[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 74 (Monday, April 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22987-22993]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08172]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94696; File No. SR-PEARL-2022-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX
PEARL Options Fee Schedule To Remove Certain Credits and Increase
Trading Permit Fees

April 12, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 30, 2022, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX Pearl'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX PEARL Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'') to remove certain credits and amend the
monthly Trading Permit \3\ fees for Members.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Trading Permit'' means a permit issued by the
Exchange that confers the ability to transact on the Exchange. See
Exchange Rule 100.
    \4\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization that
is registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of Exchange
Rules for purposes of trading on the Exchange as an ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are deemed
``members'' under the Exchange Act. See Exchange Rule 100 and the
Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl, at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to remove certain
credits and amend the monthly Trading Permit fees for Members. The
Exchange notes that its Trading Permit fees are comparable to
membership or other access type fees charged by other exchanges.
    The Exchange initially filed this proposal on July 1, 2021 with the
proposed fee changes being immediately effective (``First Proposed Rule
Change'').\5\ The First Proposed Rule Change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on July 15, 2021.\6\ The Commission received
one comment letter on the First Proposed Rule Change \7\ and
subsequently suspended the First Proposed Rule Change on August 27,
2021.\8\ The Exchange withdrew the First Proposed Rule Change on
October 12, 2021 and re-submitted the proposal on October 29, 2021,
with the proposed fee changes being effective beginning November 1,
2021 (``Second Proposed Rule Change'').\9\ The Second Proposed Rule
Change addressed points raised in the SIG Letter and was published for
comment in the Federal Register on November 17, 2021.\10\ The
Commission received no comment letters on the Second Proposed Rule
Change. The

Exchange withdrew the Second Proposed Rule Change on December 20, 2021
and submitted a revised proposal for immediate effectiveness (``Third
Proposed Rule Change'').\11\ The Third Proposed Rule Change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on January 10, 2022.\12\
The Commission received no comment letters on the Third Proposed Rule
Change. The Exchange withdrew the Third Proposed Rule Change on
February 15, 2022 and submitted a revised proposal for immediate
effectiveness, which was suspended on February 18, 2022 (``Fourth
Proposed Rule Change'').\13\ The Commission received one comment letter
on the Fourth Proposed Rule Change.\14\ The Exchange withdrew the
Fourth Proposed Rule Change on March 30, 2022 and submits this revised
proposal for immediate effectiveness (``Fifth Proposed Rule Change'').
This Fifth Proposed Rule Change provides a revised justification for
the proposed fees, which is in line with the justification provided by
another exchange in a similar filing to adopt fees for Members to be
active on that exchange.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92366 (July 9,
2021), 86 FR 37379 (SR-PEARL-2021-32).
    \6\ See id.
    \7\ See Letter from Richard J. McDonald, Susquehanna
International Group, LLC (``SIG''), to Vanessa Countryman,
Secretary, Commission, dated September 28, 2021 (``SIG Letter'').
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92797 (August 27,
2021), 86 FR 49399 (September 2, 2021).
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93555 (November 10,
2021), 86 FR 64254 (November 17, 2021) (SR-PEARL-2021-54).
    \10\ See id.
    \11\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93895 (January 4,
2022), 87 FR 1217 (January 10, 2022) (SR-PEARL-2021-59).
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94287 (February 18,
2022), 87 FR 10837 (February 25, 2022) (SR-PEARL-2022-05).
    \14\ See Letter from Richard J. McDonald, SIG, to Vanessa
Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated March 15, 2022 (``SIG
Letter 2'').
    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93927 (January 7,
2022), 87 FR 2191 (January 13, 2022) (SR-MEMX-2021-19) (proposal to
adopt monthly membership fees).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Removal of the ``Monthly Volume Credit''
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Definitions section of the Fee
Schedule to delete the definition and remove the credits applicable to
the Monthly Volume Credit for Members. The Exchange established the
Monthly Volume Credit in 2018 \16\ to encourage Members to send
increased Priority Customer \17\ order flow to the Exchange, which the
Exchange applied to the assessment of certain non-transaction fees for
that Member. The Exchange applies a different Monthly Volume Credit
depending on whether the Member connects to the Exchange via the FIX
Interface \18\ or MEO Interface.\19\ Currently, the Exchange assesses
the Monthly Volume Credit to each Member that has executed Priority
Customer volume along with that of its affiliates,\20\ not including
Excluded Contracts,\21\ of at least 0.30% of MIAX Pearl-listed Total
Consolidated Volume (``TCV''),\22\ as set forth in the following table:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82867 (March 13,
2018), 83 FR 12044 (March 19, 2018) (SR-PEARL-2018-07).
    \17\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity
that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not
place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average
during a calendar month for its own beneficial accounts(s). The
number of orders shall be counted in accordance with Interpretation
and Policy .01 of Exchange Rule 100. See the Definitions Section of
the Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100, including Interpretation and
Policy .01.
    \18\ The term ``FIX Interface'' means the Financial Information
Exchange interface for certain order types as set forth in Exchange
Rule 516. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule and
Exchange Rule 100.
    \19\ The term ``MEO Interface'' or ``MEO'' means a binary order
interface for certain order types as set forth in Rule 516 into the
MIAX Pearl System. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule
and Exchange Rule 100.
    \20\ ``Affiliate'' means (i) an affiliate of a Member of at
least 75% common ownership between the firms as reflected on each
firm's Form BD, Schedule A, or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker of an
Appointed EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an Appointed
Market Maker). An ``Appointed Market Maker'' is a MIAX Pearl Market
Maker (who does not otherwise have a corporate affiliation based
upon common ownership with an EEM) that has been appointed by an EEM
and an ``Appointed EEM'' is an EEM (who does not otherwise have a
corporate affiliation based upon common ownership with a MIAX Pearl
Market Maker) that has been appointed by a MIAX Pearl Market Maker,
pursuant to the following process. A MIAX Pearl Market Maker
appoints an EEM and an EEM appoints a MIAX Pearl Market Maker, for
the purposes of the Fee Schedule, by each completing and sending an
executed Volume Aggregation Request Form by email to
[email protected] no later than 2 business days prior to
the first business day of the month in which the designation is to
become effective. Transmittal of a validly completed and executed
form to the Exchange along with the Exchange's acknowledgement of
the effective designation to each of the Market Maker and EEM will
be viewed as acceptance of the appointment. The Exchange will only
recognize one designation per Member. A Member may make a
designation not more than once every 12 months (from the date of its
most recent designation), which designation shall remain in effect
unless or until the Exchange receives written notice submitted 2
business days prior to the first business day of the month from
either Member indicating that the appointment has been terminated.
Designations will become operative on the first business day of the
effective month and may not be terminated prior to the end of the
month. Execution data and reports will be provided to both parties.
See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \21\ ``Excluded Contracts'' means any contracts routed to an
away market for execution. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.
    \22\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
total national volume in those classes listed on MIAX Pearl for the
month for which the fees apply, excluding consolidated volume
executed during the period of time in which the Exchange experiences
an Exchange System Disruption (solely in the option classes of the
affected Matching Engine). See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Monthly
                  Type of member connection                      volume
                                                                 credit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member that connects via the FIX Interface...................       $250
Member that connects via the MEO Interface...................      1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a Member connects via both the MEO Interface and FIX Interface
and qualifies for the Monthly Volume Credit based upon its Priority
Customer volume, the greater Monthly Volume Credit shall apply to such
Member. Prior to the First Proposed Rule Change, the Monthly Volume
Credit was a single, once-per-month credit towards the aggregate
monthly total of non-transaction fees assessable to a Member.
    Beginning with the First Proposed Rule Change, the Exchange's
proposals included an amendment to the Definitions section of the Fee
Schedule to delete the definition and remove the Monthly Volume Credit.
The Exchange established the Monthly Volume Credit when it first
launched operations to attract order flow by lowering the initial fixed
cost for Members. The Monthly Volume Credit has achieved its purpose
and the Exchange believes it is appropriate to remove this credit. The
Exchange believes that the Exchange's existing Priority Customer
rebates and fees will continue to allow the Exchange to remain highly
competitive and continue to attract order flow and maintain market
share.
Removal of the Trading Permit Fee Credit
    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 3)b) of the Fee Schedule to
remove the Trading Permit fee credit that is denoted in footnote ``*''
below the Trading Permit fee table. Prior to the First Proposed Rule
Change, the Trading Permit fee credit was applicable to Members that
connect via both the MEO and FIX Interfaces. Members who connect via
both the MEO and FIX Interfaces are assessed the rates for both types
of Trading Permits, but these Members received a $100 monthly credit
towards the Trading Permit fees applicable to the MEO Interface prior
to the First Proposed Rule Change. The Exchange proposes to remove the
Trading Permit fee credit and delete footnote ``*'' from Section 3)b)
of the Fee Schedule.
    The Exchange established the Trading Permit fee credit when it
first launched operations to attract order flow and increase membership
by lowering the costs for Members that connect via both the MEO
Interface and FIX Interface. The Trading Permit fee credit has achieved
its purpose and the Exchange

now believes that it is appropriate to remove this credit in light of
the current operating conditions and membership population on the
Exchange.
Amendment of Trading Permit Fees
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to amend the fees
for Trading Permits. The Exchange issues Trading Permits to Members who
are either Electronic Exchange Members \23\ (``EEMs'') or Market
Makers.\24\ The Exchange assesses Trading Permit fees based upon the
monthly total volume executed by the Member and its Affiliates on the
Exchange across all origin types, not including Excluded Contracts, as
compared to the total TCV in all MIAX Pearl-listed options. The
Exchange adopted a tier-based fee structure based upon the volume-based
tiers detailed in the definition of ``Non-Transaction Fees Volume-Based
Tiers'' \25\ in the Definitions section of the Fee Schedule. The
Exchange also assesses Trading Permit fees based upon the type of
interface used by the Member to connect to the Exchange--the FIX
Interface and/or the MEO Interface.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The term ``Electronic Exchange Member'' or ``EEM'' means
the holder of a Trading Permit who is a Member representing as agent
Public Customer Orders or Non-Customer Orders on the Exchange and
those non-Market Maker Members conducting proprietary trading.
Electronic Exchange Members are deemed ``members'' under the
Exchange Act. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \24\ The term ``Market Maker'' or ``MM'' means a Member
registered with the Exchange for the purpose of making markets in
options contracts traded on the Exchange and that is vested with the
rights and responsibilities specified in Chapter VI of these Rules.
See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \25\ See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule for the
monthly volume thresholds associated with each Tier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Current Trading Permit Fees. Currently, each Member who connects to
the System \26\ via the FIX Interface is assessed the following monthly
Trading Permit fees:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) If its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 1 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, or volume up to 0.30%, $250;
    (ii) if its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 2 of the
Non-Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, or volume above 0.30% up to
0.60%, $350; and
    (iii) if its volume falls with the parameters of Tier 3 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, or volume above 0.60%, $450.
    Each Member who connects to the System via the MEO Interface is
assessed the following monthly Trading Permit fees:
    (i) If its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 1 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, or volume up to 0.30%, $300;
    (ii) if its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 2 of the
Non-Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, or volume above 0.30% up to
0.60%, $400; and
    (iii) if its volume falls with the parameters of Tier 3 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, or volume above 0.60%, $500.
    Proposed Trading Permit Fees. The Exchange proposes to amend its
Trading Permit fees as follows. Each Member who connects to the System
via the FIX Interface will be assessed the following monthly Trading
Permit fees:
    (i) If its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 1 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, $500;
    (ii) if its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 2 of the
Non-Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, $1,000; and
    (iii) if its volume falls with the parameters of Tier 3 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, $1,500.
    Each Member who connects to the System via the MEO Interface will
be assessed the following monthly Trading Permit fees:
    (i) If its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 1 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, $2,500;
    (ii) if its volume falls within the parameters of Tier 2 of the
Non-Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, $4,000; and
    (iii) if its volume falls with the parameters of Tier 3 of the Non-
Transaction Fees Volume-Based Tiers, $6,000.
    Members who use the MEO Interface may also connect to the System
through the FIX Interface as well, and vice versa. The Exchange notes
that the Trading Permit fees for Members who connect through the MEO
Interface are higher than the Trading Permit fees for Members who
connect through the FIX Interface, since the FIX Interface utilizes
less capacity and resources of the Exchange. The MEO Interface offers
lower latency and higher throughput, which utilizes greater capacity
and resources of the Exchange. The FIX Interface offers lower bandwidth
requirements and an industry-wide uniform message format. Both EEMs and
Market Makers may connect to the Exchange using either interface.
    Trading Permits, like membership fees, grant access and allow
Members to be active on the Exchange, thus providing the ability to
submit orders and trade on the Exchange, in the manner defined in the
relevant Trading Permit. Without a Trading Permit, or ``membership'' on
other exchanges, a Member cannot directly trade on the Exchange.
Therefore, a Trading Permit is a means to directly access the Exchange
(which offers meaningful value), and the Exchange proposes to increase
its monthly fees since it had not done so since the fees were first
adopted in 2018.\27\ The Exchange notes that the its affiliates, Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX'') and MIAX Emerald, LLC
(``MIAX Emerald''), charge a similar, fixed trading permit fee in a
similar range of trading permit fees to certain users, and a similar,
varying trading permit fee in a similar range of trading permit fees to
other users, based upon the number of assignments of option classes or
the percentage of volume in option classes.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See supra note 16.
    \28\ See the MIAX Fee Schedule, Section 3)b) and MIAX Emerald
Fee Schedule, Section 3)b), available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/fees (last visited March 9, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As illustrated by the table below, the Exchange notes that the
proposed fees for the Exchange's Trading Permits are in line with, or
cheaper than, the similar trading permit and membership fees charged by
other options exchanges. The below table also illustrates how the
Exchange has historically undercharged for access via Trading Permits
as compared to other options exchanges. The Exchange believes other
exchanges' membership and trading permit fees are useful examples of
alternative approaches to providing and charging for access and
provides the below table for comparison purposes only to show how the
Exchange's proposed fees compare to fees currently charged by other
options exchanges for similar access.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Monthly membership/trading permit
             Exchange                                fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIAX Pearl Options (as proposed)..  Trading Permit access via FIX
                                     Interface:
                                       Tier 1: $500.
                                       Tier 2: $1,000.
                                       Tier 3: $1,500.
                                    Trading Permit access via MEO
                                     Interface:
                                       Tier 1: $2,500.
                                       Tier 2: $4,000.
                                       Tier 3: $6,000.
New York Stock Exchange LLC         Annual trading license fee for
 (``NYSE'') \29\.                    member organizations ranges from
                                     approximately $25,000 to $50,000
                                     based on the type of member
                                     organization and number of trading
                                     licenses.
NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'')     Options Trading Permits:
 \30\.
                                       $6,000 for up to 175 option
                                        issues.
                                       Additional $5,000 for up to 350
                                        option issues.
                                       Additional $4,000 for up to 1,000
                                        option issues.
                                       Additional $3,000 for all option
                                        issues.
                                       Additional $1,000 for the 5th OTP
                                        and each OTP thereafter.
NYSE American, LLC (``NYSE          ATP Trading Permits:
 American'') \31\.
                                       $8,000 for up to 60 plus the
                                        bottom 45% of option issues.
                                       Additional $6,000 for up to 150
                                        plus the bottom 45% of option
                                        issues.
                                       Additional $5,000 for up to 500
                                        plus the bottom 45% of option
                                        issues.
                                       Additional $4,000 for up to 1,100
                                        plus the bottom 45% of option
                                        issues.
                                       Additional $3,000 for all option
                                        issues.
                                       Additional $2,000 for 6th to 9th
                                        ATPs (plus additional fee for
                                        premium products).
Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Nasdaq PHLX'')   Streaming Quote Trader permit fees:
 \32\.
                                       Tier 1 (up to 200 option
                                        classes): $0.00.
                                       Tier 2 (up to 400 option
                                        classes): $2,200.
                                       Tier 3 (up to 600 option
                                        classes): $3,200.
                                       Tier 4 (up to 800 option
                                        classes): $4,200.
                                       Tier 5 (up to 1,000 option
                                        classes): $5,200
                                       Tier 6 (up to 1,200 option
                                        classes): $6,200.
                                       Tier 7 (all option classes):
                                        $7,200.
                                    Remote Market Maker Organization
                                     permit fees:
                                       Tier 1 (less than 100 option
                                        classes): $5,500.
                                       Tier 2 (more than 100 and less
                                        than 999 option classes):
                                        $8,000.
                                       Tier 3 (1,000 or more option
                                        classes): $11,000.
Nasdaq ISE LLC (``Nasdaq ISE'')     Access Fees:
 \33\.
                                       Primary Market Maker: $5,000 per
                                        membership.
                                       Competitive Market Maker: $2,500
                                        per membership.
Nasdaq Stock Market LLC             Annual membership fee is $3,000 plus
 (``Nasdaq'') \34\.                  a monthly $1,250 trading rights fee
                                     (together with the annual
                                     membership fee, totaling $18,000
                                     per year).
Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'')      Electronic Trading Permit Fees:
 \35\.
                                       Market Maker: $5,000.
                                       Electronic Access Permit: $3,000.
                                       Clearing TPH Permit: $2,000.
Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe      Access Permit Fees for Market
 C2'') \36\.                         Makers: $5,000.
                                    Electronic Access Permits: $1,000.
Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe     Annual membership fee of $2,500 plus
 BZX'') \37\.                        an additional fee of $350 per month
                                     for each additional MPID a member
                                     maintains other than their first
                                     (i.e., an annual fee of $4,200 per
                                     additional MPID).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See ``Trading Licenses,'' NYSE Price List 2021 (last
updated December 1, 2021), available at: https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Price_List.pdf.
    \30\ See NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges, OTP Trading
Participant Rights, p.1, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf (last visited March 9, 2022).
    \31\ See NYSE American Options Fee Schedule, Section III,
Monthly Trading Permit, Rights, Floor Access and Premium Product
Fees, p. 23-24, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/american-options/NYSE_American_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf
(last visited March 9, 2022).
    \32\ See Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 8.
Membership Fees, available at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rules/Phlx%20Options%207 (last visited March 9, 2022).
    \33\ See Nasdaq ISE Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 8.A.
Access Services, available at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/ise/rules/ISE%20Options%207 (last visited March 9, 2022).
    \34\ See ``NASDAQ Membership Fees,'' Nasdaq Price List,
available at: http://nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=PriceListTrading2#membership. See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 34-81133 (July 12, 2017), 82 FR 32904 (July
18, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2017-065) (discussing the reasonableness of
Nasdaq's fees).
    \35\ See Cboe Fee Schedule, Electronic Trading Permit Fees,
available at https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/Cboe_FeeSchedule.pdf (last visited March 9, 2022).
    \36\ See Cboe C2 Fee Schedule, Access Fees, available at https://www.cboe.com/us/options/membership/fee_schedule/ctwo/ (last visited
March 9, 2022).
    \37\ See ``Membership Fees'' and ``Market Participant Identifier
(`MPID') Fees'' sections of the Cboe BZX Fee Schedule, available at
https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed fee changes are effective April 1, 2022.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \38\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \39\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities. The Exchange also believes the proposal furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable

principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general
to protect investors and the public interest and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers and
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Removal of Monthly Volume Credit and Trading Permit Fee Credit
    The Exchange believes its proposal to remove the Monthly Volume
Credit is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because
all market participants will no longer be offered the ability to
achieve the extra credits associated with the Monthly Volume Credit for
submitting Priority Customer volume to the Exchange and access to the
Exchange is offered on terms that are not unfairly discriminatory. The
Exchange believes it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
remove the Monthly Volume Credit from the Fee Schedule for business and
competitive reasons because, in order to attract order flow when the
Exchange first launched operations, the Exchange established the
Monthly Volume Credit to lower the initial fixed cost for Members. The
Exchange now believes that it is appropriate to remove this credit in
light of the current operating conditions and the current type and
amount of Priority Customer volume executed on the Exchange. The
Exchange believes that the Exchange's Priority Customer rebates and
fees will still allow the Exchange to remain highly competitive such
that the Exchange should continue to attract order flow and maintain
market share.
    The Exchange believes its proposal to remove the Trading Permit fee
credit for Members that connect via both the MEO Interface and FIX
Interface is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because all market participants will no longer be offered the ability
to receive the credit and access to the Exchange is offered on terms
that are not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange believes it is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to remove the Trading Permit
fee credit for business and competitive reasons because, in order to
attract order flow and membership after the Exchange first launched
operations, the Exchange established the Trading Permit fee credit to
lower the costs for Members that connect via both the MEO Interface and
FIX Interface. The Exchange now believes that it is appropriate to
remove this credit in light of the current operating conditions and
membership on the Exchange.
Trading Permit Fee Increase
    The Exchange believes that there is value in being a Member of the
Exchange, retaining that Membership as the Exchange's market share has
grown, and that the proposed Trading Permit fees are reasonable because
they are in the range of similar types of membership fees charged by
other exchanges with similar market share. The proposed monthly Trading
Permit fees are lower than or comparable to the membership and trading
permit fees imposed by several other national securities exchanges that
charge such fees.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See supra notes 29-37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed monthly Trading Permit fees
are not unfairly discriminatory because they would be assessed equally
across all Members or firms that seek to become Members. The Exchange
believes that the proposed monthly Trading Permit fees are not unfairly
discriminatory because no broker-dealer is required to become a member
of the Exchange. Instead, many market participants awaited the Exchange
growing to a certain percentage of market share before they would join
as a Member of the Exchange. In addition, many market participants
still have not joined the Exchange despite the Exchange's growth in
recent years to consistently be approximately 4-5% of the overall
equity options market share. To illustrate, the Exchange currently has
41 Members.\41\ However, based on publicly available information
regarding a sample of the Exchange's competitors, NYSE American Options
has 75 members, NYSE Arca Options has 71 members, and Cboe has 233
members.\42\ Accordingly, the vigorous competition among national
securities exchanges provides many alternatives for firms to
voluntarily decide whether membership to the Exchange is appropriate
and worthwhile, and no broker-dealer is required to become a member of
the Exchange. Specifically, neither the trade-through requirements
under Regulation NMS nor broker-dealers' best execution obligations
require a broker-dealer to become a member of every exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See MIAX Pearl Options Exchange Member Directory, available
at https://www.miaxoptions.com/exchange-members/pearl.
    \42\ See NYSE American Options Membership Directory, available
at https://www.nyse.com/markets/american-options/membership (last
visited March 9, 2022); NYSE Arca Options Membership Directory,
available at https://www.nyse.com/markets/arca-options/membership
(last visited March 9, 2022); Cboe Members and Sponsored
Participants, Form 1 Amendment dated February 17, 2022, Exhibit M,
available at https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/vprr/2200/22000797.pdf (last visited March 9, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange acknowledges that competitive forces may require
certain broker-dealers to be members of all equity options exchanges.
However, the Exchange believes that the proposed fees are reasonable,
equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory, even for a broker-
dealer that deems it necessary to join the Exchange for business
purposes, as those business reasons should presumably result in revenue
capable of covering the proposed fees.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed fees would be an
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities, and are
not unfairly discriminatory. As the Commission noted in its Concept
Release Concerning Self-Regulation, the Commission to date has not
issued detailed rules specifying proper funding levels of self-
regulatory organization (``SRO'') regulatory programs, or how costs
should be allocated among the various SRO constituencies. Rather, the
Commission has examined the SROs to determine whether they are
complying with their statutory responsibilities. This approach was
developed in response to the diverse characteristics and roles of the
various SROs and the markets they operate. The mechanics of SRO
funding, including the amount of revenue that is spent on regulation
and how that amount is allocated among various regulatory operations,
is related to the type of market that an SRO is operating. Thus, each
SRO and its financial structure is, to a certain extent, unique. While
this uniqueness can result in different levels of SRO funding across
markets, it also is a reflection of one of the primary underpinnings of
the National Market System. Specifically, by fostering an environment
in which diverse markets with diverse business models compete within a
unified National Market System, investors and market participants
benefit.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-50700 (November
22, 2004), 69 FR 71255, 71267-68 (December 8, 2004) (File No. S7-40-
04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons discussed above, the Exchange submits that the
proposal satisfies the requirements of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of
the Act \44\ in that it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its Members and other
persons using its facilities and is not designed to unfairly
discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers, or

dealers. Effective regulation is central to the proper functioning of
the securities markets. Recognizing the importance of such efforts,
Congress decided to require national securities exchanges to register
with the Commission as self-regulatory organizations to carry out the
purposes of the Act. The Exchange therefore believes that it is
critical to ensure that regulation is appropriately funded. The monthly
Trading Permit fees are expected to provide a source of funding towards
the Exchange's costs related to onboarding Members and providing
ongoing support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\45\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intra-Market Competition
    The Exchange believes the removal of the Monthly Volume Credit and
Trading Permit fee credit will not place certain market participants at
a relative disadvantage to other market participants because, in order
to attract order flow when the Exchange first launched operations, the
Exchange established these credits to lower the initial fixed cost for
Members. The Exchange now believes that it is appropriate to remove
this credit in light of the current operating conditions, including the
Exchange's overall membership and the current type and amount of volume
executed on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the Exchange's
rebates and fees will still allow the Exchange to remain highly
competitive such that the Exchange should continue to attract order
flow and maintain market share. The Exchange's proposed Trading Permit
fees will be lower than or similar to the cost of membership and
trading permits on other exchanges,\46\ and therefore, may stimulate
intramarket competition by attracting additional firms to become
Members on the Exchange or at least should not deter interested
participants from joining the Exchange. In addition, membership and
trading permit fees are subject to competition from other exchanges.
Accordingly, if the changes proposed herein are unattractive to market
participants, it is likely the Exchange will see a decline in
membership as a result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See supra note 40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inter-Market Competition
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily favor one of the 15 competing options
venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive.
Based on publicly-available information, and excluding index-based
options, no single exchange has more than approximately 16% market
share. Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of multiply-listed equity and ETF options order flow.
Over the course of 2021, the Exchange's market share has fluctuated
between approximately 3-6% of the U.S. equity options industry.\47\ The
Exchange is not aware of any evidence that a market share of
approximately 3-6% provides the Exchange with anti-competitive pricing
power. The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of products, or shift
order flow, in response to fee changes. In such an environment, the
Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with
other exchanges and to attract order flow to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See ``The market at a glance,'' available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/ (last visited December 20, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed fee change will not impact intermarket competition
because it will apply to all Members equally. The Exchange operates in
a highly competitive market in which market participants can determine
whether or not to join the Exchange based on the value received
compared to the cost of joining and maintaining membership on the
Exchange.

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

    As described above, the Exchange received one comment letter on the
First Proposed Rule Change.\48\ The Exchange responded to the comment
letter in the Second Proposed Rule Change. No comment letters were
received in response to the Second or Third Proposed Rule Changes. The
Exchange received one comment letter on the Fourth Proposed Rule
Change,\49\ which the Exchange responds to in this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See supra note 7.
    \49\ See supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The First, Second, Third and Fourth Proposed Rule Changes all
provided cost-based justifications to support the proposed fee changes.
In this Fifth Proposed Rule Change, the Exchange determined to utilize
a competition based approach to support the proposed fee changes.
Because the SIG Letters are primarily focused on the Exchange's prior
cost justifications in the First, Second, Third and Fourth Proposed
Rule Changes, the Exchange believes the SIG's assertions are no longer
germane to the current filing as the Exchange no longer utilizes a cost
justification to support the proposed fees.
    Pursuant to the Guidance, Staff may consider whether a proposed fee
is constrained by significant competitive forces in assessing the
reasonableness of the proposed fee.\50\ This is in line with a recent
filing by MEMX LLC (``MEMX''), in which MEMX argued its proposed
monthly membership fee was reasonable because it was constrained by
competitive forces.\51\ MEMX's monthly membership fee filing received
no comment letters and remains in effect today, past the Commission's
60-day suspension deadline. The Exchange's trading permit fees are the
equivalent of MEMX's ``membership fee,'' BOX's ``participant fee'' and
``market maker trading permit fee,'' and other exchanges' ``access''
fees: They are all fees to solely provide access and allow activity to
the specific marketplace. These are all monthly fees assessed to
members for trading on each particular exchange. The Exchange now
argues that its proposed fees are constrained by competition in the
same way MEMX's membership fees are constrained by competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See Staff Guidance on SRO Rule Filings Relating to Fees
(May 21, 2019), at https://www.sec.gov/tm/staff-guidance-sro-rule-filings-fees (the ``Guidance'').
    \51\ See supra note 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\52\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \53\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \53\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2022-09 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-PEARL-2022-09. 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
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2022-09 and should be
submitted on or before May 9, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\54\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-08172 Filed 4-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 179 (Thursday, September 15, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63370-63374]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21146]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-6550; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-162-AD;
Amendment 39-18638; AD 2016-18-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 90-11-05 for
certain Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-
203 airplanes and Model A300 B4-600 series airplanes. AD 90-11-05
required repetitive detailed inspections for cracking in the aft hinge
brackets of the outer shroud box that is located in the outer wing box,
and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This new
AD changes certain compliance times and adds airplanes to the
applicability. This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in the aft
hinge brackets of the outer shroud box that is located in the outer
wing box, which were found during routine maintenance checks, and our
subsequent determination that a change in inspection compliance times
is needed. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the
aft hinge brackets of the outer shroud box; such cracking could affect
the structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective October 20, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 20,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax
+33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
6550.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
6550; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-
647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA

98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 90-11-05, Amendment 39-6603 (89-NM-223-AD) (55
FR 20129, May 15, 1990) (``AD 90-11-05''). AD 90-11-05 applied to
certain Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4
203 airplanes and Model A300 B4-600 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on December 14, 2015 (80 FR 77279)
(``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that a change
to certain compliance times is needed. The NPRM proposed to continue to
require doing repetitive detailed inspections for cracking in the hinge
brackets of the forward and aft outer shroud boxes that are located in
the outer wing box, and related investigative and corrective actions if
necessary. The NPRM also proposed to change certain compliance times
and add airplanes to the applicability. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct cracking of the aft hinge brackets of the outer
shroud box; such cracking could affect the structural integrity of the
airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0181R1, dated August 20, 2013 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Model A300
series airplanes and Model A300 B4-600 series airplanes. The MCAI
states:

    In the past, aft hinge brackets of the outer wing box were found
cracked. Fracture of a bracket would allow vertical movement of the
inner shroud box structure, which could result in damage to the top
skin of the inboard flap. In addition, the loads carried by the
brackets will be transferred to the remaining supports, which may
also crack and cause extensive structural damage.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, DGAC [Direction
G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] France issued * * * [an
airworthiness directive] (later revised) to require repetitive
inspections of the hinge bracket of the outer box and, depending on
findings, corrective action(s).
    Since that [DGAC] AD was issued, a fleet survey and updated
Fatigue and Damage Tolerance analysis were performed in order to
substantiate the A300 Extended Service Goal (ESG) and A300-600
Extended Service Goal (ESG2) exercise.
    The results of these analyses led to a change in the inspection
thresholds and intervals in Flight Cycles (FC) and the introduction
of Flight Hours (FH) limits.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of DGAC France * * * [an airworthiness directive],
which is superseded, but requires those actions within the new
thresholds and intervals given by Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A300-
57-0142 Revision 04 or A300-57-6010 Revision 05, as applicable to
aeroplane model.
    Revision 1 of this [EASA] AD is issued to add model A300 B4-203
aeroplanes to the applicability and compliance time tables. This
model is covered by Airbus SB A300-57-0142, but was mistakenly
omitted from the original [EASA] AD issue.

    The corrective action for a hinge bracket that is cracked or
fractured is replacing the damaged hinge bracket with a new bracket.
    For airplanes on which a crack is found in one half bracket or both
half brackets, related investigative actions include a general visual
inspection for secondary damage (e.g., cracks, wear damage, pitting,
and gouging) in the following areas:
     The inner shroud-box forward attachments and the
attachment brackets at the inboard end.
     The inner and outer shroud-box structure, adjacent to the
fractured bracket.
     The top skin of the inboard flap.
    The corrective action for damage findings during the related
investigative action is repair using a method approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or
EASA; or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    The compliance time for related investigative actions and
corrective actions is before further flight.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
6550.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to the comment.

Request To Exclude Certain Airplanes From the Applicability

    FedEx requested that we exclude from the proposed applicability
airplanes on which the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-57-6011, Revision 2, dated July 10, 1989, have been accomplished.
FedEx stated that it has accomplished the optional terminating actions
provided in paragraph (j)(1) of the proposed AD, and specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6011, Revision 2, dated July 10, 1989,
on several of its airplanes.
    We disagree with FedEx's request. As of the effective date of this
AD, additional actions are required for airplanes on which the optional
modification has been accomplished. These airplanes will need to have a
one-time detailed visual inspection of the forward and aft outer shroud
box with no cracking found, as required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD.
We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Changes Made to This AD

    In paragraph (j)(2) of the proposed AD, we proposed to provide an
optional method of compliance (i.e., a replacement and a one-time
inspection) for actions specified in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD.
We also proposed to give credit in paragraph (k)(2) of the proposed AD
for replacements accomplished before the effective date of this AD
using the same service information identified in paragraph (j)(2) of
the AD:
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-143, dated December 17,
1986.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-143, Revision 1, dated
March 19, 1987.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6011, dated December 17,
1986.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6011, Revision 1, dated
March 19, 1987.
    Since we cannot make this service information reasonably available,
we have revised paragraph (j)(2) of the proposed AD, removed redundant
paragraph (k)(2) of the proposed AD from this AD, and redesignated
paragraph (k)(1) and subsequent subparagraphs accordingly. We revised
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD by removing the references to the service
information and instead specified that operators must do the
replacement using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or
Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and

     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-0142, Revision 04, dated
March 30, 2011, which describes procedures for doing an inspection of
the forward and aft hinge brackets on the outer shroud box.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-143, Revision 2, dated
July 10, 1989, which describes procedures for replacing the aft
aluminum alloy brackets on the outer shroud box with new steel
brackets.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010, Revision 05, dated
February 21, 2011, which describes procedures for doing an inspection
of the forward and aft hinge brackets on the outer shroud box.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6011, Revision 2, dated
July 10, 1989, which describes procedures for replacing the aft
aluminum alloy brackets on the outer shroud box with new steel
brackets.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 3 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost          Parts cost     Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.....................  8 work-hours x $85 per               $0  $680 per            $2,040 per
                                  hour = $680 per                          inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                  inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement................................  27 work-hours x $85 per hour =              $25,650         $27,945
                                              $2,295.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
90-11-05, Amendment 39-6603 (89-NM-223-AD) (55 FR 20129, May 15, 1990),
and adding the following new AD:

2016-18-08 Airbus: Amendment 39-18638. Docket No. FAA-2015-6550;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-162-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective October 20, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 90-11-05, Amendment 39-6603 (89-NM-223-AD)
(55 FR 20129, May 15, 1990).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-
2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes; Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620,
and B4-622 airplanes; and Model A300 B4-605R airplanes; certificated
in any category; except airplanes on which Airbus Modification 6661
has been embodied during production.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in the aft hinge
brackets of the outer shroud box that is located in the outer wing
box, which were found during routine maintenance checks, and our
subsequent determination that a change in inspection compliance
times is needed. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
cracking of the aft hinge brackets of the outer shroud box; such
cracking could affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections

    At the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (g)(1),
(g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection for cracks
and fractures of the hinge brackets of the forward and aft outer
shroud boxes, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-0142, Revision 04, dated March 30,
2011; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010, Revision 05, dated
February 21, 2011; as applicable. Repeat the inspection thereafter
at the applicable interval specified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or
(g)(3) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-0142, Revision 04,
dated March 30, 2011; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010,
Revision 05, dated February 21, 2011; as applicable. Doing the
replacement specified in paragraph (j) of this AD terminates the
repetitive inspections required by this paragraph.
    (1) For Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-605R, B4-620, B4-622, B4-
2C, and B4-203 airplanes: Do the inspection at the later of the
times specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000
flight cycles or 2,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 5,000 flight cycles or 10,400
flight hours since first flight, whichever occurs first.
    (ii) Within 100 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD.
    (2) For Model A300 B2-1C, B2-203, and B2K-3C airplanes: Do the
inspection at the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000 flight cycles or 1,000
flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 5,000 flight cycles or 5,400
flight hours since first flight, whichever occurs first.
    (ii) Within 100 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD.
    (3) For Model A300 B4-103 airplanes: Do the inspection at the
later of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii)
of this AD. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 1,000 flight cycles or 1,300 flight hours, whichever occurs
first.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 5,000 flight cycles or 6,600
flight hours since first flight, whichever occurs first.
    (ii) Within 100 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD.

(h) Corrective Action

    If any crack or fracture is found during any inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, replace the
damaged hinge bracket with a new bracket, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-143,
Revision 2, dated July 10, 1989; or Airbus A300-57-6011, Revision 2,
dated July 10, 1989; as applicable.

(i) Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

    If any crack or fracture is found during any inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, do a general
visual inspection for secondary damage (e.g., cracks, wear damage,
pitting, and gouging) in the areas specified in paragraphs (i)(1),
(i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-0142, Revision 04,
dated March 30, 2011; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010,
Revision 05, dated February 21, 2011; as applicable. If any damage
is found, before further flight, repair using a method approved by
the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or
Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    (1) The inner shroud-box forward attachments and the attachment
brackets at the inboard end.
    (2) The inner and outer shroud-box structure, adjacent to the
fractured bracket.
    (3) The top skin of the inboard flap.

(j) Optional Terminating Action for Inspection Requirements of
Paragraph (g) of This AD

    (1) Replacement of the hinge bracket, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-143,
Revision 2, dated July 10, 1989 (for Model A300 series airplanes);
or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6011, Revision 2, dated July 10,
1989; as applicable; terminates the inspection requirements of
paragraph (g) of this AD (for Model A300 B4-600 series airplanes).
    (2) Replacement of a hinge bracket before the effective date of
this AD terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, provided that after the hinge bracket replacement,
but before further flight after the effective date of this AD, a
one-time detailed inspection of the forward and aft outer shroud box
has been done with no cracking found, in accordance with paragraph
(g) of this AD. The replacement must be done in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for inspections required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using any of the applicable service
information listed in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(8) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-142, dated December 17,
1986.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-142, Revision 1, dated April
9, 1990.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-142, Revision 2, dated
January 16, 1991.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-0142, Revision 03, dated
February 22, 1999.
    (5) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010, Revision 1, dated
December 14, 1990.
    (6) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010, Revision 02, dated
March 30, 1998.
    (7) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010, Revision 03, dated
September 16, 1998.
    (8) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010, Revision 04, dated
February 22, 1999.

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved
by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(m) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013-0181R1, dated August 20,
2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-6550.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-0142, Revision 04, dated
March 30, 2011.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-143, Revision 2, dated July
10, 1989. Pages 1, 3, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 14 of this document are
identified as Revision 2, dated July 10, 1989; pages 2 and 8 are
identified as original, dated December 12, 1986; and pages 5, 6, 9,
11, 12, and 15 are identified as Revision March 19, 1987.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6010, Revision 05, dated
February 21, 2011.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6011, Revision 2, dated
July 10, 1989. Pages 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 11, and 12 of this document are
identified as Revision 2, dated July 10, 1989; pages 3, 4, and 13
are identified as Revision 1, dated March 19, 1987; and pages 6, 9,
10 are identified as original, dated December 17, 1986.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 24, 2016.
John P. Piccola, Jr.,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-21146 Filed 9-14-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 23, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 246)]
[Notices]
[Page 76277]
[DOCID:fr23de05-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-143-000]

Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC
Gas Tariff

December 15, 2005.
    Take notice that on December 9, 2005, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC,
(Texas Gas) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second
Revised Volume No. 1, Second Revised Sheet No. 226, to become effective
January 1, 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-7755 Filed 12-22-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 83 (Monday, May 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 23400]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09159]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4514-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Tennessee; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Tennessee (FEMA-4514-DR), dated April 2, 2020, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued March 11, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Tennessee is hereby amended to include Individual
Assistance limited to COVID-19 Funeral Assistance under Other Needs
Assistance for those areas determined to have been adversely affected
by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of April 2, 2020.

    Individual Assistance limited to COVID-19 Funeral Assistance
under Other Needs Assistance for all areas in the State of Tennessee
(already designated for Individual Assistance, limited to the Crisis
Counseling Program and emergency protective measures [Category B]
not authorized under other Federal statutes, including direct
Federal assistance).

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-09159 Filed 4-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 74554]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23978]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-495, OMB Control No. 3235-0553]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 19b-7
and Form 19b-7

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    The Exchange Act provides a framework for self-regulation under
which various entities involved in the securities business, including
national securities exchanges and national securities associations
(collectively, self-regulatory organizations or ``SROs''), have primary
responsibility for regulating their members or participants. The role
of the Commission in this framework is primarily one of oversight; the
Exchange Act charges the Commission with supervising the SROs and
assuring that each complies with and advances the policies of the
Exchange Act.
    The Exchange Act was amended by the Commodity Futures Modernization
Act of 2000 (``CFMA''). Prior to the CFMA, federal law did not allow
the trading of futures on individual stocks or on narrow-based stock
indexes (collectively, ``security futures products''). The CFMA removed
this restriction and provided that trading in security futures products
would be regulated jointly by the Commission and the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (``CFTC'').
    The Exchange Act requires all SROs to submit to the SEC any
proposals to amend, add, or delete any of their rules. Certain entities
(Security Futures Product Exchanges) would be notice-registered
national securities exchanges only because they trade security futures
products. Similarly, certain entities (Limited Purpose National
Securities Associations) would be limited-purpose national securities
associations only because their members trade security futures
products. The Exchange Act, as amended by the CFMA, established a
procedure for Security Futures Product Exchanges and Limited Purpose
National Securities Associations to provide notice of proposed rule
changes relating to certain matters.\1\ Rule 19b-7 and Form 19b-7
implemented this procedure. Effective April 28, 2008, the SEC amended
Rule 19b-7 and Form 19b-7 to require that Form 19b-7 be submitted
electronically.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These matters are higher margin levels, fraud or
manipulation, recordkeeping, reporting, listing standards, or
decimal pricing for security futures products; sales practices for
security futures products for persons who effect transactions in
security futures products; or rules effectuating the obligation of
Security Futures Product Exchanges and Limited Purpose National
Securities Associations to enforce the securities laws. See 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(7)(A).
    \2\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57526 (March 19,
2008), 73 FR 16179 (March 27, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The collection of information is designed to provide the Commission
with the information necessary to determine, as required by the
Exchange Act, whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Exchange Act and the rules thereunder. The information is used to
determine if the proposed rule change should remain in effect or be
abrogated.
    The respondents to the collection of information are SROs.\3\ The
estimated total industry burden per year for rule changes, updating and
posting rule changes and updating the online rulebook is 68 burden
hours.\4\ The total estimated internal cost of compliance for a
respondent for legal and paralegal work related to filings is $11,110
per year and the total industry internal cost of compliance is $22,220
per year.\5\ In the proposed extension, there is no change to the
burden hour estimate per respondent. However, there is a decrease in
the total burden hours because the Commission now estimates that there
are two respondents instead of three respondents in 2020 (a decrease of
on respondent). Thus, the net change in estimated total aggregate
burden hours decreased from 102 to 68 (reduction of 34 burden hours).
Similarly, with respect to the internal dollar cost burden of
respondents, the total industry internal dollar costs have decreased
overall due to one less respondent. The total industry internal cost of
compliance decreased from $30, 300 to $22,220.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ There are currently two Security Futures Product Exchanges
and one Limited Purpose National Securities Association, the
National Futures Association. One of the Security Futures Product
Exchanges, however, is conditionally exempted from filing proposed
rule changes using Form 19b-7. Therefore, there are currently two
respondents to Form 19b-7.
    \4\ This estimate is the sum of the total industry (2
respondents) burden hours for rule filings (50 hours), updating and
posting rule changes (2 hours) and updating rules (16 hours).
    \5\ This estimate is based on 2 responses x $5,555 per response
equals $11,110 per respondent per year and 2 respondents x $11,110
equals $22,220 or the total industry cost per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent by November 30, 2023 to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom, Director/Chief Information
Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: October 26, 2023.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-23978 Filed 10-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 186)]
[Notices]
[Page 49369-49370]
[DOCID:fr28se09-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

September 21, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC09-109-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Application of Consolidated Edison Company of New
York, Inc. for Authorization to Acquire Short-Term Debt.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090918-5110.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 09, 2009.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER00-3251-020; ER01-1147-010; ER01-1919-016; ER01-
513-028; ER98-1734-019; ER99-2404-015.
    Applicants: Exelon Generation Company, LLC, AmerGen Energy Company,
LLC; Commonwealth Edison Company, Exelon Framingham LLC, Exelon
Generation Company, LLC, Exelon New Boston LLC, Exelon New England
Power Marketing, LP, Exelon West Medway LLC, PECO Energy Power Company,
PECO Energy Company.
    Description: Revised Caption for Central Region Market Power Update
Filing of the Exelon MBR Companies.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090918-5104.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1195-005.
    Applicants: Silverhill, Ltd.
    Description: Change in Status of Silverhill LTD.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090918-5063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-54-014.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: Report of ISO New England Inc. Regarding the
Implementation of Market Rule Changes to Permit Non-Generating
Resources to Participate in the Regulation Market.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090918-5106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1716-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits an executed interim
Large Generator Interconnection Agreement with Western Farmers Electric
Cooperative.
    Filed Date: 09/17/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090918-0089.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, October 08, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1717-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC submits the revised
depreciation accrual rates for use in its formula rates for wholesale
power sales under.
    Filed Date: 09/17/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090918-0086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, October 08, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1719-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
submits proposed revisions to the Open Access Transmission, Energy and
Operating Reserve Markets Tariff re the Reliability Assessment
Commitment Objective Function.
    Filed Date: 09/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090918-0111.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 09, 2009.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on

or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than
the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-23348 Filed 9-25-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P