[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 160 (Friday, August 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 51090]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17884]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-030]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed August 8, 2022 10 a.m. EST Through August 15, 2022 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.
    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make
public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's
comment letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20220117, Draft, USN, VA, Disposal of Decommissioned, Defueled
Ex-Enterprise (CVN 65) and its Associated Naval Reactor Plants, Comment
Period Ends: 10/03/2022, Contact: Amanda Stuhldreher<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220118, Final Supplement, USACE, SC, Haile Gold Mine, Review
Period Ends: 09/19/2022, Contact: Shawn Boone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20220119, Draft, USFWS, CA, Tijuana Estuary Tidal Restoration
Program II Phase I, Comment Period Ends: 10/03/2022, Contact: Brian
Collins<PHONE_NUMBER> x273.

    Dated: August 15, 2022.
Robert Tomiak,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2022-17884 Filed 8-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 128 (Monday, July 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38493-38495]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16415]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75325; File No. SR-BYX-2015-29]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule
11.9 of BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., To Modify its Price Adjust Functionality

June 29, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 16, 2015, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, 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 Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Rule 11.9 to modify the
Exchange's Price Adjust functionality, as described below.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange currently offers various forms of sliding, which, in
all cases, result in the re-pricing of an order to, or ranking and/or
display of an order at, a price other than an order's limit price in
order to comply with applicable securities laws and/or Exchange rules.
Specifically, the Exchange currently offers price sliding to ensure
compliance with Regulation NMS and Regulation SHO. Price sliding
currently offered by the Exchange re-prices and displays an order upon
entry and in certain cases again re-prices and re-displays an order at
a more aggressive price one time if and when permissible (``single
display-price sliding''), and optionally continually re-prices an order
(``multiple display-price sliding'') based on changes in the national
best bid (``NBB'') or national best offer (``NBO'', and together with
the NBB, the ``NBBO''). The Exchange proposes to modify one form of
price sliding offered by the Exchange, the Price Adjust process, as
described below, in order to align more closely with the Exchange's
other form of price sliding, the display-price sliding process.
    The Exchange's display-price sliding functionality is designed to
avoid locking or crossing other markets' Protected Quotations, but does
not price slide to avoid executions on the Exchange's order book
(``BATS Book''). Specifically, when the Exchange receives an incoming
order designated with a display-price sliding instruction that could
execute against resting displayed liquidity on the BATS Book, it will
execute against such liquidity. However, when an execution against
resting displayed liquidity does not occur because an incoming order is
designated as an order that will not remove liquidity (i.e., a BATS
Post Only Order), then the Exchange will cancel the incoming order. In
contrast to display-price sliding, which is based solely on Protected
Quotations \3\ at external markets other than the Exchange, Price
Adjust is currently based on Protected Quotations at external markets
and at the Exchange. Under the Price Adjust process, if the Exchange
has a Protected Quotation that an incoming order to the Exchange locks
or crosses then such order executes against the resting order, or, if
the incoming order is a BATS Post Only Order or Partial Post Only at
Limit Order, such order would be executed in

accordance with Rules 11.9(c)(6) and (c)(7), respectively,\4\ or would
be adjusted pursuant to the Price Adjust process. The Exchange proposes
to modify the Price Adjust process so that it is applicable only with
respect to quotations of external markets, which, as noted above, is
how the display-price sliding process currently operates on the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As defined in BYX Rule 1.5(t), a ``Protected Quotation'' is
``a quotation that is a Protected Bid or Protected Offer.'' In turn,
the term ``Protected Bid'' or ``Protected Offer'' means ``a bid or
offer in a stock that is (i) displayed by an automated trading
center; (ii) disseminated pursuant to an effective national market
system plan; and (iii) an automated quotation that is the best bid
or best offer of a national securities exchange or association.''
    \4\ The Exchange notes that BATS Post Only Orders are permitted
to remove liquidity from the BATS Book if the value of price
improvement associated with such execution equals or exceeds the sum
of fees charged for such execution and the value of any rebate that
would be provided if the order posted to the BATS Book and
subsequently provided liquidity. See Rule 11.9(c)(6). Similarly,
Partial Post Only at Limit Orders are permitted to remove price
improving liquidity as well as a User-selected percentage of the
remaining order at the limit price if, following such removal, the
order can post at its limit price. See Rule 11.9(c)(7). The Exchange
notes that all BATS Post Only Orders remove liquidity from the BATS
Book based on the Exchange's current pricing structure, which
provides a rebate to remove liquidity and charges a fee to add
liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, under the Price Adjust process, an order eligible for
display by the Exchange that, at the time of entry, would create a
violation of Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS by locking or crossing a
Protected Quotation of an external market will be ranked and displayed
by the System at one minimum price variation below the current NBO (for
bids) or to one minimum price variation above the current NBB (for
offers). However, as is true for the current display-price sliding
process, the Price Adjust process would not adjust the price of a BATS
Post Only Order or Partial Post Only at Limit Order that would lock or
cross an order displayed by the Exchange but rather, would either
execute \5\ or cancel such order upon entry. Further, to the extent the
NBBO changes such that a BATS Post Only Order subject to the Price
Adjust process would be ranked at a price at which it could remove
displayed liquidity from the BATS Book, the order will be executed as
set forth in Rule 11.9(c)(6) or cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example of the Price Adjust process, assume the Exchange has
a posted and displayed bid to buy 100 shares of a security priced at
$10.10 per share and a posted and displayed offer to sell 100 shares at
$10.11 per share. Assume the NBBO is $10.10 by $10.11, which includes
an offer of $10.11 displayed by at least one other market. The Exchange
notes that under its current pricing structure, which pays a rebate to
orders that remove liquidity and charges a fee to orders that add
liquidity, all orders (including BATS Post Only Orders and Partial Post
Only at Limit Orders) that would lock or cross liquidity resting on the
Exchange would remove liquidity on entry pursuant to Rule 11.9(c)(6).
However, the Exchange has included the examples below in order to
demonstrate how the proposed functionality would operate in the event
the Exchange has a different pricing structure that does not allow the
incoming BATS Post Only Order to remove liquidity upon entry.
     Under the current functionality, if the Exchange receives
a Post Only bid to buy 100 shares at $10.11 per share with a Price
Adjust instruction the Exchange will rank and display the order to buy
at $10.10 because displaying the bid at $10.11 would lock the offer to
sell for $10.11 displayed by the Exchange (as well as one or more
external markets).
     As proposed, however, if the Exchange receives a Post Only
bid to buy 100 shares at $10.11 per share with a Price Adjust
instruction the Exchange will cancel the order back because displaying
the bid at $10.11 would lock the offer to sell for $10.11 displayed by
the Exchange (as well as one or more external markets) and the
Exchange's Price Adjust functionality would no longer price slide past
a displayed order resting on the Exchange.
     Assume however, that all facts are the same as the
immediately preceding example except that the Exchange's best offer is
displayed at $10.12. Because an incoming Post Only bid to buy 100
shares at $10.11 could be displayed by the Exchange but would lock the
Protected Quotation of one or more external markets at that price, the
Exchange would re-price and display the order to buy at $10.10.
    In addition to the change proposed above, the Exchange proposes to
correct two aspects of the Exchange's current rule regarding the
display-price sliding process. First, the Exchange proposes to modify
Rule 11.9(g)(1)(D), which states that ``any'' display-eligible BATS
Post Only Order or Partial Post Only at Limit order that locks or
crosses a Protected Quotation displayed by an external market upon
entry will be subject to the display-price sliding process. Because an
order can also be subject to the Price Adjust process or no price
sliding option at all, the Exchange proposes to instead start this
provision with ``depending on User instructions.'' The Exchange
proposes to use this same language in the proposed revision to Rule
11.9(g)(2)(D) with respect to Price Adjust. Second, the Exchange
proposes to modify the cross-reference at the end of Rule 11.9(g)(2)(D)
from 11.9(c)(7) to 11.9(c)(6) to accurately refer to the rule
applicable to BATS Post Only Orders.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'')
\6\ and further the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \7\
because they are designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest. The proposed rule change also is designed to support the
principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \8\ of the Act in that it seeks to
assure fair competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange
markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to Price Adjust is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ as well as Rule 610 of
Regulation NMS \10\ and Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.\11\ The Exchange is
not modifying the overall functionality of Price Adjust, which is
designed to avoid locking or crossing quotations of other market
centers or to comply with applicable short sale restrictions. Instead,
the Exchange is proposing changes to Price Adjust to more closely
mirror the display-price sliding process, such that neither form of
price sliding functionality adjusts the price of an order to avoid
locking or crossing an order displayed by the Exchange, and instead,
such an order will either be cancelled or executed by the Exchange. As
noted above, in contrast to display-price sliding, which is based
solely on Protected Quotations of external markets, the Price Adjust
process is currently based on Protected Quotations at external markets
and at the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ 17 CFR 242.610.
    \11\ 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 610(d) requires exchanges to establish, maintain, and enforce
rules that require members reasonably to avoid ``[d]isplaying
quotations that lock or cross any protected quotation in an NMS
stock.'' \12\ Such rules must be ``reasonably designed to assure the
reconciliation of locked or crossed quotations in an NMS stock,'' and
must ``prohibit . . . members from engaging in a pattern or practice of
displaying quotations that lock or cross any protected quotation in an
NMS

stock.'' \13\ The Price Adjust process, as amended will continue to
assist Users by displaying orders at permissible prices or rejecting
them if the Exchange has displayed liquidity that would preclude their
display. Similarly, Rule 201 of Regulation SHO \14\ requires trading
centers to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to prevent the execution or display of a
short sale order at a price at or below the current NBB under certain
circumstances. The Exchange's short sale price sliding will continue to
operate the same for Users of Price Adjust as it does for Users that
select the display-price sliding process offered by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 242.610(d).
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, if the Exchange has a Protected Quotation that an incoming
order to the Exchange locks or crosses then such incoming order will
execute against the resting order, or, if the incoming order is a BATS
Post Only Order or Partial Post Only at Limit Order, such order would
be executed in accordance with Rules 11.9(c)(6) and (c)(7),
respectively, or cancelled. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable
and consistent with the Act to cancel orders on entry that cannot
executed or displayed at their limit price because this is consistent
with display-price sliding functionality. Therefore, the Exchange
believes the proposal to apply the Price Adjust process to orders that
cannot be displayed because they would lock or cross displayed contra-
side interest on the Exchange will promote just and equitable
principles of trade, remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism
of, a free and open market and a national market system. The Exchange
also reiterates that the proposed change to the Price Adjust process
will continue to enable the System to avoid displaying a locking or
crossing quotation in order to ensure compliance with Rule 610(d) of
Regulation NMS.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed
rule change is being proposed as minor modification to functionality
offered by the Exchange that will ensure that the Exchange's Price
Adjust process is consistent with the display-price sliding process
offered by the Exchange today.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and paragraph (f)(6) of Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\16\ The proposed rule change effects a change that
(A) does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the
public interest; (B) does not impose any significant burden on
competition; and (C) by its terms, does not become operative for 30
days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest; provided that the self-regulatory organization
has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the
proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the
proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of
filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated
by the Commission.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \17\ The Exchange has fulfilled this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (1)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection
of investors; or (3) 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BYX-2015-29 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-BYX-2015-29. 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-BYX-2015-29,
and should be submitted on or before July 27, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-16415 Filed 7-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 9258-9259]
[DOCID:fr03mr09-78]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3302-EM] Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]

Kentucky; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-3302-EM), dated January 28, 2009,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: February 12, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of an emergency declaration for
the

Commonwealth of Kentucky is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared an emergency by the President in his declaration of
January 28, 2009.

    Boone, Casey, Gallatin, Henry, Kenton, Taylor, and Trimble
Counties for emergency protective measures (Category B), limited to
direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.
    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Nancy Ward,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-4510 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 72)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 19968-19971]
[DOCID:fr14ap08-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0227; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-159-AD;
Amendment 39-15454; AD 2008-08-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 727 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Boeing Model 727 airplanes. This AD requires repetitive inspections for
cracking or corrosion of the threaded end of the lower segment of the
main landing gear (MLG) side strut, and corrective actions if
necessary. This AD also requires prior or concurrent inspection for
cracking or corrosion of the threads and thread relief area of the
lower segment, corrective action if necessary, and re-assembly using
corrosion inhibiting compound. This AD results from reports of the
threads cracking on the MLG side strut lower segment. We are issuing
this AD to

prevent a fractured side strut, which could result in collapse of the
MLG.

DATES: This AD is effective May 19, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 19, 2008.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207.

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 AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6577; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
all Boeing Model 727 airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on November 26, 2007 (72 FR 65913). That NPRM proposed to
require repetitive inspections for cracking or corrosion of the
threaded end of the lower segment of the main landing gear (MLG) side
strut, and corrective actions if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to
require prior or concurrent inspection for cracking or corrosion of the
threads and thread relief area of the lower segment, corrective action
if necessary, and re-assembly using corrosion inhibiting compound.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the single comment received. Boeing supports the
NPRM.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 842 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This AD affects about 459 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Average labor
             Action                    Work hours        rate per hour   Cost per airplane        Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection......................  12..................             $80  $960, per            $440,640, per
                                                                         inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
Prior/concurrent actions........  Up to 6.............              80  Up to $480.........  Up to $220,320.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2008-08-02 Boeing: Amendment 39-15454. Docket No. FAA-2007-0227;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-159-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 19, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Model 727, 727C, 727-100, 727-100C,
727-200, and 727-200F series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of the threads cracking on the
main landing gear (MLG) side strut lower segment. We are issuing
this AD to prevent a fractured side strut, which could result in
collapse of the MLG.

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.

Inspections and Corrective Actions

    (f) At the latest applicable time in paragraph (f)(1), (f)(2),
or (f)(3) of this AD: Do detailed and magnetic particle inspections
for cracking or corrosion of the threaded end of the lower segment
of the MLG side strut and do all applicable corrective actions as
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 727-32-0338, Revision 4, dated April 7,
2007. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 120
months.
    (1) Within 48 months after the last MLG overhaul.
    (2) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Within 120 months after the last MLG overhaul for airplanes
on which the actions in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin
727-32-0338, Revision 4, dated April 7, 2007, have been accomplished
before the effective date of this AD.

Prior/Concurrent Requirements

    (g) Prior to or concurrently with the actions required by
paragraph (f) of this AD: Do all applicable actions specified in the
service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD. Where the
lubrication and corrosion protection procedures in any service
bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD differ from those in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-32-0338, Revision 4, dated
April 7, 2007, use the procedures in Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 727-32-0338, Revision 4.

                 Table 1.--Prior/Concurrent Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Describes procedures
            For--              Service Bulletin--    for these prior or
                                                    concurrent actions--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) All airplanes...........  Boeing Special        Inspecting for
                               Attention 727-32-     corrosion or
                               0411, Revision 1,     cracking of the
                               dated February 19,    threads and thread
                               2007.                 relief area of the
                                                     swivel clevis, and
                                                     improving the
                                                     corrosion
                                                     protection of the
                                                     swivel clevis
                                                     fitting threads in
                                                     commonly affected
                                                     airplanes.
(2) Airplanes specified as    Boeing 727 Service    Modifying the MLG
 Options III, IV and V         Bulletin 32-79,       side strut
 configurations in Boeing      Revision 1, dated     universal joint.
 Special Attention Service     February 27, 1967.
 Bulletin 727-32-0338,
 Revision 4.
                              Boeing 727 Service    Replacing the MLG
                               Bulletin 32-157,      side strut swivel
                               dated August 30,      bushing,
                               1968.                 incorporating only
                                                     parts kit 65-89855-
                                                     1, and not
                                                     installing the lube
                                                     fitting in the
                                                     lower segment.
(3) Airplanes specified as    Boeing Service        Inspecting and
 Option V configuration in     Bulletin 727-32-      modifying the MLG
 Boeing Special Attention      268, Revision 2,      side strut.
 Service Bulletin 727-32-      dated February 20,
 0338, Revision 4.             1981.
                              Boeing Service        Resolving the
                               Bulletin 727-57-      interference
                               163, dated            between the MLG
                               September 17, 1982.   gear beam and the
                                                     MLG side strut.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the applicable service information listed in
Table 2 of this AD to do the actions required by this AD, unless the
AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington
98124-2207.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information that is
incorporated by reference at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html.

                                  Table 2.--Material Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Service Bulletin                           Revision                               Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boeing Special Attention Service        4..................................  April 7, 2007.
 Bulletin 727-32-0338.
Boeing Special Attention Service        1..................................  February 19, 2007.
 Bulletin 727-32-0411.
Boeing 727 Service Bulletin 32-157....  Original...........................  August 30, 1968.
Boeing 727 Service Bulletin 32-79.....  1..................................  February 27, 1967.
Boeing Service Bulletin 727-32-268....  2..................................  February 20, 1981.
Boeing Service Bulletin 727-57-163....  Original...........................  September 17, 1982.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 28, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-7176 Filed 4-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 132)]
[Notices]
[Page 37779-37780]
[DOCID:fr11jy07-94]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0395; FRL-8136-1]

Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petition for Residues of Silver as
Component of Food Contact Surface Sanitizing Solution

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide
petition proposing the amendment of regulations at 40 CFR 180.190(a)
for residues of antimicrobial pesticide formulation containing silver
compounds applied to food contact surfaces in public eating places,
dairy processing equipment, and food processing equipment and utensils.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 10, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0395 and pesticide petition number (PP
7F7178), by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2007-0395. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov
, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation
of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marshall Swindell, PM 33,
Antimicrobials Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-6341, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed at the end of the pesticide petition
summary of interest.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
     2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is printing a summary of a pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations in
40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
food commodities. EPA has determined that this pesticide petition
contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA
section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting
of the pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA
rules on this pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov/. To locate this information on the home

page of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the
OPP docket ID number. Once the search has located the docket, clicking
on the ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list of all documents in the
docket for the pesticide including the petition summary.

Amendment to Existing Tolerance

    PP 7F7178. ETI H2O., 1725 Gillespie Way, El Cajon, CA 92020,
proposes to amend 40 CFR 180.940 (a) to include residues of silver
applied as a food contact sanitizing solution at a maximum in-use
concentration of 50 parts per million to food contact surfaces in or on
public eating places, dairy processing equipment, food processing
equipment and utensils. The analytical method being used is entitled,
``Determination of Silver, Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS), Citric Acid,
and Water is Silver Citrate Solutions using Inductively coupled Plasma
Chromatography, HPLC, and Weight Loss Upon Drying Techniques.''
Contact: Marshall Swindell, Product Manager 33, telephone number: (703)
308-6341<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Food Contact Sanitizers, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: June 27, 2007.
Betty Shackleford,
Acting Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E7-13470 Filed 7-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9367-9370]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03698]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-3703; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-115-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design
approval holder (DAH) indicating that the skin lap splice is subject to
widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require
repetitive external detailed and surface high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspections of the outer skin for cracking around fastener heads
common to the inboard fastener row of the skin lap splice. We are
proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the skin
lap splice, which, if not detected, could grow and result in possible
rapid decompression and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 11, 2016.

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 Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It
is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3703.

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-2016-
3703; 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 (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6447; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-3703;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-115-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

    Structural fatigue damage is progressive. It begins as minute
cracks, and those cracks grow under the action of repeated stresses.
This can happen because of normal operational conditions and design
attributes, or because of isolated situations or incidents such as
material defects, poor fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, dings,
or scratches. Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or
structural design details, or globally. Global fatigue damage is
general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural
details and stress levels. Multiple-site damage is global damage that
occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a
lap splice joining two large skin panels. Global damage can also occur
in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-
site-damage and multiple-element-damage cracks are typically too small
initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods.
Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise
the structural integrity of the airplane, in a condition known as WFD.
As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if
the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.
    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to
prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs
establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that
support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the
WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV
is approved.
    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by ADs through
separate rulemaking actions.
    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to
propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for
their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This
approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides
flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information
development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with
certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
    We have received an evaluation by the DAH indicating that the skin
lap splice is subject to WFD. As a result of WFD analysis, the stringer
S-2R skin lap splice from station (STA) 368 to STA 434 requires
additional supplemental inspection beyond the inspections specified in
the Boeing Model 767 airplane maintenance planning document. This
condition, if not corrected, could result in cracking of the skin lap
splice, which could grow and result in possible rapid

decompression and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, dated August
26, 2014. The service information describes procedures for a detailed
inspection and a surface HFEC inspection at section 41, stringer S-2R
skin lap splice from STA 368 to STA 434, for any cracking, and repair.
This service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service
Information.'' For information on the procedures and compliance times,
see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3703.''
    The phrase ``corrective actions'' is used in this proposed AD.
``Corrective actions'' are actions that correct or address any
condition found. Corrective actions in an AD could include, for
example, repairs.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 356 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost     Cost per product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections......................  3 work-hours x $85             $0   $255 per inspection   $90,780 per
                                    per hour = $255 per                 cycle.                inspection cycle.
                                    inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) 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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-3703; Directorate Identifier
2015-NM-115-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 11, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -
400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, dated August 26, 2014.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval
holder indicating that the skin lap splice is subject to widespread
fatigue damage. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue
cracking of this skin lap splice, which, if not detected, could grow
and result in possible rapid decompression and reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, dated
August 26, 2014, except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: Do
a detailed inspection and a surface high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspection at section 41, stringer S-2R skin lap splice from
body station (STA) 368 to STA 434, for any cracking, and do all
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert

Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, dated August 26, 2014. Do all
applicable corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the
inspections thereafter at the applicable times specified in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-53A0260, dated August 26, 2014. If any existing external repair
is found in the inspection area, then the inspections in Part 1 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-53A0260, dated August 26, 2014, are not required in the area
hidden by the repair, provided that the repair was previously
approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), or by the Authorized Representative of the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA), or installed
as specified in Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, dated August 26, 2014.
Inspections in Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, dated August 26, 2014, remain
applicable in areas not hidden by the repair.

(h) Exception to the Service Information

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-53A0260, dated August
26, 2014, specifies a compliance time ``after the original issue
date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within
the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, 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
ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph
(i) of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has
been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings.
To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or
alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: For service
information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and
(i)(4)(ii) apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 15, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-03698 Filed 2-24-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 184)]
[Notices]
[Page 55458]
[DOCID:fr22se06-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-592-000]

Mojave Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas
Tariff

September 15, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 12, 2006, Mojave Pipeline Company
(Mojave) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective
October 12, 2006:

Third Revised Sheet No. 108
First Revised Sheet No. 115

    Mojave states that the tariff sheets are being submitted to remove
the ``release will be awarded on a first-come, first served basis'' as
a bid evaluation method for capacity release transactions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-15652 Filed 9-21-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 148 (Monday, August 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46074-46078]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18882]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75536; File No. SR-BX-2015-042]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 4702 To Introduce a Market Maker Peg Order for Use on BX

July 28, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 17, 2015, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the 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 Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 4702 to introduce a Market
Maker Peg Order for use on BX.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to introduce a Market Maker Peg Order
(``MMPO'') for use on BX by registered BX Market Makers. The MMPO,
which is currently available for use on The NASDAQ Stock Market
(``NASDAQ'') \3\ and NASDAQ OMX Phlx (``PHLX'') PSX System,\4\ is an
order type that provides a means by which a market maker may comply
with its market making obligations under applicable Exchange rules.\5\
Although the Exchange has rules allowing market making on BX, it does
not currently have any market makers registered with the Exchange. In
an effort to attract market makers, BX is proposing to introduce the
MMPO, which will facilitate BX market maker compliance with BX quoting
obligations.\6\ The MMPO is available for use only by BX Market Makers
because these obligations are not applicable to other market
participants. The MMPO is available only through the Exchange's RASH
and FIX connectivity protocols, because these are the only protocols
that support continuous pegging functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See NASDAQ Rule 4702(b)(7).
    \4\ See PHLX Rule 3301A(b)(5).
    \5\ See Rule 4613. The MMPO is a ``one-sided'' order. Therefore
a member firm exclusively employing the order type to comply with
its market making obligations must enter both a buy and sell MMPO.
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BX Rule 4613 requires a member firm registered as a Market Maker in
a particular security to be willing to buy and sell such security for
its own account on a continuous basis during regular market hours and
to enter and maintain a two-sided trading interest (``Two-Sided
Obligation'') that is identified to the Exchange as the interest
meeting the obligation and is displayed in BX's quotation montage at
all times. Interest eligible to be considered part of a Market Maker's
Two-Sided Obligation must have a displayed quotation size of at least
one normal unit of trading.\7\ After an execution against its Two-Sided
Obligation, a Market Maker must ensure that it has additional trading
interest to satisfy its Two-Sided Obligation either by immediately
entering new interest to comply with this obligation to maintain
continuous two-sided quotations or by identifying existing interest on
the BX book that will satisfy this obligation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Unless otherwise designated, 100 shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BX Market Makers must also adhere to certain pricing obligations
established by Rule 4613, which are premised on entering quotation
prices that are not more than a ``Designated Percentage'' \8\ away from
the National Best Bid or National Best Offer \9\ (as applicable), and
that must be refreshed if a change in the National Best Bid or National
Best Offer causes the quotation price to be more than a ``Defined
Limit'' \10\ away from the National Best Bid or National Best
Offer.\11\ The pricing obligations established by the Rule apply during
regular trading hours (i.e., 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.), but do not
commence during any trading day until after the first regular way
transaction on the primary listing market in the security. Moreover,
the obligations are suspended during a trading halt, suspension, or
pause, and do not re-commence until after the first regular way
transaction on the primary listing market in the security following
such halt, suspension, or pause, as reported by the responsible single
plan processor. When the halt is lifted, the order will remain on the
book unless cancelled by the market maker or if the displayed price is
outside the permitted pricing range the order will be cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The ``Designated Percentage'' is: (i) 8% for securities
subject to Rule 4120(a)(11) and are securities included in the S&P
500[supreg] Index, Russell 1000[supreg] Index, and a pilot list of
Exchange Traded Products (``Tier 1 Securities''); 28% for securities
subject to Rule 4120(a)(11) and that are all NMS stocks not Tier 1
Securities with a price equal to or greater than $1 (``Tier 2
Securities''); and 30% for securities subject to Rule 4120(a)(11)
and that are all NMS stocks not Tier 1 Securities with a price less
than $1 (``Tier 3 Securities''), except that between 9:30 a.m. and
9:45 a.m. and between 3:35 p.m. and the close of trading, when Rule
4120(a)(11) is not in effect, the Designated Percentage shall be 20%
for Tier 1 Securities, 28% for all Tier 2 Securities, and 30% for
Tier 3 Securities. See Rule 4613(a)(2)(D).
    \9\ As determined by the Exchange in accordance with its
procedures for determining Protected Quotations under SEC Rule 600
under Regulation NMS.
    \10\ The ``Defined Limit'' is 9.5% for Tier 1 Securities, 29.5%
for Tier 2 Securities, and 31.5% for Tier 3 Securities, except that
between 9:30 a.m. and 9:45 a.m. and between 3:35 p.m. and the close
of trading, when Rule 4120(a)(11) is not in effect, the Defined
Limit shall be 21.5% Tier 1 Securities, 29.5% for Tier 2 Securities,
and 31.5% for Tier 3 Securities. See Rule 4613(a)(2)(E).
    \11\ Nothing in Rule 4613 precludes a BX Market Maker from
quoting at price levels that are closer to the National Best Bid and
Offer than the levels required by the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For bid quotations, at the time of entry of bid interest satisfying
the Two-Sided Obligation, the displayed price of the bid interest may
not be more than the applicable Designated Percentage away from the
then current National Best Bid, or if no National Best Bid, not more
than the Designated Percentage away from the last reported sale from
the responsible single plan securities information processor. In the
event that the National Best Bid (or if no National Best Bid, the last
reported sale) increases to a level that would cause the bid interest
of the Two-Sided Obligation to be more than the Defined Limit away from
the National Best Bid (or if no National Best Bid, the last reported
sale), or if the bid is executed or cancelled, the Market Maker must
enter new bid interest at a displayed price not more than the
Designated Percentage away from the then current National Best Bid (or
if no National Best Bid, the last reported sale), or identify to the
Exchange current resting interest that satisfies the Two-Sided
Obligation. Similarly, for offer quotations, at the time of entry of
offer interest satisfying the Two-Sided Obligation, the displayed price
of the offer interest may not be more than the Designated Percentage
away from the then current National Best Offer, or if no National Best
Offer, not more than the Designated Percentage away from the last
reported sale received from the responsible single plan securities
information processor. In the event that the National Best Offer (or if
no National Best Offer, the last reported sale) decreases to a level
that would cause the offer interest of the Two-Sided Obligation to be
more than

the Defined Limit away from the National Best Offer (or if no National
Best Offer, the last reported sale), or if the offer is executed or
cancelled, the Market Maker must enter new offer interest at a
displayed price not more than the Designated Percentage away from the
then current National Best Offer (or if no National Best Offer, the
last reported sale), or identify to the Exchange current resting
interest that satisfies the Two-Sided Obligation.
    The MMPO is designed to assist Market Makers in complying with
these requirements by being repriced in accordance with the parameters
required by Rule 4613. Thus, use of the order will allow market makers
to make liquidity available at prices reasonably related to the
National Best Bid and National Best Offer, even in circumstances where
they are not themselves quoting at the best price or have more limited
liquidity available at the best price. Specifically, the MMPO is a
limit order that, upon entry, is automatically priced by the BX System
at the Designated Percentage away from the Reference Price to keep the
displayed price of the order bounded within a price range, thereby
allowing the market maker to comply with the quotation requirements
under Rule 4613(a)(2). The Reference Price is the then current National
Best Bid (National Best Offer), or if no National Best Bid (National
Best Offer), the most recent reported last-sale eligible trade from the
responsible single plan processor for that day, or if none, the
previous closing price of the security as adjusted to reflect any
corporate actions (e.g., dividends or stock splits) in the security.
For example, if the National Best Bid was $10 in a Tier 1 Security, the
Designated Percentage would be 8%, an MMPO to buy entered between 9:45
a.m. and 3:45 p.m. would be priced at $9.20.\12\ Because the order is
designed to post to the book at the Designated Percentage, it would not
be marketable upon entry and therefore may not be entered with a time-
in-force of Immediate-or-Cancel. As a result, an MMPO would provide,
rather than access, liquidity. The order may not be assigned any
special conditions governing its terms of execution, other than time-
in-force, limit price, and the pegging functionality described herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ As noted above, the MMPO is a limit order and therefore
must be assigned a limit priced beyond which it will not execute. If
the repricing mechanism of the order would result in the order being
priced at a level inconsistent with its limit price, the order will
be rejected or cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon reaching the Defined Limit, the displayed price of an MMPO
will be repriced by the System to the Designated Percentage away from
the then current Reference Price. Thus, if the National Best Bid in the
above example increased to $10.17, the MMPO priced at $9.20 would now
be more than 9.5%, the Defined Limit, away from the National Best Bid,
and would be repriced to $9.35, the Designated Percentage away from
$10.17.
    An MMPO order could execute in the circumstances shown below. The
best bid in a particular security is currently $10.00 and all MMPO's in
the security are currently priced at $9.50 with no other bids resting
between those two prices. If the $10.00 bid were cancelled or executed,
the MMPO's resting at $9.50 would become the inside market and would
then be available for execution against any order willing to sell at
$9.50 or lower. Alternatively, assume there is a bid for 100 shares at
$10.00 and the next order on the book is the MMPO resting at $9.50 for
100 shares. If a 200 share order to sell at $9.50 is received, it would
execute 100 shares against the $10.00 bid and 100 shares against the
MMPO that is posted at $9.50.
    If as a result of a change to the Reference Price, the displayed
price of a Market Maker Peg Order to buy (sell) is at least one minimum
price variation more than (less than) a price that is 4% less than
(more than) the Reference Price, rounded up (down), then the price of
the Market Maker Peg Order to buy (sell) will be re-priced to the
Designated Percentage away from the Reference Price. Thus, if the
National Best Bid was initially $10 in a Tier 1 Security, and an MMPO
to buy was initially entered at $9.20, if the National Best Bid
decreased to $9.57 (such that the displayed price of the MMPO would be
at least $0.01 more than a price that is 4% less than the National Best
Bid, rounded up (i.e., $9.57 - ($9.57 x 0.04) = $9.1872, rounding up to
$9.19), the MMPO would be repriced to $8.81 (8% away from the National
Best Bid).\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ If the resulting calculated price is $9.185, the price
would round up or down to the compliant price for the entering
party, up for a buyer and down for a seller.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For a given MMPO, a Market Maker may designate a more aggressive
offset from the National Best Bid or National Best Offer than the given
Designated Percentage, but such an offset will be expressed as a price
difference from the Reference Price. Thus, for example, the Market
Maker could designate an offset of $0.25, in which case the order would
be continually repriced to maintain the $0.25 offset as the Reference
Price moved. Thus, if the National Best Bid was $10, an MMPO to buy
with a $0.25 offset would initially be priced at $9.75, with the price
rising or falling continually as the Reference Price moved.\14\ If
there is no Reference Price, an MMPO with a designated offset amount
will be sent back to the Market Maker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ An MMPO with an offset operates in a manner similar to a
Primary Pegged Order with an offset amount (see Rule 4702(b(4)), but
an MMPO is always displayed. Note also that if the repricing of an
order with an offset amount would result in the order being priced
at a level inconsistent with its limit price, the order will be
rejected or cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the absence of a Reference Price, a Market Maker Peg Order will
be cancelled (if on the BX Book) or rejected (if it is an incoming
Order). If, after entry, a Market Maker Peg Order has a displayed price
based on a Reference Price other than the National Best Bid or National
Best Offer and such Market Maker Peg Order is established as the
National Best Bid or National Best Offer, the Market Maker Peg Order
will not be subsequently repriced in accordance with this rule until a
new Reference Price is established. Thus, if the last sale price on the
consolidated tape was $10 and an MMPO to buy is priced at $9.20 and
establishes the National Best Bid, the order will not then be repriced
to maintain an offset from itself. Rather, the order will be repriced
only once there is an independent basis pricing the order. In the event
of an execution against an MMPO that reduces the size of the order
below one round lot, the Market Maker would need to enter a new order
(after performing required regulatory checks, as discussed below) to
satisfy its obligations under Rule 4613.\15\ If a Market Maker Peg
Order is repriced 1,000 times, it will be cancelled.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Rule 4613 generally sets forth BX Market Maker
requirements, which include quotation and pricing obligations, and
the firm quote obligation.
    \16\ BX limits the total number of repricings to 1,000 to
control message traffic in the System. For example, a MMPO may be
affected by a flickering quotation, which is a condition whereby the
displayed quotation (off of which the MPPO is pegged) can change
multiple times in a single second. The Exchange determined that, if
the MMPO repricing was unlimited, the flickering quotation may cause
unnecessary System traffic as the MMPO continually reprices in
reaction to each rapid change of the quotation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MMPOs are not eligible for routing pursuant to Rule 4758 and are
always displayed on BX. Notwithstanding the availability of MMPO
functionality, a Market Maker remains responsible for entering,
monitoring, and resubmitting, as applicable, quotations that meet the
requirements of Rule 4613. A new timestamp is created for an MMPO each
time that its displayed price is automatically repriced. At a
particular price, the order would be processed in regular price/time
priority, with better

priced interest being executed prior to the MMPO and with the MMPO
being executed behind similarly priced orders entered before the MMPO
is repriced.
    Although Rule 4613 does not govern the pre-market trading session
before 9:30 a.m. and the post-market trading session after 4:00 p.m., a
Market Maker may enter an MMPO during such periods. In that case, the
Designated Percentage and Defined Limit applicable to the MMPO will be
the same as for the periods from 9:30 a.m. through 9:45 a.m., as
described in Rule 4613.\17\ As BX does not have a special market
opening or closing process, an MMPO does not behave differently at 9:30
a.m. or 4:00 p.m. than it does immediately before or after such times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Supra notes 8 and 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Use of the MMPO does not frustrate compliance with any broker-
dealer risk management obligations required by SEC Rule 15c3-5 (the
``Market Access Rule''), or any Regulation SHO marking and locate
requirement prior to order entry. As such, use of the order is not
inconsistent with Market Makers fulfilling their obligations under
these rules, while also meeting their Exchange market making
obligations. It should be noted, however, that use of the order does
not ensure that the Market Maker is in compliance with its regulatory
obligations under the Market Access Rule or Regulation SHO.
2. Statutory Basis
    BX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of section 6 of the Act,\18\ in general, and with section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\19\ in particular, in that the proposal 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 also in that it is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. The Exchange believes that the MMPO will aid
Market Makers in complying with the requirements of Rule 4613. The
Exchange further believes that compliance with this rule will remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and protect investors and the public
interest, because it will provide a means by which Market Makers may
offer liquidity at prices that are reasonably related to the National
Best Bid and National Best Offer, even in circumstances where they are
not willing to quote at the inside market. As a result, in
circumstances where liquidity available at displayed prices closer to
the inside than the price of an MMPO is exhausted, the MMPO will
nevertheless be available to support executions at prices that are not
widely at variance with the prior inside market. Moreover, a Market
Maker may elect to set a more aggressive offset from the National Best
Bid or National Best Offer than the given Designated Percentage, which
would support executions as prices closer to the prior inside market.
Because the MMPO is repriced to avoid triggering a limit-up, limit-down
restriction or a trading pause, it will not contribute to aberrant
volatility in a particular stock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The methodology for repricing an MMPO is consistent with the
requirements of the Act because it will ensure that the displayed price
of the order bears a reasonable relationship to the inside market and
is less likely to execute at a price that would trigger a limit-up,
limit-down restriction or a trading pause. Moreover, because the
repricing of an MMPO results in a new timestamp being attached to the
order, the MMPO does not provide a means by which an MMPO may achieve
an execution priority superior to an order entered at that price
earlier in time. In addition, the use of the MMPO would not be
inconsistent with Market Makers fulfilling their obligations under the
Market Access Rule and Regulation SHO.
    The Exchange also believes that although the order may be used only
by Market Makers, this restriction is not unfairly discriminatory
because only Market Makers are subject to the requirements of Rule
4613; accordingly, the order is not needed to assist other market
participants in fulfilling regulatory obligations. To the extent that a
market participant wishes to maintain an order at a displayed price
that deviates from the inside market by a particular amount, however,
it may use the Primary Peg Order to achieve this purpose. Accordingly,
an alternative to the MMPO is already available to market participants.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically,
the Exchange believes that the proposal will enhance BX's
competitiveness by providing Market Makers on BX with a means to offer
liquidity at prices reasonably related to the inside market. The
Exchange believes that this functionality will be appealing to
potential Market Makers, and therefore will make it more likely that
market participants will choose to become active on BX. This may, in
turn, increase the extent of liquidity available on BX and increase its
ability to compete with other execution venues to attract orders that
are seeking liquidity. The Exchange further believes that the
introduction of the MMPO will not impair in any manner the ability of
market participants or other execution venues to compete.

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 \20\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(iii).
    \21\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2015-042 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2015-042. 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-BX-2015-042,
and should be submitted on or before August 24, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-18882 Filed 7-31-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P