(f) of TR 73-07, except you
are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or return a failed
CPT to Sikorsky.
    (C) Measure the differential voltage of each CPT by following
paragraphs 4.B.(14) through 4.B.(15)(h) of TR 73-07, except you are
not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet. If the maximum
voltage is greater than 100 millivolts or the minimum voltage is
less than -100 millivolts, replace the CPT.
    (ii) For helicopters using Test Box P/N 76700-40009-043:
    (A) Measure resistance of each engine CPT and replace the CPT if
the resistance is not within tolerance by following paragraph
5.B.(11) of TR 73-07 or paragraph 3.B.(11) of TR 73-08, except you
are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or return a failed
CPT to Sikorsky.
    (B) Measure the resistance linearity of each engine CPT and
replace the CPT if the resistance is not within tolerance by
following paragraph 5.B.(12) of TR 73-07 or paragraph 3.B.(12) of TR
73-08, except you are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet
or return a failed CPT to Sikorsky.
    (C) Measure the differential voltage of each engine CPT and
replace the CPT if the resistance is not within tolerance by
following paragraphs 5.B.(13)(a) through 5.B.(13)(k) of TR 73-07 or
paragraph 3.B.(13) of TR 73-08, except you are not required to use
Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or return a failed CPT to Sikorsky.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the procedures specified in Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter
Alert Service Bulletin ASB 76-73-8, Basic Issue, dated August 21,
2015; Sikorsky Special Service Instruction SSI No. 76-87, dated July
24, 2015; or Sikorsky Special Service Instruction SSI No. 76-87,
Revision A, dated August 21, 2015, are considered acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions specified in paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nick Rediess,
Aerospace Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:
(781) 238-7159; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact your
local Sikorsky Field Representative or Sikorsky's Service
Engineering Group at Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, 124 Quarry Road,
Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S or<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Operators may also log on to
the Sikorsky 360 website at https://www.sikorsky360.com. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 15, 2019.
Helene Gandy,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-10772 Filed 5-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 227 (Wednesday, November 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73852-73853]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29927]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76479; File No. SR-ICC-2015-015]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Related to the ICC Rule Enforcement
Process for Missed Submissions

November 19, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On September 30, 2015, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')\1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change (SR-ICC-2015-015)
to the ICC Clearing Rules (the ``Rules'') related to the ICC rule
enforcement process for Missed Submissions. The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on October 16,
2015.\3\ The Commission did not receive comments on the proposed rule
change. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-76122 (Oct. 9, 2015),
80 FR 62593 (Oct. 16, 2015) (SR-ICC-2015-015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    As part of ICC's end-of-day price discovery process, ICC Clearing
Participants (``CPs'') are required to submit end-of-day prices for
specific instruments related to their open interest at ICC, in
accordance with Rule 404(b) and ICC Procedures. Failure of a CP to
provide submissions required by ICC pursuant to Rule 404(b) and ICC
Procedures constitute a Missed Submission. In order to provide
incentive against Missed Submissions, ICC has adopted a summary
assessment approach described in Rule 702(e) and Schedule 702 of the
Rules.
    Currently, under Rule 702(e)(ii)(2), a CP may be eligible for a
once-in-a-lifetime conditional waiver from such assessments if one or
more Missed Submissions are the first instance(s) of a Missed
Submission for the type of instrument (index or single name) and the CP
provides adequate explanation of the cause and plans for remedial
actions.
    Given the increased automation of price submissions, ICC recognizes
that there may be circumstances, due to technological failures, which
may result in Missed Submissions. ICC also notes that, due to the
significant length of time since the inception of the end-of-day
process, many CPs have utilized their once-in-a-lifetime waiver. As
such, ICC believes it is reasonable to provide, under limited
circumstances, a conditional once-a-year waiver for such Missed
Submissions caused by technical failures, as described below. ICC
believes that such Rule changes will not affect the integrity and
effectiveness of the end-of-day price discovery process. ICC believes
such Rule changes provide a valuable and practical balance between the
technicalities of the price discovery process and appropriate
penalization for Missed Submissions.
    The proposed Rule text provides for the replacement of ICC's
current once-in-a-lifetime waiver for Missed Submissions with a
conditional once-a-year waiver for Missed Submissions caused by
technical failures. Under revised Rule 702(e)(ii)(2), a CP would be
eligible for one waiver per year for single name Missed Submissions,
and one waiver per year for index Missed Submissions. A CP may request
such wavier(s) be applied against all Missed Submissions for a given
instrument class on a given day. CPs would be required to provide
documentation with a waiver request, explaining that the root-cause of
the Missed Submission was a technology issue and including a
remediation plan to fix the cause of the Missed Submission. ICC states
that it would review and evaluate the waiver request and accept unless
it had legitimate concerns that the root-cause of the Missed Submission
had not been adequately identified, was not due to a technical issue,
and/or would not be corrected by the provided remediation plan. ICC
would maintain its current ability to provide waivers for Missed
Submissions deemed to be due to extraordinary circumstances outside of
a CP's control, as set forth in Rule 702(e)(ii)(3). Pending regulatory
approval, ICC plans to implement these changes on January 1, 2016, and
apply the once-a-year waiver to the 2016 calendar year, and each
calendar year going forward. ICC represents that there are no changes
to ICC policies and procedures as a result of the Rule changes.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \4\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such self-regulatory organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F)
of the Act \5\ requires, among other things, that the rules of a
clearing agency are designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions. Section
17A(b)(3)(G) of the Act \6\ requires that rules the of the clearing
agency provide that its participants shall be appropriately disciplined
for violation of any provision of the rules of the clearing agency,
including through the use of fines or any other fitting sanctions.
Furthermore, Section 17A(b)(3)(H) of the Act \7\ requires, among other
things, that rules the of the clearing agency, in general, provide a
fair procedure with respect to the disciplining of participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(G).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(H).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \8\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to ICC. The proposed rule change
would replace ICC's current once-in-a-lifetime waiver for Missed
Submissions, which has already been utilized by many of ICC's CPs, with
a conditional once-a-year waiver for Missed Submissions (one waiver
each for single name and index Missed Submissions) caused by technical
failures. The proposed rule change also provides details surrounding
the process by which CPs can request such conditional waivers and ICC's
review and evaluation of each request. The Commission believes that
allowing for a once-per-year waiver for technical failures causing
Missed Submissions is appropriate given the increased automation of
end-of-day price submissions and is reasonably designed to maintain the
integrity of ICC's end-of-day pricing process, thereby promoting the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
and, to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions in accordance with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Commission believes that allowing for a once-per-
year conditional waiver for technical failures in the summary
assessment process for Missed Submissions is designed to ensure that
CPs are

appropriately disciplined for violations of ICC's rules consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the Act.\10\ The Commission also finds that the
proposed process for the requesting and review of the conditional
waivers is reasonably designed to provide for a fair procedure with
respect to the disciplining of CPs for Missed Submissions in accordance
with Section 17A(b)(3)(H) of the Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(G).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(H).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \12\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-ICC-2015-015) be,
and hereby is, approved.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \14\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-29927 Filed 11-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P