[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 188 (Thursday, September 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59150-59156]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21068]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95902; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2022-052]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Nasdaq Equity 11, Rule 11890

September 23, 2022.
    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 September 20, 2022, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Nasdaq Equity 11, Rule 11890
(Clearly Erroneous Transactions).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rules, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On September 1, 2022, the Commission approved the proposal of Cboe
BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe BZX'') to (1) adopt on a permanent basis the
pilot program for clearly erroneous executions in Cboe BZX Rule 11.17
and (2) limit the circumstances where clearly erroneous review would
continue to be available during regular trading hours (i.e., Market
Hours) \3\ when the Limit Up-Limit Down (``LULD'') Plan to Address
Extraordinary Market Volatility (the ``LULD Plan'') \4\ already
provides similar protections for trades occurring at prices that may be
deemed erroneous.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95658 (September 1,
2022) (SR-CboeBZX-2022-037).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012).
    \5\ The term ``Market Hours'' means the period of time beginning
at 9:30 a.m. ET and ending at 4:00 p.m. ET (or such earlier time as
may be designated by Nasdaq on a day when Nasdaq closes early). See
Equity 1, Section 1(a)(9). The Exchange will make conforming changes
throughout Rule 11890 to replace references to ``Regular Trading
Hours'' and ``Regular Market Session'' with ``Market Hours,'' which
is the correct defined term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to adopt the same changes in Equity 11,
Rule 11890 (Clearly Erroneous Transactions). The Exchange believes that
these changes are appropriate as the LULD Plan has been approved by the
Commission on a permanent basis,\6\ and in light of amendments to the
LULD Plan, including changes to the applicable Price Bands \7\ around
the open and close of trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84843 (December 18,
2018), 83 FR 66464 (December 26, 2018) (``Notice''); 85623 (April
11, 2019), 84 FR 16086 (April 17, 2019) (File No. 4-631)
(``Amendment Eighteen'').
    \7\ ``Price Bands'' refers to the term provided in Section V of
the LULD Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal To Make the Clearly Erroneous Pilot Permanent
    On September 10, 2010, the Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to Equity 11, Rule 11890 that, among other things: (i) provided
for uniform treatment of clearly erroneous execution reviews in multi-

stock events involving twenty or more securities; and (ii) reduced the
ability of the Exchange to deviate from the objective standards set
forth in the rule.\8\ In 2013, the Exchange adopted a provision
designed to address the operation of the LULD Plan.\9\ Finally, in
2014, the Exchange adopted two additional provisions providing that:
(i) a series of transactions in a particular security on one or more
trading days may be viewed as one event if all such transactions were
effected based on the same fundamentally incorrect or grossly
misinterpreted issuance information resulting in a severe valuation
error for all such transactions; and (ii) in the event of any
disruption or malfunction in the operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of an Exchange, another SRO, or
responsible single plan processor in connection with the transmittal or
receipt of a trading halt, an Officer, acting on his or her own motion,
shall nullify any transaction that occurs after a trading halt has been
declared by the primary listing market for a security and before such
trading halt has officially ended according to the primary listing
market.\10\ These changes are currently scheduled to operate for a
pilot period that would end at the close of business on October 20,
2022.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (September 10,
2010), 75 FR 56613 (September 16, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-076).
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68819 (February 1,
2013), 78 FR 9438 (February 8, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-022).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72434 (June 19,
2014), 79 FR 36110 (June 25, 2014) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-044).
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95329 (July 20,
2022), 87 FR 44455 (July 26, 2022) (SR-NASDAQ-2022-043).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When it originally approved the clearly erroneous pilot, the
Commission explained that the changes were ``being implemented on a
pilot basis so that the Commission and the Exchanges can monitor the
effects of the pilot on the markets and investors, and consider
appropriate adjustments, as necessary.'' \12\ In the 12 years since
that time, the Exchange and other national securities exchanges have
gained considerable experience in the operation of the rule, as amended
on a pilot basis. Based on that experience, the Exchange believes that
the program should be allowed to continue on a permanent basis so that
equities market participants and investors can benefit from the
increased certainty provided by the amended rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (September
10, 2010), 75 FR 56613 (September 16, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-076).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The clearly erroneous pilot was implemented following a severe
disruption in the U.S. equities markets on May 6, 2010 (``Flash
Crash'') to ``provide greater transparency and certainty to the process
of breaking trades.'' \13\ Largely, the pilot reduced the discretion of
the Exchange, other national securities exchanges, and Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') to deviate from the objective
standards in their respective rules when dealing with potentially
erroneous transactions. The pilot has thus helped afford greater
certainty to Members and investors about when trades will be deemed
erroneous pursuant to self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') rules and
has provided a more transparent process for conducting such reviews.
The Exchange proposes to make the current pilot permanent so that
market participants can continue to benefit from the increased
certainty afforded by the current rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendments to the Clearly Erroneous Rules
    When the Participants to the LULD Plan filed to introduce the Limit
Up-Limit Down (``LULD'') mechanism, itself a response to the Flash
Crash, a handful of commenters noted the potential discordance between
the clearly erroneous rules and the Price Bands used to limit the price
at which trades would be permitted to be executed pursuant to the LULD
Plan. For example, two commenters requested that the clearly erroneous
rules be amended so the presumption would be that trades executed
within the Price Bands would not be subject to review.\14\ While the
Participants acknowledged that the potential to prevent clearly
erroneous executions would be a ``key benefit'' of the LULD Plan, the
Participants decided not to amend the clearly erroneous rules at that
time.\15\ In the years since, industry feedback has continued to
reflect a desire to eliminate the discordance between the LULD
mechanism and the clearly erroneous rules so that market participants
would have more certainty that trades executed with the Price Bands
would stand. For example, the Equity Market Structure Advisory
Committee (``EMSAC'') Market Quality Subcommittee included in its April
19, 2016 status report a preliminary recommendation that clearly
erroneous rules be amended to conform to the Price Bands--i.e., ``any
trade that takes place within the band would stand and not be broken
and trades outside the LU/LD bands would be eligible for the
consideration of the Clearly Erroneous rules.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (File No. 4-631) (n. 33505).
    \15\ Id.
    \16\ See EMSAC Market Quality Subcommittee, Recommendations for
Rulemaking on Issues of Market Quality (November 29, 2016),
available at https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/emsac/emsac-recommendations-rulemaking-market-quality.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is important for there to be some
mechanism to ensure that investors' orders are either not executed at
clearly erroneous prices or are subsequently busted as needed to
maintain a fair and orderly market. At the same time, the Exchange
believes that the LULD Plan, as amended, would provide sufficient
protection for trades executed during Market Hours. Indeed, the LULD
mechanism could be considered to offer superior protection as it
prevents potentially erroneous trades from being executed in the first
instance. After gaining experience with the LULD Plan, the Exchange now
believes that it is appropriate to largely eliminate clearly erroneous
review during Market Hours when Price Bands are in effect. Thus, as
proposed, trades executed within the Price Bands would stand, barring
one of a handful of identified scenarios where such review may still be
necessary for the protection of investors. The Exchange believes that
this change would be beneficial for the U.S. equities markets as it
would ensure that trades executed within the Price Bands are subject to
clearly erroneous review in only rare circumstances, resulting in
greater certainty for Members and investors.
    The current LULD mechanism for addressing extraordinary market
volatility is available solely during Market Hours. Thus, trades during
the Exchange's Pre-Market \17\ or Post-Market Hours \18\ would not
benefit from this protection and could ultimately be executed at prices
that may be considered erroneous. For this reason, the Exchange
proposes that transactions executed during Pre-Market or Post-Market
Hours would continue to be reviewable as clearly erroneous.

Continued availability of the clearly erroneous rule during Pre- and
Post-Market Hours would therefore ensure that investors have
appropriate recourse when erroneous trades are executed outside of the
hours where similar protection can be provided by the LULD Plan.
Further, the proposal is designed to eliminate the potential
discordance between clearly erroneous review and LULD Price Bands,
which does not exist outside of Market Hours because the LULD Plan is
not in effect. Thus, the Exchange believes that it is appropriate to
continue to allow transactions to be eligible for clearly erroneous
review if executed outside of Market Hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The term ``Pre-Market Hours'' means the period of time
beginning at 4:00 a.m. ET and ending immediately prior to the
commencement of Market Hours. See Equity 1, Section 1(a)(9). The
Exchange will make conforming changes throughout Rule 11890 to
replace references to ``Pre-Opening Hours'' or ``Pre-Opening Hours
Trading Session'' with ``Pre-Market Hours,'' which is the correct
defined term.
    \18\ The term ``Post-Market Hours'' means the period of time
beginning immediately after the end of Market Hours and ending at
8:00 p.m. ET. See Equity 1, Section 1(a)(9). The Exchange will make
conforming changes throughout Rule 11890 to replace references to
``After Hours'' or ``After Hours Trading Session'' with ``Post-
Market Hours,'' which is the correct defined term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the other hand, there would be much more limited potential to
request that a transaction be reviewed as potentially erroneous during
Market Hours. With the introduction of the LULD mechanism in 2013,
clearly erroneous trades are largely prevented by the requirement that
trades be executed within the Price Bands. In addition, in 2019,
Amendment Eighteen to the LULD Plan eliminated double-wide Price Bands:
(1) at the Open, and (2) at the Close for Tier 2 NMS Stocks 2 with a
Reference Price above $3.00.\19\ Due to these changes, the Exchange
believes that the Price Bands would provide sufficient protection to
investor orders such that clearly erroneous review would no longer be
necessary during Market Hours. As the Participants to the LULD Plan
explained in Amendment Eighteen: ``Broadly, the Limit Up-Limit Down
mechanism prevents trades from happening at prices where one party to
the trade would be considered `aggrieved,' and thus could be viewed as
an appropriate mechanism to supplant clearly erroneous rules.'' While
the Participants also expressed concern that the Price Bands might be
too wide to afford meaningful protection around the open and close of
trading, amendments to the LULD Plan adopted in Amendment Eighteen
narrowed Price Bands at these times in a manner that the Exchange
believes is sufficient to ensure that investors' orders would be
appropriately protected in the absence of clearly erroneous review. The
Exchange therefore believes that it is appropriate to rely on the LULD
mechanism as the primary means of preventing clearly erroneous trades
during Market Hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Amendment Eighteen, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the same time, the Exchange is cognizant that there may be
limited circumstances where clearly erroneous review may continue to be
appropriate, even during Market Hours. Thus, the Exchange proposes to
amend its clearly erroneous rules to enumerate the specific
circumstances where such review would remain available during the
course of Market Hours, as follows. All transactions that fall outside
of these specific enumerated exceptions would be ineligible for clearly
erroneous review.
    First, pursuant to proposed subparagraph (C)(1)(i) of Rule
11890(a)(2), a transaction executed during Market Hours would continue
to be eligible for clearly erroneous review if the transaction is not
subject to the LULD Plan. In such case, the Numerical Guidelines set
forth in subparagraph (C)(2) of Rule 11890(a)(2) will be applicable to
such NMS Stock. While the majority of securities traded on the Exchange
would be subject to the LULD Plan, certain equity securities, such as
rights and warrants, are explicitly excluded from the provisions of the
LULD Plan and would therefore be eligible for clearly erroneous review
instead.\20\ Similarly, there are instances, such as the opening
auction on the primary listing market,\21\ where transactions are not
ordinarily subject to the LULD Plan, or circumstances where a
transaction that ordinarily would have been subject to the LULD Plan is
not--due, for example, to some issue with processing the Price Bands.
These transactions would continue to be eligible for clearly erroneous
review, effectively ensuring that such review remains available as a
backstop when the LULD Plan would not prevent executions from occurring
at erroneous prices in the first instance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Appendix A of the LULD Plan.
    \21\ The initial Reference Price used to calculate Price Bands
is typically set by the Opening Price on the primary listing market.
See Section V(B) of the LULD Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, investors would also continue to be able to request review
of transactions that resulted from certain systems issues pursuant to
proposed subparagraph (C)(1)(ii). This limited exception would help to
ensure that trades that should not have been executed would continue to
be subject to clearly erroneous review. Specifically, as proposed,
transactions executed during Market Hours would be eligible for clearly
erroneous review pursuant to proposed subparagraph (C)(1)(ii) if the
transaction is the result of an Exchange technology or systems issue
that results in the transaction occurring outside of the applicable
LULD Price Bands pursuant to Rule 11890(g), or is executed after the
primary listing market for the security declares a regulatory trading
halt, suspension, or pause pursuant to Rule 11890(i). A transaction
subject to review pursuant to this paragraph shall be found to be
clearly erroneous if the price of the transaction to buy (sell) that is
the subject of the complaint is greater than (less than) the Reference
Price, described in subparagraph (D) of this Rule, by an amount that
equals or exceeds the applicable Percentage Parameter defined in
Appendix A to the LULD Plan (``Percentage Parameters'').
    Third, the Exchange proposes to narrowly allow for the review of
transactions during Market Hours when the Reference Price, described in
proposed subparagraph (D), is determined to be erroneous by an Officer
of the Exchange or senior level employee designee. Specifically, a
transaction executed during Market Hours would be eligible for clearly
erroneous review pursuant to proposed subparagraph (C)(1)(iii) of Rule
11890(a)(2) if the transaction involved, in the case of (1) a corporate
action or new issue or (2) a security that enters a Trading Pause
pursuant to the LULD Plan and resumes trading without an auction,\22\ a
Reference Price that is determined to be erroneous by an Officer of the
Exchange or senior level employee designee because it clearly deviated
from the theoretical value of the security. In such circumstances, the
Exchange may use a different Reference Price pursuant to proposed
subparagraph (D)(2) of this Rule. A transaction subject to review
pursuant to this paragraph shall be found to be clearly erroneous if
the price of the transaction to buy (sell) that is the subject of the
complaint is greater than (less than) the new Reference Price,
described in subparagraph (D)(2) below, by an amount that equals or
exceeds the applicable Numerical Guidelines or Percentage Parameters,
as applicable depending on whether the security is subject to the LULD
Plan. Specifically, the Percentage Parameters would apply to all
transactions except those in an NMS Stock that is not subject to the
LULD Plan, as described in subparagraph (C)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The Exchange notes that the ``resumption of trading without
an auction'' provision of the proposed rule text applies only to
securities that enter a Trading Pause pursuant to LULD and does not
apply to a corporate action or new issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the context of a corporate action or a new issue, there may be
instances where the security's Reference Price is later determined by
the Exchange to be erroneous (e.g., because of a bad first trade for a
new issue), and subsequent LULD Price Bands are calculated from that
incorrect Reference Price. In determining whether the Reference Price
is erroneous in such instances, the

Exchange would generally look to see if such Reference Price clearly
deviated from the theoretical value of the security. In such cases, the
Exchange would consider a number of factors to determine a new
Reference Price that is based on the theoretical value of the security,
including but not limited to, the offering price of the new issue, the
ratio of the stock split applied to the prior day's closing price, the
theoretical price derived from the numerical terms of the corporate
action transaction such as the exchange ratio and spin-off terms, and
the prior day's closing price on the OTC market for an OTC up-
listing.\23\ In the foregoing instances, the theoretical value of the
security would be used as the new Reference Price when applying the
Percentage Parameters under the LULD Plan (or Numerical Guidelines if
the transaction is in an NMS Stock that is not subject to the LULD
Plan) to determine whether executions would be cancelled as clearly
erroneous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Using transaction data reported to the FINRA OTC Reporting
Facility, FINRA disseminates via the Trade Data Dissemination
Service a final closing report for OTC equity securities for each
business day that includes, among other things, each security's
closing last sale price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following illustrate the proposed application of the rule in
the context of a corporate action or new issue:
Example 1
1. ABCD is subject to a corporate action, 1 for 10 reverse split, and
the previous day close was $5, but the new theoretical price based on
the terms of the corporate action is $50
2. The security opens at $5, with LULD bands at $4.50 x $5.50
3. The bands will be calculated correctly but the security is trading
at an erroneous price based on the valuation of the remaining
outstanding shares
4. The theoretical price of $50 would be used as the new Reference
Price when applying LULD bands to determine if executions would be
cancelled as clearly erroneous
Example 2
1. ABCD is subject to a corporate action, the company is doing a spin
off where a new issue will be listed, BCDE. ABCD trades at $50, and the
spinoff company is worth \1/5\ of ABCD
2. BCDE opens at $50 in the belief it is the same company as ABCD
3. The theoretical values of the two companies are ABCD $40 and BCDE
$10
4. BCDE would be deemed to have had an incorrect Reference Price and
the theoretical value of $10 would be used as the new Reference Price
when applying the LULD Bands to determine if executions would be
cancelled as clearly erroneous
Example 3
1. ABCD is an uplift from the OTC market, the prior days close on the
OTC market was $20
2. ABCD opens trading on the new listing exchange at $0.20 due to an
erroneous order entry
3. The new Reference Price to determine clearly erroneous executions
would be $20, the theoretical value of the stock from where it was last
traded

    In the context of the rare situation in which a security that
enters a LULD Trading Pause and resumes trading without an auction
(i.e., reopens with quotations), the LULD Plan requires that the new
Reference Price in this instance be established by using the mid-point
of the best bid and offer (``BBO'') on the primary listing exchange at
the reopening time.\24\ This can result in a Reference Price and
subsequent LULD Price Band calculation that is significantly away from
the security's last traded or more relevant price, especially in less
liquid names. In such rare instances, the Exchange is proposing to use
a different Reference Price that is based on the prior LULD Band that
triggered the Trading Pause, rather than the midpoint of the BBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See LULD Plan, Section I(U) and V(C)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following example illustrates the proposed application of the
rule in the context of a security that reopens without an auction:
Example 4
1. ABCD stock is trading at $20, with LULD Bands at $18 x $22
2. An incoming buy order causes the stock to enter a Limit State
Trading Pause and then a Trading Pause at $22
3. During the Trading Pause, the buy order causing the Trading Pause is
cancelled
4. At the end of the 5-minute halt, there is no crossed interest for an
auction to occur, thus trading would resume on a quote
5. Upon resumption, a quote that was available prior to the Trading
Pause (e.g., a quote was resting on the book prior to the Trading
Pause), is widely set at $10 x $90
6. The Reference Price upon resumption is $50 (mid-point of BBO)
7. The SIP will use this Reference Price and publish LULD Bands of $45
x $55 (i.e., far away from BBO prior to the halt)
8. The bands will be calculated correctly, but the $50 Reference Price
is subsequently determined to be incorrect as the price clearly
deviated from where it previously traded prior to the Trading Pause
9. The new Reference Price would be $22 (i.e., the last effective Price
Band that was in a limit state before the Trading Pause), and the LULD
Bands would be applied to determine if the executions should be
cancelled as clearly erroneous

    In all of the foregoing situations, investors would be left with no
remedy to request clearly erroneous review without the proposed
carveouts in subparagraph (C)(1)(iii) because the trades occurred
within the LULD Price Bands (albeit LULD Price Bands that were
calculated from an erroneous Reference Price). The Exchange believes
that removing the current ability for the Exchange to review in these
narrow circumstances would lessen investor protections.
Numerical Guidelines
    Today, subparagraph (C)(1) defines the Numerical Guidelines that
are used to determine if a transaction is deemed clearly erroneous
during Market Hours, or during the Pre-Market and Post-Market Hours.
With respect to Market Hours, trades are generally deemed clearly
erroneous if the execution price differs from the Reference Price
(i.e., last sale) by 10% if the Reference Price is greater than $0.00
up to and including $25.00; 5% if the Reference Price is greater than
$25.00 up to and including $50.00; and 3% if the Reference Price is
greater than $50.00. Wider parameters are also used for reviews for
Multi-Stock Events, as described in subparagraph (C)(2). With respect
to transactions in Leveraged ETF/ETN securities executed during Market
Hours, Pre-Market and Post-Market Hours, trades are deemed clearly
erroneous if the execution price exceeds the Market Hours Numerical
Guidelines multiplied by the leverage multiplier.
    Given the changes described in this proposed rule change, the
Exchange proposes to amend the way that the Numerical Guidelines are
applied during Market Hours in the handful of instances where clearly
erroneous review would continue to be available. Specifically during
Market Hours, the Exchange would continue to apply the Numerical
Guidelines, which would be relocated from subparagraph (C)(1) to
(C)(2)(i) under this proposal, to transactions eligible for review
pursuant proposed subparagraph (C)(1)(i) (i.e., transactions in NMS
Stocks that are not subject to the LULD Plan). In addition,

as applied to the circumstances described in proposed subparagraphs
(C)(1)(ii) and (iii), the Exchange would not apply the Numerical
Guidelines in proposed subparagraph (C)(2)(i) during Market Hours, and
would instead apply the Percentage Parameters used to calculate Price
Bands, as set forth in Appendix A to the LULD Plan. Without this
change, a transaction that would otherwise stand if Price Bands were
properly applied to the transaction may end up being subject to review
and deemed clearly erroneous solely due to the fact that the Price
Bands were not available due to a systems or other issue. The Exchange
believes that it makes more sense to instead base the Price Bands on
the same parameters as would otherwise determine whether the trade
would have been allowed to execute within the Price Bands. The Exchange
also proposes to modify the Numerical Guidelines applicable to
leveraged ETF/ETN securities during Market Hours. As noted above, the
Numerical Guidelines will only be applicable to transactions eligible
for review pursuant subparagraph (C)(1)(i) (i.e., to NMS Stocks that
are not subject to the LULD Plan). As leveraged ETF/ETN securities are
subject to LULD and thus the Percentage Parameters will be applicable
during Market Hours, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the Numerical
Guidelines for leveraged ETF/ETN securities traded during Market Hours.
However, as no Price Bands are available outside of Market Hours, the
Exchange proposes to keep the existing Numerical Guidelines in place
for transactions in leveraged ETF/ETN securities that occur during Pre-
Market and Post-Market Hours.
    The Exchange also proposes to move existing subparagraphs (C)(2)
(Multi-Stock Events Involving Twenty or More Securities) and (C)(3)
(Additional Factors) as proposed subparagraphs (C)(2)(ii) and
(C)(2)(iii), respectively, and also proposes to make clear that Multi-
Stock Events and Additional Factors will only be subject to clearly
erroneous review if those NMS Stocks are not subject to the LULD Plan
or occur during the Pre-Market or Post-Market Hours. The Exchange
proposes to make similar changes to existing subparagraph (A)(iii)
(Outlier Transactions) to make clear that such transactions will only
be subject to clearly erroneous review if those NMS Stocks are not
subject to the LULD Plan or occur during Pre-Market or Post-Market
Hours. Further, given the proposal to move existing subparagraphs
(C)(2) and (C)(3) to subparagraphs (C)(2)(ii) and (C)(2)(iii),
respectively, the Exchange also proposes to amend applicable rule
references throughout subparagraph (C)(2)(i). Further, the Exchange
proposes to update applicable rule references in subparagraph (A)(iii)
based on the above-described structural changes to the Rule. Finally,
the Exchange proposes to renumber existing subparagraph (C)(4) to
subparagraph (C)(3) and update the cross cites therein to ``paragraphs
(C)(1)-(C)(3)'' to ``subparagraphs (C)(1)-(C)(2).'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The Exchange will make a related change to update the cross
cite within current paragraph (b)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reference Price
    As proposed, the Reference Price used would continue to be based on
last sale and would be memorialized in proposed subparagraph (D).
Continuing to use the last sale as the Reference Price is necessary for
operational efficiency as it may not be possible to perform a timely
clearly erroneous review if doing so required computing the arithmetic
mean price of eligible reported transactions over the past five
minutes, as contemplated by the LULD Plan. While this means that there
would still be some differences between the Price Bands and the clearly
erroneous parameters, the Exchange believes that this difference is
reasonable in light of the need to ensure timely review if clearly
erroneous rules are invoked. The Exchange also proposes to allow for an
alternate Reference Price to be used as prescribed in proposed
subparagraphs (D)(1), (2), and (3). Specifically, the Reference Price
may be a value other than the consolidated last sale immediately prior
to the execution(s) under review (1) in the case of Multi-Stock Events
involving twenty or more securities, as described in subparagraph
(C)(2)(ii) above, (2) in the case of an erroneous Reference Price, as
described in subparagraph (C)(1)(iii) above,\26\ or (3) in other
circumstances, such as, for example, relevant news impacting a security
or securities, periods of extreme market volatility, sustained
illiquidity, or widespread system issues, where use of a different
Reference Price is necessary for the maintenance of a fair and orderly
market and the protection of investors and the public interest,
provided that such circumstances occurred during Pre-Market or Post-
Market Hours or are eligible for review pursuant to subparagraph
(C)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ As discussed above, in the case of (C)(1)(iii)(1), the
Exchange would consider a number of factors to determine a new
Reference Price that is based on the theoretical value of the
security, including but not limited to, the offering price of the
new issue, the ratio of the stock split applied to the prior day's
closing price, the theoretical price derived from the numerical
terms of the corporate action transaction such as the exchange ratio
and spin-off terms, and the prior day's closing price on the OTC
market for an OTC up-listing. In the case of (C)(1)(iii)(2), the
Reference Price will be the last effective Price Band that was in a
limit state before the Trading Pause.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

System Disruption or Malfunction
    To conform with the structural changes described above, the
Exchange now proposes to remove paragraph (b)(i), System Disruption or
Malfunctions, and renumber existing paragraph (b)(ii) as (b)(i).
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to add rule text in renumbered
(b)(i) (Senior Official Acting on Own Motion) to specify that a Senior
Official, acting on his or her own motion, may review potentially
erroneous transactions that occur only during Pre-Market or Post-Market
Hours or that are eligible for review pursuant to proposed paragraph
(a)(2)(C)(1).
    The Exchange also proposes new subparagraph (C)(1)(ii) of Rule
11890(a)(2). Specifically, as described in subparagraph (C)(1)(ii),
transactions occurring during Market Hours that are executed outside of
the LULD Price Bands due to an Exchange technology or system issue, may
be subject to clearly erroneous review pursuant to proposed paragraph
(g) of Rule 11890. Proposed subparagraph (C)(1)(ii) further provides
that a transaction subject to review pursuant to this paragraph shall
be found to be clearly erroneous if the price of the transaction to buy
(sell) that is the subject of the complaint is greater than (less than)
the Reference Price, described in subparagraph (D), by an amount that
equals or exceeds the applicable Percentage Parameter defined in
Appendix A to the LULD Plan.
Securities Subject to Limit Up-Limit Down Plan
    The Exchange proposes to rename paragraph (g) (Securities Subject
to LULD Plan) as ``Transactions Occurring Outside of LULD Price
Bands.'' Given that proposed subparagraph (C)(1) of Rule 11890(a)(2)
defines the LULD Plan, the Exchange also proposes to eliminate
redundant language from paragraph (g). Finally, the Exchange also
proposes to update references to the LULD Plan and Price Bands so that
they are uniform throughout the Rule and to update rule references
throughout the paragraph to conform to the structural changes to the
Rule described above.
Fees, Multi-Day Event and Trading Halts
    The Exchange proposes to modify the text of paragraphs (e) (Fees),
(h) (Multi-Day Event), and (i) (Trading Halts) to reference the
Percentage Parameters as well as the Numerical Guidelines, and

to update rule references therein to conform to the structural changes
to the Rule described above. Specifically, the existing text of
paragraph (e) provides that adjustments or voluntary breaks negotiated
by Nasdaq to trades executed at prices that meet the Numerical
Guidelines set forth in (a)(2)(C)(1) count as breaks by Nasdaq for
purposes of this paragraph. The Exchange now proposes to amend the rule
text to state that adjustments or voluntary breaks negotiated by Nasdaq
to trades executed at prices that meet the Percentage Parameters or
Numerical Guidelines set forth in (a)(2)(C)(2) count as breaks by
Nasdaq for purposes of this paragraph.
    In addition, the existing text of paragraphs (h) and (i) provides
that any action taken in connection with this paragraph will be taken
without regard to the Numerical Guidelines set forth in this Rule. The
Exchange proposes to amend the rule text to provide that any action
taken in connection with this paragraph will be taken without regard to
the Percentage Parameters or Numerical Guidelines set forth in this
Rule, with the Percentage Parameters being applicable to an NMS Stock
subject to the LULD Plan and the Numerical Guidelines being applicable
to an NMS Stock not subject to the LULD Plan.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\27\ in general, and
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\28\ in particular, in that it is designed
to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest and not to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the purpose section of this proposed rule change,
the current pilot was implemented following the Flash Crash to bring
greater transparency to the process for conducting clearly erroneous
reviews, and to help assure that the review process is based on clear,
objective, and consistent rules across the U.S. equities markets. The
Exchange believes that the amended clearly erroneous rules have been
successful in that regard and have thus furthered fair and orderly
markets. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the pilot has
successfully ensured that such reviews are conducted based on objective
and consistent standards across SROs and has therefore afforded greater
certainty to Members and investors. The Exchange therefore believes
that making the current pilot a permanent program is appropriate so
that equities market participants can continue to reap the benefits of
a clear, objective, and transparent process for conducting clearly
erroneous reviews. In addition, the Exchange understands that the other
U.S. equities exchanges and FINRA will also file largely identical
proposals to make their respective clearly erroneous pilots permanent.
The Exchange therefore believes that the proposed rule change would
promote transparency and uniformity across markets concerning review of
transactions as clearly erroneous and would also help assure consistent
results in handling erroneous trades across the U.S. equities markets,
thus furthering fair and orderly markets, the protection of investors,
and the public interest.
    Similarly, the Exchange believes that it is consistent with just
and equitable principles of trade to limit the availability of clearly
erroneous review during Market Hours. The LULD Plan was approved by the
Commission to operate on a permanent rather than pilot basis. As a
number of market participants have noted, the LULD Plan provides
protections that ensure that investors' orders are not executed at
prices that may be considered clearly erroneous. Further, amendments to
the LULD Plan approved in Amendment Eighteen serve to ensure that the
Price Bands established by the LULD Plan are ``appropriately tailored
to prevent trades that are so far from current market prices that they
would be viewed as having been executed in error.'' \29\ Thus, the
Exchange believes that clearly erroneous review should only be
necessary in very limited circumstances during Market Hours.
Specifically, such review would only be necessary in instances where a
transaction was not subject to the LULD Plan, or was the result of some
form of systems issue, as detailed in the purpose section of this
proposed rule change. Additionally, in narrow circumstances where the
transaction was subject to the LULD Plan, a clearly erroneous review
would be available in the case of (1) a corporate action or new issue
or (2) a security that enters a Trading Pause pursuant to LULD and
resumes trading without an auction, where the Reference Price is
determined to be erroneous by an Officer of the Exchange or senior
level employee designee because it clearly deviated from the
theoretical value of the security. Thus, eliminating clearly erroneous
review in all other instances will serve to increase certainty for
Members and investors that trades executed during Market Hours would
typically stand and would not be subject to review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Amendment Eighteen, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the fact that clearly erroneous review would largely be
limited to transactions that were not subject to the LULD Plan, the
Exchange also believes that it is necessary to change the parameters
used to determine whether a trade is clearly erroneous. Specifically,
due to the different parameters currently used for clearly erroneous
review and for determining Price Bands, it is possible that a trade
that would have been permitted to execute within the Price Bands would
later be deemed clearly erroneous, if, for example, a systems issue
prevented the dissemination of the Price Bands. The Exchange believes
that this result is contrary to the principle that trades within the
Price Bands should stand, and has the potential to cause investor
confusion if trades that are properly executed within the applicable
parameters described in the LULD Plan are later deemed erroneous. By
using consistent parameters for clearly erroneous reviews conducted
during Market Hours and the calculation of the Price Bands, the
Exchange believes that this change would also serve to promote greater
certainty with regards to when trades may be deemed erroneous.
    Finally, the proposed rule changes make organizational updates to
Rule 11890 as well as minor updates and corrections to the Rule to
improve readability and clarity.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal would ensure
the continued, uninterrupted operation of harmonized clearly erroneous
execution rules across the U.S. equities markets while also amending
those rules to provide greater certainty to Members and investors that
trades will stand if executed during Market Hours where the LULD Plan
provides adequate protection against trading at erroneous prices. The
Exchange understands that the other national securities exchanges and
FINRA will also file similar proposals, the substance of which are
identical to this proposal. Thus, the proposed rule change will help to
ensure consistency

across SROs without implicating any competitive issues.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \30\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \32\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \33\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed
rule change may become operative on October 1, 2022. The Commission
believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, as it will allow the
Exchange to coordinate its implementation of the revised clearly
erroneous execution rules with the other national securities exchanges
and FINRA, and will help ensure consistency across the SROs.\34\ For
this reason, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay
and designates the proposed rule change as operative upon filing.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \33\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \34\ See SR-CboeBZX-2022-37 (July 8, 2022).
    \35\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-052 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-052. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-052 and should be submitted
on or before October 20, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-21068 Filed 9-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Incorporation by Reference

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0905

December 6, 2006

The contents of the following two dockets are hereby incorporated by
reference into and are considered to be included in, contained in, and
to have been placed in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0905 (Revisions of
Standards of Performance for New and Existing Stationary Sources;
Electric Utility Steam Generating Units; Federal Plan Requirements for
Clean Air Mercury Rule; and Revisions of Acid Rain Program Rules):

(1) EPA-HQ-OAR–2002–0056 (National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Utility Air Toxics; Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR)),
legacy EDOCKET ID No. OAR-2002-0056, and legacy Docket ID No. A-92-55.

(2) EPA-HQ-OAR–2003-0053 (Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone; Clean Air Interstate Rule, (CAIR)), legacy
EDOCKET ID No. OAR-2003-0053.

Accessing dockets:

Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
through   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov/"
http://www.regulations.gov/  or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center
(Air Docket), EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW,
Washington, DC.  The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER> and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 48 (Monday, March 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 15386]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05097]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 8632-021]

City of Kankakee, Illinois; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving Use of
the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 8632-021.
    c. Date Filed: January 27, 2023.
    d. Submitted By: City of Kankakee, Illinois (City of Kankakee).
    e. Name of Project: Kankakee Hydroelectric Project (project).
    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Kankakee River
in Kankakee County, Illinois. No federal lands are occupied by the
project works or located within the project boundary.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Zachary Newton, Manager of Sewer
Services, City of Kankakee, Illinois, 295 North Harrison Avenue
Kankakee, IL 60901; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
il.gov">[email protected]il.gov.
    i. FERC Contact: Laura Washington at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
[email protected].
    j. The City of Kankakee filed its request to use the Traditional
Licensing Process on January 27, 2023. The City of Kankakee provided
public notice of its request on February 1, 2023. In a letter dated
March 7, 2023, the Director of the Division of Hydropower Licensing
approved the request to use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at
50 CFR part 402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating
consultation the Illinois State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historical Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating the City of Kankakee as the
Commission's non-federal representatives for carrying out informal
consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and
section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act; and consultation pursuant to section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. The City of Kankakee filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD),
including a proposed process plan and schedule for the project with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD may be viewed on the Commission's website
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY).
    o. The licensee states its unequivocal intent to submit an
application for a subsequent license for Project No. 8632. Pursuant to
18 CFR 16.20, each application for a subsequent license and any
competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at
least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All
applications for license for this project must be filed by April 30,
2026.
    p. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: March 7, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-05097 Filed 3-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 222)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 67817-67820]
[DOCID:fr17no08-30]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1214; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-259-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
(Jetstream) Model 4101 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
(Jetstream) Model 4101 airplanes. The existing AD currently requires
operators to determine the number of flight cycles accumulated on each
component of the main landing gear (MLG) and the nose landing gear
(NLG), and to replace each component that reaches its life limit with a
serviceable component. The existing AD also requires operators to
revise the Airworthiness Limitations (AWL) section of the Instructions
for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) in the aircraft maintenance manual to
reflect

the new life limits for structurally significant items. This proposed
AD would require a new revision of the AWL section of the ICA to
incorporate revised life limits for structurally significant items,
operational and functional tests of certain systems, and instructions
to retain critical ignition source prevention features during
configuration changes. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country. We are proposing this AD to prevent
failure of certain structurally significant items, including the MLG
and the NLG, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane; and to prevent fuel vapor ignition sources, which could
result in fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 17,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact BAE Systems
Regional Aircraft, 13850 McLearen Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1175; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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-2008-1214;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-259-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD 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

    On September 9, 2005, we issued AD 2005-19-15, amendment 39-14280
(70 FR 55230, September 21, 2005), for all BAE Systems (Operations)
Limited (Jetstream) Model 4101 airplanes. That AD requires operators to
determine the number of flight cycles accumulated on each component of
the main landing gear (MLG) and the nose landing gear (NLG), and to
replace each component that reaches its life limit with a serviceable
component. The existing AD also requires operators to revise the
Airworthiness Limitations (AWL) section of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness in the aircraft maintenance manual to reflect
the new life limits for structurally significant items. That AD
resulted from engineering analysis of fleet operations which resulted
in more restrictive life limits. We issued that AD to prevent failure
of certain structurally significant items, including the MLG and the
NLG, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2005-19-15, the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the airworthiness authority for the European Union,
advises that BAE System (Operations) Limited has issued revised
Airworthiness Limitations, Certification Maintenance Requirements, and
Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL). The
revisions were based on assessments of fuel tank wiring installations.
These assessments revealed that fuel vapor ignition sources may remain
undetected. Fuel vapor ignition sources, if not corrected, could result
in fuel tank explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has issued Chapters 05-10-10,
``Airworthiness Limitations,'' 05-10-20, ``Certification Maintenance
Requirements,'' and 05-10-30, ``Critical Design Configuration Control
Limitations (CDCCL)--Fuel System'' of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Jetstream Series 4100 AMM, Revision 29, dated February 15, 2008.
Chapter 05-10-10 revises life limits for structurally significant
items. Chapter 05-10-20 includes operational and functional tests of
certain systems (e.g., air conditioning, electrical power, fire
protection, and flight controls) and the maximum permitted time between
those tests to maintain the certificated airworthiness standard of the
airplanes. Chapter 05-10-30 includes CDCCLs that provide instructions
to retain critical ignition source prevention features during
configuration changes that may be caused by modification, repair, or
maintenance actions.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The EASA mandated
the service information and issued airworthiness directive 2008-0094,
dated May 16, 2008 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to ensure
the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in the European Union.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    This proposed AD would supersede AD 2005-19-15 and would continue
to require revising the AWL section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness in the AMM to reflect the

new life limits structurally significant items. This proposed AD would
also require revising the AWL section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness by incorporating the instructions specified in certain
chapters of the service information described previously.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain only certain requirements of AD 2005-
19-15. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers have
changed in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifier
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Corresponding  requirement
       Requirement in AD 2005-19-15             in this  proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
paragraph (l).............................  paragraph (f).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
             Action                  Work hour     Average labor     Cost per        registered     Fleet cost
                                                   rate per hour     airplane        airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AWL revision (required by AD                   1             $80             $80               3            $240
 2005-19-15)....................
AWL revision (new proposed                     1              80              80               3             240
 action)........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

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

    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]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-14280 (70 FR 55230, September 21, 2005) and
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited (Formerly British Aerospace
Regional Aircraft): Docket No. FAA-2008-1214; Directorate Identifier
2007-NM-259-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by December
17, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2005-19-15.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Model Jetstream 4101 airplanes, certificated in any category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of certain
structurally significant items, including the main landing gear
(MLG) and the nose landing gear (NLG), which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane; and to prevent fuel vapor
ignition sources, which could result in fuel tank explosion and
consequent loss of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Certain Requirement of AD 2005-19-15

Revise Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM)

    (f) Within 30 days after October 26, 2005 (the effective date of
AD 2005-19-15): Revise the Airworthiness Limitations (AWL) section
of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness of the BAE Systems
(Operations) Limited J41 AMM to include the life limits of the
components listed in Chapter 05-10-10, Airworthiness Limitations--
Description and Operation Section, Revision 23, dated February 15,
2005, of the AMM. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy into
the AWL section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness.
Thereafter, except as provided in paragraph (i) of this AD, no
alternative replacement times may be approved for any affected
component.

New Requirements of This AD

Revise AWL Section of Instructions for Continued Airworthiness

    (g) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise
the AWL section of the

Instructions for Continued Airworthiness by incorporating the
instructions of Chapters 05-10-10, ``Airworthiness Limitations,''
05-10-20, ``Certification Maintenance Requirements,'' and 05-10-30,
``Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL)--Fuel
System'' of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Jetstream Series 4100
AMM, Revision 29, dated February 15, 2008 (hereafter ``the service
information''). Thereafter, except as provided in paragraph (i) of
this AD, no alternative replacement times or inspection intervals
may be approved for any affected component. The revised Chapter 05-
10-10 replaces the corresponding chapter specified in paragraph (f)
of this AD.
    (h) Where paragraph 2.A.(2) of the service information specifies
that certain landing gear units ``must be removed 31st March 2008,''
this AD requires compliance within 60 days after the effective date
of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (i) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Related Information

    (j) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) airworthiness
directive 2008-0094, dated May 16, 2008, also addresses the subject
of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 6, 2008.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8-27161 Filed 11-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


The Mohegan Tribe Job Description Mohegan Environmental Protection Department Administrator Salary Grade : 34 License Level : Effective Date: April 9, 2001 FLSA Status : Exempt Summary of Description :

This position is responsible for administering, planning, and enforcing the responsibilities of the Mohegan Environmental Protection Department ( MEPD).

Essential Duties :

Examples of Duties: Administers programs and operations .

Develop, promulgate, administer and implement rules and regulations for protection of the environment and natural resources within the Tribe's Reservation and Tribal fee lands.

Review and comment on all new or modified construction for conformance with environmental consistency.

Ensures appropriate legal, technical and scientific expertise is coordinated for programs.

Creates and implement polices and procedures for the Department.

Monitors and enforces the Department's environmental and natural resource standards, rules and regulations.

Develops, implements and evaluates policies, goals and objectives.

Establishes and administers a schedule of civil and criminal penalties to be assessed for violations of the Department's rules and regulations .

Designs, and develops new programs that consider the energy, environmental risk and economic implications of programs .

Evaluates potential consistency of projects with Federal, State and local environmental regulatory practices.

Maintains awareness of current Federal and Tribal environmental law, rules, and regulations that apply to MEPD functions Page 2  Mohegan Environmental Protection Department Administrator Directs the management and coordination of staff to insure compliance with Ordinance 2001 10.

Confidentiality: Maintains appropriate level of confidentiality of information and reports.

Conduct: Represents the Tribe in a professional and courteous manner at all times.

Dependability: Regularly attends and is punctual for work.

Other: Performs other duties as required .

Supervision Received: This position reports to the Mohegan Tribal Council Supervision Exercised : Directs staff as assigned in the department.

Knowledge, Skills and Ability: Knowledge of and ability to apply management principles . Knowledge and ability to understand and apply Mohegan Tribe and Federal, State and local regulations to programs. Considerable oral and written communication skills and interpersonal skills .

Experience and Training:

" Experience in the promulgation of environmental regulation and enforcement of environmental permits and laws. " Advanced degree in Chemistry, Physics, Biology or related sciences . " Strong mathematical and statistics knowledge " Experience in experimental design data collection methods employed in research projects, monitoring and surveys. " Ten years experience in environmental and natural resource management, including identifying, analyzing and abating pollution sources. " Five years experience developing, administering and supervising environmental protection programs and regulations. " Experience managing and guiding staff in the implementation of existing programs and the development of new programs. " Demonstrated knowledge of risk assessment and toxicology as it relates to the operations on Mohegan reservation and trust lands. " Training and experience in administrative law


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 167 (Friday, August 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52269-52270]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21388]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.

    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e)(1)(v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

                                 Exempt
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Docket No.              File date    Presenter or requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CP15-115-000..................      8-17-15  Mary Jo Tambulin,
                                                 Niagara County
                                                 Legislature, NY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: August 24, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-21388 Filed 8-27-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P