[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 9, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53937-53941]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16988]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98051; File No. SR-EMERALD-2023-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX Emerald, LLC; Suspension of
and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or
Disapprove Proposed Rule Change To Increase Fees for the ToM Market
Data Product and Establish Fees for the cToM Market Data Product

August 3, 2023.

I. Introduction

    On June 7, 2023, MIAX Emerald, LLC (``MIAX Emerald'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change (File Number SR-EMERALD-2023-13) to increase fees
for the MIAX Emerald Top of Market (``ToM'') market data product and
establish fees for the MIAX Emerald Complex Top of Market (``cToM'')
market data product. The proposed rule change was immediately effective
upon filing with the Commission pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act.\3\ The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on June 26, 2023.\4\ Pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(C)
of

the Act,\5\ the Commission is hereby: (1) temporarily suspending the
proposed rule change; and (2) instituting proceedings to determine
whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). A proposed rule change may take
effect upon filing with the Commission if it is designated by the
exchange as ``establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the self-regulatory organization on any person, whether
or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory organization.''
15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97767 (June 20,
2023), 88 FR 41442 (``Notice'').
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background and Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to increase fees for the ToM market data
product and establish fees for the cToM market data product.\6\
According to the Exchange, the ToM feed provides subscribers with top
of book quotations based on options orders and quotes entered into the
System \7\ and resting on the Exchange's Simple Order Book \8\ as well
as administrative messages.\9\ The cToM feed provides subscribers with
the same information as TOM as it relates to the Strategy Book \10\
(i.e., best bid and offer for a complex strategy, with aggregate size,
based on displayable orders in the complex strategy on the Exchange),
plus additional information specific to complex orders (i.e.,
identification of the complex strategies currently trading on the
Exchange, complex strategy last sale information, and the status of
securities underlying the complex strategy).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee change on
December 28, 2022, with an effective date of January 1, 2023. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 96625 (January 10, 2023), 88 FR
2688 (January 17, 2023) (SR-EMERALD-2022-37). That filing was
withdrawn by the Exchange and the Exchange filed new proposed fee
changes with additional justification (SR-EMERALD-2023-04) on
February 23, 2023. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97078
(March 8, 2023), 88 FR 15813 (March 14, 2023). The Exchange
subsequently withdrew that filing and replaced it with SR-EMERALD-
2023-10 on April 11, 2023. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
97326 (April 19, 2023), 88 FR 25043 (April 25, 2023). The Exchange
subsequently withdrew that filing and replaced it with the instant
filing to provide additional information and a revised justification
for the proposal, which is discussed herein. See Notice, supra note
4, at 41442.
    \7\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of Securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
    \8\ The term ``Simple Order Book'' means ``the Exchange's
regular electronic book of orders and quotes.'' See Exchange Rule
518(a)(15).
    \9\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 41443.
    \10\ The ``Strategy Book'' is each Exchange's electronic book of
complex orders and complex quotes. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(17).
    \11\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 41443. The Exchange states
that cToM is a distinct market data product from ToM. The Exchange
also states that ToM subscribers are not required to subscribe to
cToM, and that cToM subscribers are not required to subscribe to
ToM. See id. at 41443-44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to increase the fee for Internal Distributors
\12\ from $1,250 per month to $2,000 per month and External
Distributors \13\ from $1,750 per month to $3,000 per month for the ToM
data feed.\14\ The Exchange also proposes to assess a fee on Internal
Distributors of $2,000 per month and External Distributors of $3,000
per month for the cToM feed.\15\ The Exchange will assess the increased
ToM and new cToM fees on Internal and External Distributors in each
month the Distributor is credentialed to use ToM or cToM, and will
reduce such fees for new Distributors for the first month during which
they subscribe to ToM or cToM based on the number of trading days that
have been held during the month prior to the date on which that
subscriber has been credentialed to use ToM or cToM.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A ``Distributor'' of MIAX Emerald data is any entity that
receives a feed or file of data either directly from MIAX Emerald or
indirectly through another entity and then distributes it either
internally (within that entity) or externally (outside that entity).
See Fee Schedule, Section 6(a). All members or non-members that
determine to receive any market data feed from the Exchange, or its
affiliates, must first execute, among other things, the MIAX
Exchange Group Exchange Data Agreement (``Exchange Data
Agreement''). See Notice, supra note 4, at 41451. Pursuant to the
Exchange Data Agreement, ``Internal Distributors'' are restricted to
the ``internal use'' of any market data they receive, meaning they
may only distribute the Exchange's market data to their officers and
employees and their affiliates. See id.
    \13\ ``External Distributors'' may distribute the Exchange's
market data to persons who are not their officers, employees, or
affiliates, and may charge their own fees for the distribution of
such market data. See id.
    \14\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 41443.
    \15\ See id. at 41444.
    \16\ New cToM Distributors will be assessed a pro-rata
percentage of the fees described above, which is the percentage of
the number of trading days remaining in the affected calendar month
as of the date on which they have been credentialed to use cToM,
divided by the total number of trading days in the affected calendar
month. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Suspension of the Proposed Rule Changes

    Pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act,\17\ at any time within
60 days of the date of filing of an immediately effective proposed rule
change pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Act,\18\ the Commission
summarily may temporarily suspend the change in the rules of a self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') if it appears to the Commission that
such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. The Commission believes a temporary suspension of the proposed
rule changes is necessary and appropriate to allow for additional
analysis of the proposed rule changes' consistency with the Act and the
rules thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of the proposal, the Exchange states its belief that the
proposed fees overall are fair and reasonable as a form of ``cost
recovery plus the possibility of a reasonable return'' for the
Exchange's aggregate costs of offering the ToM and cToM data feeds.\19\
Specifically, the Exchange states the fees are based on a ``cost-plus
model'' used to determine a reasonable fee structure that is informed
by the Exchange's understanding of different use of products by
different types of participants.\20\ According to the Exchange,
employing a methodology that is the ``result of an extensive review and
analysis,'' it estimates the total projected annual cost of providing
the ToM and cToM data feeds to be $665,296.\21\ To arrive at these
figures, the Exchange states that it undertook a thorough internal
analysis of nearly every expense in the Exchange's general expense
ledger to determine whether each such expense related to the provision
of ToM and cToM data feeds, and, if such expense did so relate, what
portion (or percentage) of such expense supported the provision of ToM
and cToM data feeds.\22\ The Exchange states that it determined the
total cost for the Exchange and its affiliated markets for each cost
driver \23\ through a company-wide this process that included
discussions with senior management, Exchange department heads, and the
Finance Team.\24\ The Exchange further

states that it determined what portion of the cost allocated to the
Exchange pursuant to this methodology is to be allocated to each core
service, including the appropriate allocation to market data.\25\ The
Exchange states that through this allocation methodology, the Exchange
``applied an estimated allocation of each cost driver to each core
service'' and ``[e]ach of the [resulting] cost allocations is unique to
the Exchange and represents a percentage of overall cost that was
allocation to the Exchange pursuant to the initial allocation.'' \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See id. 41450.
    \20\ See id. at 41450. In addition, the Exchange states that the
proposed monthly cToM fees for Internal and External Distributors
are identical to the fees that the Exchange proposes to charge for
ToM. See id. at 41444. The Exchange also states that cToM was
provided free of charge for the past four years, since the cToM
market data product was established on the Exchange, the Exchange
absorbed all costs associated with compiling and disseminating cToM
during that time, and the Exchange now proposes to establish fees
for cToM to recoup its ongoing costs going forward. See id. at
41443.
    \21\ See id. at 41446. The Exchange states that the Cost
Analysis is based on the Exchange's 2023 fiscal year of operations
and projections. See id. at 41449. The Exchange has calculated the
annual cost for producing ToM to subscribers to be $317,753, and
$347,543 for cToM. See id. at 41443.
    \22\ See id. at 41446.
    \23\ The Exchange defines ``cost drivers'' within the filing as
the costs necessary to deliver each of the core services, see infra
note 25, including infrastructure, software, human resources (i.e.,
personnel), and certain general and administrative expenses. See
Notice supra note 4, at 41445.
    \24\ See id. at 41445. The Exchange states that because the
Exchange's parent company currently owns and operates four separate
and distinct marketplaces, the Exchange's parent company determines
the actual cost for each marketplace, which results in different
allocations and amounts across exchanges for the same cost drivers.
See id. According to the Exchange, its allocation methodology
ensures that no portion of any cost would be allocated twice or
double-counted between the Exchange and its affiliated markets. See
id.
    \25\ See id. at 41446. The Exchange describes ``core services''
as services provided by the Exchange, including transactions, market
data, membership services, physical connectivity, and ports (which
provides order entry, cancellation and modification functionality,
risk functionality, ability to receive drop copies, and other
functionality). See id.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange states that the $665,296 aggregate annual costs for
providing the ToM and cToM data feeds is the sum of to the following
individual line-item costs: (1) Human Resources at $354,553; (2)
Network Infrastructure (fiber connectivity) at $9,428; (3) Data Center
at $20,630; (4) Hardware and Software Maintenance and Licenses at
$22,202; (5) Depreciation at $21,167; and (6) Allocated Shared Expenses
at $237,316.\27\ The Exchange represents that it estimates that the
proposed fees will result in an annual revenue of approximately
$804,000, which is a potential profit margin of 17% over the cost of
providing ToM and cToM market data feeds.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See id. at 41446-47.
    \28\ See id. at 41446, 41448.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange states its belief that a 17% rate of return is
reasonable because it allows the Exchange to ``recoup all of its
expenses for providing the ToM and cToM data products'' and that any
additional revenue would represent no more than what the Exchange
believes to be a reasonable rate of return.\29\ In addition, the
Exchange states its belief that the proposed fees are reasonable
because they are generally less than the fees charged by competing
options exchanges for comparable market data products.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Id. at 41450. The Exchange also states that an
approximately 17% mark-up is fair and reasonable after taking into
account the costs related to creating, generating and disseminating
the ToM and cToM data feeds and the fact that the Exchange will need
to fund future expenditures. Id. at 41448.
    \30\ Id. at 41450.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In further support of the proposal, the Exchange states its belief
that the fees are reasonable, fair, and equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory, because they are designed to align fees with services
provided, are allocated fairly and equitably among the various
categories of users of the feeds with any differences among categories
of users being justified and appropriate, and will apply uniformly to
all data recipients that choose to subscribe to the ToM and cToM data
feeds.\31\ Moreover, the Exchange asserts that it is reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory to assess Internal
Distributors fees that are lower than the fees assessed for External
Distributors for subscriptions to the ToM and cToM data feeds because
Internal Distributors have limited, restricted usage rights to the
market data, as compared to External Distributors, which have more
expansive usage rights, including rights to commercialize such market
data.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See id.
    \32\ See id. at 41451. In addition, the Exchange argues that it
utilizes more resources to support External Distributors as compared
to Internal Distributors, as External Distributors have reporting
and monitoring obligations that Internal Distributors do not have,
thus requiring additional time and effort of the Exchange's staff.
See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange asserts that the proposed fees would not
cause any unnecessary or inappropriate burden on inter-market
competition because other exchanges already have similar market data
fees and they are free to adopt comparable fee structures subject to
the Commission's rule filing process.\33\ Furthermore, the Exchange
asserts that the allowing the Exchange, or any new market entrant, to
waive fees for a period of time to allow it to become established, such
as the Exchange did with cToM, will encourage market entry and thus
ultimately promote competition.\34\ The Exchange also asserts that the
proposed rule change would not cause any unnecessary or inappropriate
burden on intra-market competition because the proposed fees are
associated with the usage of the data feed by each market participant
based on whether the market participant internally and externally
distributes the Exchange data.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See id. at 41452.
    \34\ See id.
    \35\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To date, the Commission has not received any comment letters on the
revised justifications for the increase in ToM market data fees or the
establishment of the cToM market data fees.
    When exchanges file their proposed rule changes with the
Commission, including fee filings like the Exchange's present proposal,
they are required to provide a statement supporting the proposal's
basis under the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable
to the exchange.\36\ The instructions to Form 19b-4, on which exchanges
file their proposed rule changes, specify that such statement ``should
be sufficiently detailed and specific to support a finding that the
proposed rule change is consistent with [those] requirements.'' \37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See 17 CFR 240.19b-4 (Item 3 entitled ``Self-Regulatory
Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for,
the Proposed Rule Change'').
    \37\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 6 of the Act, including sections 6(b)(4), (5), and (8),
require the rules of an exchange to: (1) provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable fees among members, issuers, and other persons
using the exchange's facilities; \38\ (2) perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, protect investors
and the public interest, and not be designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers; \39\
and (3) not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In temporarily suspending the Exchange's proposed rule change, the
Commission intends to further consider whether the proposal to increase
fees for the ToM market data feeds and establish fees for the cToM
market data feeds are consistent with the statutory requirements
applicable to a national securities exchange under the Act. In
particular, the Commission will consider whether the proposed rule
change satisfies the standards under the Act and the rules thereunder
requiring, among other things, that an exchange's rules provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable fees among members, issuers, and
other persons using its facilities; not permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers; and do not impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the Commission finds that it is appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of investors, and otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, to temporarily suspend the
proposed rule change.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ For purposes of temporarily suspending the proposed rule
change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).

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

IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove the
Proposed Rule Changes

    In addition to temporarily suspending the proposal, the Commission
also hereby institutes proceedings pursuant to sections 19(b)(3)(C)
\43\ and 19(b)(2)(B)of the Act \44\ to determine whether the Exchange's
proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of
proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any
conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, the
Commission seeks and encourages interested persons to provide
additional comment on the proposed rule change to inform the
Commission's analysis of whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C). Once the Commission temporarily
suspends a proposed rule change, section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act
requires that the Commission institute proceedings under section
19(b)(2)(B) to determine whether a proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
    \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\45\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for possible disapproval under
consideration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Id. Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act also provides that
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove a proposed rule
change must be concluded within 180 days of the date of publication
of notice of the filing of the proposed rule change. See id. The
time for conclusion of the proceedings may be extended for up to 60
days if the Commission finds good cause for such extension and
publishes its reasons for so finding, or if the exchange consents to
the longer period. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposed
fees are consistent with section 6(b)(4) of the Act, which requires
that the rules of a national securities exchange ``provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities''; \46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposed
fees are consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires,
among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange
not be ``designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers''; \47\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Whether the Exchange has demonstrated how the proposed
fees are consistent with section 6(b)(8) of the Act, which requires
that the rules of a national securities exchange ``not impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of [the Act].'' \48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in section III above, the Exchange made various
arguments in support of their proposal. The Commission believes that
there are questions as to whether the Exchange has provided sufficient
information to demonstrate that the proposed fees are consistent with
the Act and the rules thereunder.
    Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the ``burden to
demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the [Act]
and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is on the [SRO]
that proposed the rule change.'' \49\ The description of a proposed
rule change, its purpose and operation, its effect, and a legal
analysis of its consistency with applicable requirements must all be
sufficiently detailed and specific to support an affirmative Commission
finding,\50\ and any failure of an SRO to provide this information may
result in the Commission not having a sufficient basis to make an
affirmative finding that a proposed rule change is consistent with the
Act and the applicable rules and regulations.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3).
    \50\ See id.
    \51\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
consideration and comment on the issues raised herein, including as to
whether the proposed fees are consistent with the Act, and
specifically, with its requirements that exchange fees be reasonable
and equitably allocated, not be unfairly discriminatory, and not impose
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5), and (8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Commission's Solicitation of Comments

    The Commission requests written views, data, and arguments with
respect to the concerns identified above as well as any other relevant
concerns. Such comments should be submitted by August 30, 2023.
Rebuttal comments should be submitted by September 13, 2023. Although
there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or
disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views,
data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule
19b-4, any request for an opportunity to make an oral presentation.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Section 19(b)(2) of the Act grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by an SRO. See Securities
Acts Amendments of 1975, Report of the Senate Committee on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs to Accompany S. 249, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th
Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, in
addition to any other comments they may wish to submit about the
proposed rule changes.
    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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number
    SR-EMERALD-2023-13 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-EMERALD-2023-13. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or

withhold entirely from publication submitted material that is obscene
or subject to copyright protection. All submissions should refer to
file number SR-EMERALD-2023-13 and should be submitted on or before
August 30, 2023. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by September 13,
2023.

VI. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(C) of the
Act,\54\ that File No. SR-EMERALD-2023-13, be and hereby is,
temporarily suspended. In addition, the Commission is instituting
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-16988 Filed 8-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 96 (Monday, May 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28704-28706]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11475]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP14-842-000.
    Applicants: PGPipeline LLC.
    Description: Docket No. RP14-442-000 Compliance Filing to be
effective 7/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/7/14.

    Accession Number: 20140507-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-843-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: May 9-14, 2014 Auction to be effective 5/9/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20140507-5131.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-844-000.
    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners.
    Description: Negotiated Rates 5-6-14 to be effective 5/8/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20140507-5174.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-845-000.
    Applicants: J.P. Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation, Mercuria
Energy America, Inc.
    Description: Joint Petition for Temporary Waiver of J.P. Morgan
Ventures Energy Corporation and Mercuria Energy America, Inc.
    Filed Date: 5/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20140507-5205.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-846-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Transmission, Inc.
    Description: DTI--Abandonment of Rate Schedule X-32 to be effective
6/9/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20140508-5091.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-847-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Neg Rate 2014-05-09 Encana NC NRA to be effective 5/
10/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20140509-5047.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-848-000.
    Applicants: Rager Mountain Storage Company LLC.
    Description: Tariff Modifications to be effective 6/8/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20140509-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-849-000.
    Applicants: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation.
    Description: Cancellation of Rate Schedule X-38 to be effective 6/
9/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20140509-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-850-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company,
    Description: Transco's GSS LSS Customers Share of DTI GSS Fuel
Refund to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20140509-5135.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/21/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-851-000.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Company submits tariff filing per
154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be effective N/
A.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5037.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-852-000.
    Applicants: ANR Storage Company.
    Description: ANR Storage Company submits tariff filing per 154.203:
Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be effective 6/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5039.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-853-000.
    Applicants: Bison Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Bison Pipeline LLC submits tariff filing per 154.203:
Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5042.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-854-000.
    Applicants: Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Par.
    Description: Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Partnership
submits tariff filing per 154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-
442-000 to be effective 6/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5043.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-855-000.
    Applicants: Blue Lake Gas Storage Company.
    Description: Blue Lake Gas Storage Company submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be
effective 6/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5044.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-856-000.
    Applicants: Gas Transmission Northwest LLC.
    Description: Gas Transmission Northwest LLC submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be
effective 6/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5046.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-857-000.
    Applicants: North Baja Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: North Baja Pipeline, LLC submits tariff filing per
154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be effective 6/
12/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5047.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-858-000.
    Applicants: Northern Border Pipeline Company.
    Description: Northern Border Pipeline Company submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be
effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-859-000.
    Applicants: Portland Natural Gas Transmission System.
    Description: Portland Natural Gas Transmission System submits
tariff filing per 154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000
to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5050.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-860-000.
    Applicants: TC Offshore LLC.
    Description: TC Offshore LLC submits tariff filing per 154.203:
Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-861-000.
    Applicants: Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company
    Description: Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.203: Compliance to Show Cause Order RP14-442-000 to be
effective 6/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/12/14.
    Accession Number: 20140512-5052.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/14.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-685-001.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Interruptible Wheeling Service--Compliance Filing to
be effective 6/6/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/7/14.

    Accession Number: 20140507-5066.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-780-001.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: TETLP 2014 Tariff Maps Filing Amendment to be
effective 5/29/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/7/14.
    Accession Number: 20140507-5031.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-118-003.
    Applicants: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Interim Rates to be effective 5/1/2014 to be effective
5/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20140508-5073.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-573-003.
    Applicants: KPC Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: KPC Fuel Reimbursement Adjustment--Supplemental
Compliance Filing to be effective 4/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20140508-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-767-001.
    Applicants: Questar Pipeline Company.
    Description: Non-conforming TSAs, Amended filing--Enervest 5113,
5114, 5115 to be effective 2/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20140508-5074.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-823-001.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Additional Non-Conf Agmts in RP14-823-000 to be
effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 5/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20140508-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/20/14.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: Monday, May 12, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
 Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-11475 Filed 5-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


	INDEX TO DOCKET EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0681

	HAWAII INFRASTRUCTURE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PROPOSED RULE

CATEGORY I	NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Proposed Rule, “Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation
Plans; Hawaii; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead National
Ambient Air Quality Standard” signed September 25, 2013
(pre-publication version).

EPA Region IX, Technical Support Document: Evaluation of 2013 Hawaii
Infrastructure SIP for 2008 Lead NAAQS, dated September 2013.

Submittal from Loretta J. Fuddy, A.C.S.W., M.P.H., Director of Health,
the Hawaii State Department of Health, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional
Administrator, US EPA Region 9, dated February 13, 2013.

CATEGORY II	INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

[Reserved]

CATEGORY III	OFFICIAL PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE NPRM

[Reserved]

CATEGORY IV	OTHER DOCUMENTS

Letter from Stephen D. Page, Director for Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, dated
October 14, 2011.

Analysis by Mark Schmidt, OAQPS, “The Estimated Contribution of
Ambient Lead (Pb) to Class I Area Visibility Impairment,” November 7,
2011.

Letter from Bruce Anderson, Deputy Director for Environmental Health,
Hawaii State Department of Health, regarding US EPA/DOH Delegation
Agreement, to David Howekamp, Director, Air Management Division, EPA
Region 9, dated January 03, 1989.

Delegation Agreement between US EPA and the Hawaii State Department of
Health, dated January 5, 1989.

Technical System Audit Report, Hawaii Department of Health Ambient Air
Quality Monitoring Program, June 01, 2011.

Submittal from the Hawaii State Department of Health, Environmental
Management Division, Clean Air Branch, of the State of Hawaii 2011 Air
Monitoring Network Plan, to Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis
Office, US EPA Region 9, dated July 01, 2011.

Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, US EPA
Region 9, regarding the approval of the State of Hawaii 2011 Air
Monitoring Network Plan, to Wilfred Nagamine, Manager, Hawaii State
Department of Health, Environmental Management Division, Clean Air
Branch, dated October 31, 2011.

Submittal from the Hawaii State Department of Health, Environmental
Management Division, Clean Air Branch, of the State of Hawaii 2012 Air
Monitoring Network Plan, to Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis
Office, US EPA Region 9, dated June 22, 2012.

Letter from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, US EPA
Region 9, regarding the approval of the State of Hawaii 2012 Air
Monitoring Network Plan, to Nolan Hirai, Acting Manager, Hawaii State
Department of Health, Environmental Management Division, Clean Air
Branch, dated February 13, 2013.

Submittal from the Hawaii State Department of Health, Environmental
Management Division, Clean Air Branch, of the State of Hawaii 2013 Air
Monitoring Network Plan, to Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis
Office, US EPA Region 9, dated July 01, 2013.

EPA Region IX, Air Division, Technical Support Document for EPA's Notice
of Rulemaking for the Hawaii State Implementation Plan, Hawaii
Administrative Rules Title 11 Department of Health Chapter 60.1 Air
Pollution Control, dated January, 2012.

EPA Region IX, Technical Support Document for EPA's Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking for the Hawaii State Implementation Plan: Minor New Source
Review Program, March 12, 2012.

EPA Region IX, Technical Support Document: Evaluation of 2011 Hawaii
Infrastructure SIP for 1997 Ozone; 1997 Particulate Matter; and 2006
Particulate Matter NAAQS, dated March 2012.

CATEGORY V	FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES

39 FR 34536, “Amended Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans,” Sept. 26, 1974.

43 FR 26410, “1977 Clean Air Act; Prevention of Significant Air
Quality Deterioration State Implementation Plans; Requirements,” June
19, 1978.

45 FR 52741, “Amended Prevention Of Significant Air Quality
Deterioration,” Aug. 7, 1980.

46 FR 40512, “Final Rule to approved an air quality surveillance plan
as a revision to the Hawaii SIP,” Final Rule, August 10, 1981.

50 FR 28535, “State Implementation Plans for Visibility; New Source
Review and Monitoring Strategy; Final Rule,” July 12, 1985.

51 FR 40676, “Amended Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans,” Nov. 7, 1986.

52 FR 45137, “Protection of Visibility from Sources in Attainment
Areas,” Nov. 24, 1987.

61 FR 38664, “Correction of Implementation Plans; American Samoa,
Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada State Implementation Plans,”
July 25, 1996.

62 FR 34641, “Correction of Implementation Plans; American Samoa,
Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada State Implementation Plans,”
June 27, 1997.

64 FR 35714, “Regional Haze Regulations,” July 1, 1999.

66 FR 62945, “Clean Air Act Full Approval of the Operating Permits
Program; State of Hawaii,” December 4, 2001.

67 FR 80186,” Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR): Baseline Emissions Determination,
Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology, Plantwide Applicability
Limitations, Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects,” December 31,
2002.

68 FR 11322, “Amended Prevention Of Significant Air Quality
Deterioration,” Mar. 10, 2003.

68 FR 74488, “Amended Prevention Of Significant Air Quality
Deterioration,” Dec. 24, 2003.

69 FR 41431, “Final Rule to amendment to the state’s air quality
surveillance network as a revision to the Hawaii SIP,” July 9, 2004.

72 FR 19804, “Clean Air Act Full Approval of Revisions to the State of
Hawaii Operating Permit Program,” April 20, 2007.

72 FR 32526, “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR): Removal of Vacated Elements,”
June 13, 2007.

73 FR 66964, “National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead,”
November 12, 2008.

74 FR 2392, “Finding of Failure To Submit State Implementation Plans
Required by 1999 Regional Haze Rule,” January 15, 2009.

76 FR 72097, “Air Quality Designations for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards,” November 22, 2011.

77 FR 21913, “Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans;
Hawaii; Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and the
1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards,” April 12, 2012.

77 FR 24148, “Revision to the Hawaii State Implementation Plan, Minor
New Source Review Program,” April 23, 2012.

77 FR 25084, “Revisions to the Hawaii State Implementation Plan,”
April 27, 2012.

77 FR 47530, “Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans;
Hawaii; Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and the
1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards,“ August 9, 2012.

78 FR 12961, “Findings of Failure To Submit a Complete State
Implementation Plan for Section 110(a) Pertaining to the 2008 Lead
National Ambient Air Quality Standards,” February 26, 2013.

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4266-4268]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01620]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2205]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice lists communities where the addition or
modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths,
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or
the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard
determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and
where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for
each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical
data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have
been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through
issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in accordance with Federal
Regulations. The currently effective community number is shown in the
table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

DATES: These flood hazard determinations will be finalized on the dates
listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS report in
effect prior to this determination for the listed communities.
    From the date of the second publication of notification of these
changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in
which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate
Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The
flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day
period.

ADDRESSES: The affected communities are listed in the table below.
Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.
    Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of
the community as listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The specific flood hazard determinations are
not described for each community in this notice. However, the online
location and local community map repository address where the flood
hazard determination information is available for inspection is
provided.
    Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must
be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed
in the table below.
    The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood
Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance
with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.,
and with 44 CFR part 65.
    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management
measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show
evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified
for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
    These flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by
other Federal, State, or regional entities. The flood hazard
determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood
hazard determination information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Chief executive officer of                                    Online location of letter of map                            Community
         State and county          Location and case No.             community              Community map  repository                 revision                Date of  modification      No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona:
    Maricopa.....................  City of Peoria (21-09- The Honorable Cathy Carlat,     City Hall, 8401 West Monroe    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 11, 2022.........       040050
                                    1679P).                Mayor, City of Peoria, 8401     Street, Peoria, AZ 85345.      advanceSearch.
                                                           West Monroe Street, Peoria,
                                                           AZ 85345.
    Maricopa.....................  City of Phoenix (21-   The Honorable Kate Gallego,     Street Transportation          https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 11, 2022.........       040051
                                    09-0190P).             Mayor, City of Phoenix, 200     Department, 200 West           advanceSearch.
                                                           West Washington Street,         Washington Street, 5th
                                                           Phoenix, AZ 85003.              Floor, Phoenix, AZ 85003.
    Maricopa.....................  Unincorporated Areas   The Honorable Jack Sellers,     Flood Control District of      https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 11, 2022.........       040037
                                    of Maricopa County     Chairman, Board of              Maricopa County, 2801 West     advanceSearch.
                                    (21-09-0190P).         Supervisors, Maricopa County,   Durango Street, Phoenix, AZ
                                                           301 West Jefferson Street,      85009.
                                                           10th Floor, Phoenix, AZ
                                                           85003.

    Maricopa.....................  Unincorporated Areas   The Honorable Jack Sellers,     Flood Control District of      https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 11, 2022.........       040037
                                    of Maricopa County     Chairman, Board of              Maricopa County, 2801 West     advanceSearch.
                                    (21-09-1679P).         Supervisors, Maricopa County,   Durango Street, Phoenix, AZ
                                                           301 West Jefferson Street,      85009.
                                                           10th Floor, Phoenix, AZ
                                                           85003.
    Yavapai......................  Town of Dewey-         The Honorable John Hughes,      Town Hall, 2735 South Highway  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 24, 2022.........       040061
                                    Humboldt (21-09-       Mayor, Town of Dewey-           69, Suite 12, Humboldt, AZ     advanceSearch.
                                    0533P).                Humboldt, 2735 South Highway    86329.
                                                           69, Suite 12, Humboldt, AZ
                                                           86329.
    Yavapai......................  Town of Prescott       The Honorable Kell Palguta,     Town Hall, Engineering         https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 24, 2022.........       040121
                                    Valley (21-09-         Mayor, Town of Prescott         Division, 7501 East Civic      advanceSearch.
                                    0533P).                Valley, Civic Center, 7501      Circle, Prescott Valley, AZ
                                                           East Skoog Boulevard, 4th       86314.
                                                           Floor, Prescott Valley, AZ
                                                           86314.
    Yavapai......................  Town of Prescott       The Honorable Kell Palguta,     Town Hall, Engineering         https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Apr. 6, 2022..........       040121
                                    Valley (21-09-         Mayor, Town of Prescott         Division, 7501 East Civic      advanceSearch.
                                    1015P).                Valley, Civic Center, 7501      Circle, Prescott Valley, AZ
                                                           East Skoog Boulevard, 4th       86314.
                                                           Floor, Prescott Valley, AZ
                                                           86314.
Illinois:
    Cook.........................  City of Country Club   The Honorable James W. Ford,    City Hall, 4200 West 183rd     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 11, 2022.........       170078
                                    Hills (21-05-1457P).   Mayor, City of Country Club     Street, Country Club Hills,    advanceSearch.
                                                           Hills, 4200 West 183rd          IL 60478.
                                                           Street, Country Club Hills,
                                                           IL 60478.
    Cook.........................  City of Palos Heights  The Honorable Robert Straz,     City Hall, 7607 West College   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 11, 2022.........       170142
                                    (21[dash]05[dash]344   Mayor, City of Palos Heights,   Drive, Palos Heights, IL       advanceSearch.
                                    5P).                   7607 West College Drive,        60463.
                                                           Palos Heights, IL 60463.
    Cook.........................  Unincorporated Areas   The Honorable Toni              Cook County Building and       https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 11, 2022.........       170054
                                    of Cook County         Preckwinkle, President, Cook    Zoning Department, 69 West     advanceSearch.
                                    (21[dash]05[dash]344   County Board, 118 North Clark   Washington, 28th Floor,
                                    5P).                   Street, Room 537, Chicago, IL   Chicago, IL 60602.
                                                           60602.
Kansas:
    Johnson......................  City of Lenexa (21-07- The Honorable Michael Boehm,    City Hall, 12350 West 87th     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Apr. 13, 2022.........       200168
                                    0238P).                Mayor, City of Lenexa, 17101    Street Parkway, Lenexa, KS     advanceSearch.
                                                           West 87th Street Parkway,       66215.
                                                           Lenexa, KS 66219.
New York:
    Erie.........................  Town of Lancaster (2-  Mr. Ronald Ruffino, Sr.,        Town Hall, 21 Central Avenue,  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        May 17, 2022..........       360249
                                    02-1556P).             Supervisor, Town of             Lancaster, NY 14086.           advanceSearch.
                                                           Lancaster, 21 Central Avenue,
                                                           Lancaster, NY 14086.
    Onondaga.....................  Town of Lysander (21-  Mr. Robert A. Wicks,            Town Hall, 8220 Loop Road,     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        May 3, 2022...........       360583
                                    02-0578P).             Supervisor, Town of Lysander,   Baldwinsville, NY 13027.       advanceSearch.
                                                           8220 Loop Road,
                                                           Baldwinsville, NY 13027.
    Westchester..................  Village of Mamaroneck  The Honorable Thomas A.         Building Inspector, The        https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Apr. 20, 2022.........       360916
                                    (21-02-0550P).         Murphy, Mayor, Village of       Regatta Building, 123          advanceSearch.
                                                           Mamaroneck, 123 Mamaroneck      Mamaroneck Avenue,
                                                           Avenue, Mamaroneck, NY 10543.   Mamaroneck, NY 10543.
Texas:
    Tarrant......................  City of Arlington (21- The Honorable Jim Ross, Mayor,  City Hall, 101 West Abram      https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 28, 2022.........       485454
                                    06-0854P).             City of Arlington, P.O. Box     Street, Arlington, TX 76010.   advanceSearch.
                                                           90231, Arlington, TX 76004.
    Tarrant......................  City of Fort Worth     The Honorable Mattie Parker,    Department of Transportation   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Mar. 28, 2022.........       480596
                                    (21-06-0854P).         Mayor, City of Fort Worth,      and Public Works, 200 Texas    advanceSearch.
                                                           200 Texas Street, Fort Worth,   Street, Fort Worth, TX
                                                           TX 76102.                       76012.
Wisconsin:

    Dane.........................  City of Madison (21-   The Honorable Satya Rhodes-     City Hall, 210 Martin Luther   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Apr. 12, 2022.........       550083
                                    05-2552P).             Conway, Mayor, City of          King Jr. Boulevard, Room       advanceSearch.
                                                           Madison, 210 Martin Luther      403, Madison, WI 53703.
                                                           King Jr. Boulevard, Room 403,
                                                           Madison, WI 53703.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-01620 Filed 1-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18934-18938]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09126]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0335; Special Conditions No. 25-725-SC]

Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc., Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 Series Airplanes; Flight Envelope Protection: High Incidence
Protection System

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Bombardier Inc.
(Bombardier), Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 series airplanes. These
airplanes will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to
the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for
transport category airplanes. This design feature is a high incidence
protection system that replaces the stall warning system during normal
operating conditions, prohibits the airplane from stalling, limits the
angle of attack at which the airplane can be flown during normal low
speed operation, and cannot be overridden by the flight crew. The
applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special
conditions contain the additional safety standards that the
Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety
equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on Bombardier Inc. on May 1, 2018. Send
comments on or before June 15, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by Docket No. FAA-2018-0335 using
any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478).
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Jacobsen, FAA, Airplane and Flight
Crew Interface Section, AIR-671, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and
Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, 2200 South 216th
Street, Des Moines, Washington 98198-6547; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The substance of these special conditions
previously has been published in the Federal Register for public
comment. These special conditions have been derived without substantive
change from those previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public
comment would result in a significant change from the substance
contained herein. Therefore, the FAA has determined that prior public
notice and comment are unnecessary, and finds that, for the same
reason, good cause exists for adopting these special conditions upon
publication in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On May 30, 2012, Bombardier applied for an amendment to Type
Certificate No. T00003NY to include the new Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 series airplanes. The Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-
2A13 series airplanes, which are derivatives of the Model BD-700
airplane currently approved under Type Certificate No. T00003NY, are
business jets, with a maximum certified passenger capacity of 19. The
maximum takeoff weight of Model BD-700-2A12 is 106,250 lbs. and 104,800
lbs. for the Model BD-700-2A13.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.101, Bombardier must show that the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 series airplanes meet the applicable provisions of the
regulations listed in Type Certificate No. T00003NY or the applicable
regulations in effect on the date of application for the change except
for earlier amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 series
airplanes because of a novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on
the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to
the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 series airplanes will
incorporate the following novel or unusual design features:
    A high incidence protection system that replaces the stall warning
system during normal operating conditions, prohibits the airplane from
stalling, limits the angle of attack at which the airplane can be flown
during normal low speed operation, and cannot be overridden by the
flight crew. The application of this angle-of-attack limit impacts the
stall speed determination, the stall characteristics and stall-warning
demonstration, and the longitudinal handling characteristics.

Discussion

    The high incidence protection function prevents the airplanes from
stalling at low speeds and, therefore, a stall warning system is not
needed during normal flight conditions. If there is a failure of the
high incidence protection function that is not shown to be extremely
improbable, theses special conditions will apply. For example, stall
warning must be provided in a conventional manner and the flight
characteristics at the angle of attack for CLMAX must be
suitable in the traditional sense.
    These special conditions addressing the high incidence protection
system will replace the applicable sections of 14 CFR part 25. Part I
of the following special conditions is in lieu of Sec. Sec.  25.21(b),
25.103, 25.145(a), 25.145(b)(6), 25.201, 25.203, 25.207, and
25.1323(d). Part II is in lieu of Sec. Sec.  25.103, 25.105(a)(2)(i),
25.107(c) and (g), 25.121(b)(2)(ii)(A), 25.121(c)(2)(ii)(A),
25.121(d)(2)(ii), 25.123(b)(2)(i), 25.125(b)(2)(ii)(B), and
25.143(j)(2)(i).
    These special conditions address this novel or unusual design
feature on the Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13, and
contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator
considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that
established by the existing airworthiness standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to
Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 series airplanes. Should
Bombardier apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate
to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design
feature, these special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model series of airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Authority Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702,
44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Bombardier Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-
700-2A13 series airplanes.

Part I: Stall Protection and Scheduled Operating Speeds

Foreword

    In the following paragraphs, ``in icing conditions'' means with the
ice accretions (relative to the relevant flight phase) as defined in 14
CFR part 25, Amendment 121, appendix C.
1. Definitions
    These special conditions use terminology that does not appear in 14
CFR part 25. For the purpose of these special conditions, the following
terms describe certain aspects of this novel or unusual design feature:
    a. High incidence protection system: A system that operates
directly and automatically on the airplane's flight controls to limit
the maximum angle of attack that can be attained to a value below that
at which an aerodynamic stall would occur.
    b. Alpha-limit: The maximum angle of attack at which the airplane
stabilizes with the high incidence protection system operating, and the
longitudinal control held on its aft stop.
    c. Vmin: The minimum steady flight speed in the
airplane's configuration under consideration with the high incidence
protection system operating. See Part 1, paragraph 3 of these Special
Conditions.
    d. Vmin1g: Vmin corrected to 1g conditions.
See Part 1, paragraph 3, of these Special Conditions. It is the minimum
calibrated airspeed at which the airplane can develop a lift force
normal to the flight path and equal to its weight when at an angle of
attack not greater than that determined for Vmin.
2. Capability and Reliability of the High Incidence Protection System
    The applicant must establish the capability and reliability of the
high incidence protection system. The applicant may establish this
capability and reliability by flight test, simulation, or analysis as
appropriate. The capability and reliability required are:
    a. It must not be possible during pilot induced maneuvers to
encounter a stall and handling characteristics must be acceptable, as
required by Part 1, paragraph 5 of these Special Conditions;
    b. The airplane must be protected against stalling due to the
effects of wind-shears and gusts at low speeds as required by Part 1,
paragraph 6 of these Special Conditions;
    c. The ability of the high incidence protection system to
accommodate any reduction in stalling incidence must be verified in
icing conditions;
    d. The high incidence protection system must be provided in each

abnormal configuration of the high lift devices that is likely to be
used in flight following system failures; and
    e. The reliability of the system and the effects of failures must
be acceptable in accordance with Sec.  25.1309.
3. Minimum Steady Flight Speed and Reference Stall Speed
    In lieu of Sec.  25.103, the following requirements apply:
    a. The minimum steady flight speed, Vmin, is the final,
stabilized, calibrated airspeed obtained when the airplane is
decelerated until the longitudinal control is on its stop in such a way
that the entry rate does not exceed 1 knot per second.
    b. The minimum steady flight speed, Vmin, must be
determined in icing and non-icing conditions with:
    i. The high incidence protection system operating normally.
    ii. Idle thrust and automatic thrust system (if applicable)
inhibited;
    iii. All combinations of flaps setting and landing gear position
for which Vmin is required to be determined;
    iv. The weight used when reference stall speed, VSR, is
being used as a factor to determine compliance with a required
performance standard;
    v. The most unfavorable center of gravity allowable; and
    vi. The airplane trimmed for straight flight at a speed achievable
by the automatic trim system.
    c. The 1-g minimum steady flight speed, Vmin1g, is the
minimum calibrated airspeed at which the airplane can develop a lift
force (normal to the flight path) equal to its weight, while at an
angle of attack not greater than that at which the minimum steady
flight speed of Part 1, paragraph 3(a) of these special conditions is
determined. It must be determined in icing and non-icing conditions.
    d. The reference stall speed, VSR, is a calibrated
airspeed defined by the applicant. VSR may not be less than
a 1-g stall speed. VSR must be determined in non-icing
conditions and expressed as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01MY18.000

where--
VCLmax = Calibrated airspeed obtained when the load-
factor-corrected lift coefficient
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01MY18.001

 is first a maximum during the maneuver
 prescribed in condition (3)(e)(viii) of
 these special conditions.
nzw = Load factor normal to the flight path at
VCLmax
W = Airplane gross weight;
S = Aerodynamic reference wing area; and
q = Dynamic pressure.

    e. VCLmax is determined in non-icing conditions with:
    i. Engines idling, or, if that resultant thrust causes an
appreciable decrease in stall speed, not more than zero thrust at the
stall speed;
    ii. The airplane in other respects (such as flaps and landing gear)
in the condition existing in the test or performance standard in which
VSR is being used;
    iii. The weight used when VSR is being used as a factor
to determine compliance with a required performance standard;
    iv. The center of gravity position that results in the highest
value of reference stall speed;
    v. The airplane trimmed for straight flight at a speed achievable
by the automatic trim system, but not less than 1.13 VSR and
not greater than 1.3 VSR;
    vi. None.
    vii. The High Incidence Protection System adjusted, at the option
of the applicant, to allow higher incidence than is possible with the
normal production system; and
    viii. Starting from the stabilized trim condition, apply the
longitudinal control to decelerate the airplane so that the speed
reduction does not exceed 1 knot per second.
4. Stall Warning
    In lieu of Sec.  25.207, the following requirements apply:
4.1 Normal Operation
    If the design meets all conditions of Part 1, paragraph 2 of these
special conditions, then the airplane need not provide stall warning
during normal operation. The conditions of Part 1, paragraph 2 of these
special conditions provide a level of safety equal to the intent of
Sec.  25.207, ``Stall Warning'', so the provision of an additional,
unique warning device is not required.
4.2 High Incidence Protection System Failure
    For any failures of the high incidence protection system that the
applicant cannot show to be extremely improbable, and that result in
the capability of the system no longer satisfying any part of paragraph
2(a), (b), and (c) of Part 1 of these special conditions, the design
must provide stall warning that protects against encountering
unacceptable stall characteristics and against encountering stall.
    a. This stall warning, with the flaps and landing gear in any
normal position, must be clear and distinctive to the pilot and meet
the requirements specified in Part 1, paragraphs 4.2(d) and 4.2(e) of
these special conditions.
    b. The design must also provide this stall warning in each abnormal
configuration of the high lift devices that is likely to be used in
flight following system failures.
    c. The design may furnish this stall warning either through the
inherent aerodynamic qualities of the airplane or by a device that will
give clearly distinguishable indications under expected conditions of
flight. However, a visual stall warning device that requires the
attention of the crew within the flight deck is not acceptable by
itself. If a warning device is used, it must provide a warning in each
of the airplane configurations prescribed in paragraph 4.2(a) and for
the conditions prescribed in paragraphs 4.2(d) and 4.2(e) of Part 1 of
these special conditions.
    d. In non-icing conditions, stall warning must provide sufficient
margin to prevent encountering unacceptable stall characteristics and
encountering stall in the following conditions:
    i. In power off straight deceleration not exceeding 1 knot per
second to a speed of 5 knots or 5 percent calibrated airspeed (CAS),
whichever is greater, below the warning onset.
    ii. In turning flight, stall deceleration at entry rates up to 3
knots per second when recovery is initiated not less than one second
after the warning onset.
    e. In icing conditions, stall warning must provide sufficient
margin to prevent encountering unacceptable characteristics and
encountering stall, in power off straight and turning flight
decelerations not exceeding 1 knot per second, when the pilot starts a
recovery maneuver not less than three seconds after the onset of stall
warning.
    f. An airplane is considered stalled when the behavior of the
airplane gives the pilot a clear and distinctive indication of an
acceptable nature that the airplane is stalled. Acceptable indications
of a stall, occurring either individually or in combination are:
    i. A nose-down pitch that cannot be readily arrested;
    ii. Buffeting, of a magnitude and severity that is strong and
effective deterrent to further speed reduction; or
    iii. The pitch control reaches the aft stop, and no further
increase in pitch attitude occurs when the control is held full aft for
a short time before recovery is initiated.
    g. An aircraft exhibits unacceptable characteristics during
straight or turning flight decelerations if it is not always possible
to produce and to correct roll

and yaw by unreversed use of aileron and rudder controls, or abnormal
nose-up pitching occurs.
5. Handling Characteristics at High Incidence
5.1 High Incidence Handling Demonstrations
    In lieu of Sec.  25.201, the following is required:
    (a) Maneuvers to the limit of the longitudinal control, in the nose
up sense, must be demonstrated in straight flight and in 30-degree
banked turns with:
    (i) The high incidence protection system operating normally;
    (ii) Initial power conditions of:
    (1) Power off; and
    (2) The power necessary to maintain level flight at 1.5
VSR1, where VSR1 is the reference stall speed
with flaps in approach position, the landing gear retracted and maximum
landing weight.
    (iii) None.
    (iv) Flaps, landing gear, and deceleration devices in any likely
combination of positions;
    (v) Representative weights within the range for which certification
is requested; and
    (vi) The airplane trimmed for straight flight at a speed achievable
by the automatic trim system.
    (b) The following procedures must be used to show compliance in
non-icing and icing conditions:
    i. Starting at a speed sufficiently above the minimum steady flight
speed to ensure that a steady rate of speed reduction can be
established, apply the longitudinal control so that the speed reduction
does not exceed 1 knot per second until the control reaches the stop;
    ii. The longitudinal control must be maintained at the stop until
the airplane has reached a stabilized flight condition and must then be
recovered by normal recovery techniques;
    iii. Maneuvers with increased deceleration rates;
    (1) In non-icing conditions, the requirements must also be met with
increased rates of entry to the incidence limit, up to the maximum rate
achievable; and
    (2) In icing conditions, with the anti-ice system working normally,
the requirements must also be met with increased rates of entry to the
incidence limit, up to 3 knots per second.
    iv. Maneuver with ice accretion prior to operation of the normal
anti-ice system.
    v. With the ice accretion prior to operation of the normal anti-ice
system, the requirement must also be met in deceleration at 1 knot per
second up to full back stick.
5.2 Characteristics of High Incidence Maneuvers
    In lieu of Sec.  25.203, the following requirements apply:
    a. Throughout maneuvers with a rate of deceleration of not more
than 1 knot per second, both in straight flight and in 30-degree banked
turns, the airplane's characteristics must be as follows:
    i. There must not be any abnormal nose-up pitching.
    ii. There must not be any uncommanded nose-down pitching, which
would be indicative of stall. However, reasonable attitude changes
associated with stabilizing the incidence at Alpha limit as the
longitudinal control reaches the stop would be acceptable.
    iii. There must not be any uncommanded lateral or directional
motion and the pilot must retain good lateral and directional control,
by conventional use of the controls, throughout the maneuver.
    iv. The airplane must not exhibit buffeting of a magnitude and
severity that would act as a deterrent from completing the maneuver
specified in 5.1(a) of these special conditions.
    b. In maneuvers with increased rates of deceleration, some
degradation of characteristics is acceptable, associated with a
transient excursion beyond the stabilized Alpha-limit. However, the
airplane must not exhibit dangerous characteristics or characteristics
that would deter the pilot from holding the longitudinal control on the
stop for a period of time appropriate to the maneuver.
    c. It must always be possible to reduce incidence by conventional
use of the controls.
    d. The rate at which the airplane can be maneuvered from trim
speeds associated with scheduled operating speeds such as V2
and VREF, up to Alpha-limit, must not be unduly damped or be
significantly slower than can be achieved on conventionally controlled
transport airplanes.

5.3 Characteristics up to Maximum Lift Angle of Attack

    In lieu of Sec.  25.201, the following requirements apply:
    a. In non-icing conditions:
    Maneuvers with a rate of deceleration of not more than 1 knot per
second up to the angle of attack at which VCLmax was
obtained, as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of these special
conditions, must be demonstrated in straight flight and in 30-degree
banked turns in the following configurations:
    i. The high incidence protection deactivated or adjusted, at the
option of the applicant, to allow higher incidence than is possible
with the normal production system;
    ii. Automatic thrust increase system inhibited (if applicable);
    iii. Engines idling;
    iv. Flaps and landing gear in any likely combination of positions;
and
    v. The airplane trimmed for straight flight at a speed achievable
by the automatic trim system.
    b. In icing conditions:
    Maneuvers with a rate of deceleration of not more than 1 knot per
second up to the maximum angle of attack reached during maneuvers from
paragraph 5.1(b)(iii)(2) of these special conditions must be
demonstrated in straight flight with:
    i. The high incidence protection deactivated or adjusted, at the
option of the applicant, to allow higher incidence than is possible
with the normal production system;
    ii. Automatic thrust increase system inhibited (if applicable);
    iii. Engines idling;
    iv. Flaps and landing gear in any likely combination of positions;
    v. The airplane trimmed for straight flight at a speed achievable
by the automatic trim system.
    c. During the maneuvers used to show compliance with paragraphs
5.3(a) and (b) of these special conditions the airplane must not
exhibit dangerous characteristics and it must always be possible to
reduce angle of attack by conventional use of the controls. The pilot
must retain good lateral and directional control, by conventional use
of the controls, throughout the maneuver.
6. Atmospheric Disturbances
    Operation of the high incidence protection system must not
adversely affect aircraft control during expected levels of atmospheric
disturbances, nor impede the application of recovery procedures in case
of wind-shear. This must be demonstrated in non-icing and icing
conditions.
7. Proof of Compliance
    In lieu of Sec.  25.21(b), ``[Reserved],'' the design must meet the
following requirement:
    (b) The flying qualities must be evaluated at the most unfavorable
center-of-gravity position.
8. Sections 25.145(a), 25.145(b)(6), and 25.1323(d)
    The design must meet the following modified requirements:
     For Sec.  25.145(a), ``Vmin'' in lieu of
``stall identification.''

     For Sec.  25.145(b)(6), ``Vmin'' in lieu of
``VSW.''
     For Sec.  25.1323(d), ``From 1.23 VSR to
Vmin . . .,'' in lieu of ``1.23 VSR to stall
warning speed . . .,'' and, ``. . . speeds below Vmin . .
.'' in lieu of ``. . . speeds below stall warning . . . .''

Part II: Credit for Robust Envelope Protection in Icing Conditions

    The following special conditions are in lieu of the specified
paragraphs of Sec.  Sec.  25.103, 25.105, 25.107, 25.121, 25.123,
25.125, 25.143, and 25.207.
    1. In lieu of Sec.  25.103, define the stall speed as provided in
Part I, paragraph 3 of these special conditions.
    2. In lieu of Sec.  25.105(a)(2)(i), the following applies:
    (i) The V2 speed scheduled in non-icing conditions does
not provide the maneuvering capability specified in Sec.  25.143(h) for
the takeoff configuration, or apply 25.105(a)(2)(ii) unchanged.
    3. In lieu of Sec.  25.107(c') and (g'), the following apply, with
additional sections (c') and (g'):
    (c) In non-icing conditions, V2, in terms of calibrated
airspeed, must be selected by the applicant to provide at least the
gradient of climb required by Sec.  25.121(b), but may not be less
than--
    (1) V2MIN;
    (2) VR plus the speed increment attained (in accordance
with Sec.  25.111(c)(2)) before reaching a height of 35 feet above the
takeoff surface; and
    (3) A speed that provides the maneuvering capability specified in
Sec.  25.143(h).
    (c') In icing conditions with the ``takeoff ice'' accretion defined
in part 25, appendix C, V2 may not be less than--
    (1) The V2 speed determined in non-icing conditions; and
    (2) A speed that provides the maneuvering capability specified in
Sec.  25.143(h).
    (g) In non-icing conditions, VFTO, in terms of
calibrated airspeed, must be selected by the applicant to provide at
least the gradient of climb required by Sec.  25.121(c), but may not be
less than--
    (1) 1.18 VSR; and
    (2) A speed that provides the maneuvering capability specified in
Sec.  25.143(h).
    (g') In icing conditions with the ``final takeoff ice'' accretion
defined in part 25, appendix C, VFTO may not be less than--
    (1) The VFTO speed determined in non-icing conditions.
    (2) A speed that provides the maneuvering capability specified in
Sec.  25.143(h).
    4. In lieu of Sec. Sec.  25.121(b)(2)(ii)(A), 25.121(c)(2)(ii)(A),
and 25.121(d)(2)(ii), the following apply:
    In lieu of Sec.  25.121(b)(2)(ii)(A):
    (A) The V2 speed scheduled in non-icing conditions does
not provide the maneuvering capability specified in Sec.  25.143(h) for
the takeoff configuration; or
    In lieu of Sec.  25.121(c)(2)(ii)(A):
    (A) The VFTO speed scheduled in non-icing conditions
does not provide the maneuvering capability specified in Sec.
25.143(h) for the en-route configuration; or
    In lieu of Sec.  25.121(d)(2)(ii):
    (d)(2) The requirements of subparagraph (d)(1) of this paragraph
must be met:
    (ii) In icing conditions with the approach ice accretion defined in
14 CFR part 25, appendix C, in a configuration corresponding to the
normal all-engines-operating procedure in which Vmin1g for
this configuration does not exceed 110 percent of the Vmin1g
for the related all-engines-operating landing configuration in icing,
with a climb speed established with normal landing procedures, but not
more than 1.4 VSR (VSR determined in non-icing
conditions).
    5. In lieu of Sec.  25.123(b)(2)(i), the following applies:
    (i) The minimum en-route speed scheduled in non-icing conditions
does not provide the maneuvering capability specified in Sec.
25.143(h) for the en-route configuration; or
    6. In lieu of Sec.  25.125(b)(2)(ii)(B) and Sec.
25.125(b)(2)(ii)(C), the following applies:
    (B) A speed that provides the maneuvering capability specified in
Sec.  25.143(h) with the approach ice accretion defined in 14 CFR part
25, appendix C.
    7. In lieu of Sec.  25.143(j)(2)(i), the following applies:
    (i) The airplane is controllable in a pull-up maneuver up to 1.5 g
load factor or lower if limited by angle-of-attack protection.
    8. In lieu of Sec.  25.207, ``Stall warning,'' to read as the
requirements defined in these special conditions Part I, paragraph 4.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on April 25, 2018.
Suzanne Masterson,
Acting Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-09126 Filed 4-30-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P