[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 213 (Monday, November 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51455-51457]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24048]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81988; File No. SR-IEX-2017-38]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt New
Rule 6.210 Related to Ex-Dates for Securities Listed or Traded on the
Exchange

October 31, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on October 27, 2017, the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\4\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\5\
Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or ``Exchange'') is filing with the
Commission a proposed rule change to adopt new Rule 6.210 (Ex-Dividend
or Ex-Right Dates) related to ex-dates for securities listed or traded
on the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as ``non-
controversial'' and provided the Commission with the notice required by
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \5\ 17 CRF 240.19b-4.
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.iextrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
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 statement may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    On June 17, 2016 the Commission granted IEX's application for
registration as a national securities exchange under Section 6 of the
Act including approval of rules applicable to the qualification,
listing and delisting of companies on the Exchange. The Exchange plans
to begin a listing program in early 2018 and is proposing to adopt Rule
6.210 related to ex-dates for securities listed on IEX.
    IEX Rule 2.160(c)(4) requires in substance that an Exchange Member
must be a Member of a registered clearing agency registered with the
Commission pursuant to Section 17A of the Act or clear transactions
executed on the Exchange through another Member that is a Member of a
registered clearing agency. In addition, IEX Rule 6.110(a) provides
that every Exchange Member who is a Member of a registered clearing
agency shall implement comparison and settlement procedures under the
rules of such entity. Further, IEX Rule 11.250(a) provides that the
Exchange maintains connectivity and access to the Universal Trade
Capture of the National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'') for
the transmission of executed transactions. Pursuant to these
provisions, all IEX Members are either Members of the NSCC or clear
transactions executed on the Exchange through another Member that is a
Member of NSCC. Thus, IEX Members must comply with NSCC comparison and
settlement procedures for all transactions executed on the Exchange.
    NSCC and other listing exchanges have rules related to securities
settlement which specify the requirements and process for designation
of so-called ``ex-dates'' in the event that the issuer of a security
enters into certain types of corporate actions, including declaration
of a dividend, and issuance of rights or warrants (i.e., the corporate
action consideration).\7\ Generally, an issuer of securities will
establish a record date to determine which security holders are
entitled to the corporate action

consideration--security holders of record on the record date are
entitled to the corporate action consideration. Because virtually all
securities transactions now settle on the second business day after
trade date (``T+2'') pursuant to Rule 15c6-1 under the Act,\8\ a
purchaser of a security on the business day prior to the record date
will not be the security holder of record on the record date. For
example, if the record date for XYZ's issuance of a dividend is
December 19, 2017, a purchaser on December 18, 2017 will not be the
holder or record until December 20, 2017. The purchaser will not be the
holder of record on December 19, 2017 and therefore will not be
entitled to the dividend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.4.
    \8\ The Commission recently adopted amendments to Rule 15c6-1(a)
under the Act to shorten the standard, regular-way settlement cycle
from T+3 to T+2 or the second business day after trade date. See,
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-80295 (March 22, 2016), 82 FR
15564 (March 29, 2017) (S7-22-16). The compliance date for the
amendments was September 5, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, to provide certainty as to which security holder will receive
the corporate action consideration it is necessary to establish ``ex-
dates'' that denote the date on and after which a security will no
longer trade with the corporate action consideration. Most listing
exchanges, as well as the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(``FINRA'') have such rules, which specify that generally a security
will trade ``ex'' two [sic] business days [sic] prior to the record
date. In the example above, XYZ would trade ``ex-dividend'' beginning
on December 18, 2017.
    Accordingly, in connection with the planned launch of its listing
program, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 6.210 to specify when
transactions in securities traded ``regular'' shall be ``ex-dividend''
or ``ex-rights'' as the case may be. As proposed, Rule 6.210 provides
that transactions in securities traded ``regular'' shall be ``ex-
dividend'' or ``ex-rights'' as the case may be, on the business day
preceding the record date fixed by the company or the date of the
closing of transfer books, except when the Board of Directors rules
otherwise.\9\ Should such record date or such closing of transfer books
occur upon a day other than a business day Rule 6.210 shall apply for
the second preceding business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Exceptions would be expected to occur in circumstances where
the listed company's corporate action consideration is relatively
large (typically 25% or greater than the value of the security) or
definitive information is not received by the Exchange sufficiently
in advance of the record date, as required by IEX Rule 14.207(e)(6),
to permit the designation of an ``ex-dividend'' or ``ex-rights''
date in accordance with Rule 6.210. In such cases, the ex-date would
generally be on the first business day which is practical given the
relevant circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, Rule 6.210 is substantially identical to NYSE Arca
Rule 7.4-E with only a minor difference in that proposed Rule 6.210
refers to ``securities'' rather than ``stocks'' to be inclusive of
listed securities that are not strictly speaking characterized as
stocks (e.g., rights and warrants).
    In connection with their ``ex-date'' rules, other listing exchanges
disseminate relevant information regarding such corporate actions by
their listed companies to market participants.\10\ Corporate action
information regarding IEX listed companies will also be posted on the
IEX Web site for viewing and download, without charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See, http://www.nyxdata.com/Data-Products/NYSE-Corporate-Actions?rfrby=sum# describing the NYSE Group Corporate Actions
package of reports sold by NYSE Group regarding corporate actions
for all equities listed on NYSE, NYSE MKT and NYSE Arca. See also,
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=dailylistpd describing
the Nasdaq Daily List sold by Nasdaq that provides certain corporate
action data for Nasdaq listed securities. See also, BAT BZX
(``BATS'') Exchange corporate action reports available without
charge at: https://www.bats.com/us/equities/market_statistics/corporate_action/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    IEX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\11\ in general and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \12\ of the Act in particular, in that it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
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. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
supports these objectives because it is designed to enable the Exchange
to provide clarity to market participants on applicable ``ex-dates''
for securities listed on IEX in connection with corporate actions
involving consideration to be paid or distributed to security holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because it provides authority to the Exchange to determine ex-dates in
circumstances warranting a different ex-date than the business day
preceding the record date fixed by the company or the date of closing
of transfer books.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will
serve to promote clarity and consistency among market participants
thereby facilitating investor protection and the public interest.

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

    IEX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The proposed rule
change is not designed to address any competitive issues but rather to
provide for the appropriate determination and dissemination of ex-
dates, to provide certainty as to which security holder will receive
the corporate action consideration. The Exchange also believes that the
proposed rule change will serve to promote clarity and consistency, as
noted in the Statutory Basis section, thereby reducing burdens on
competition and facilitating investor protection.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \15\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\16\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection

of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the
Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes
that waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest because the Exchange's proposed rule
change is substantially similar to a provision to another self-
regulatory organization's rules,\17\ and the Exchange's proposal does
not raise any new or novel issues. Accordingly, the Commission hereby
waives the 30-day operative delay requirement and designates the
proposed rule change as operative upon filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \17\ See NYSE Arca Rule 7.4-E.
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-IEX-2017-38 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-IEX-2017-38. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of 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-IEX-2017-38, and should be
submitted on or before November 27, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-24048 Filed 11-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36877-36879]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15694]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75261; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-062]

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

June 22, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 15, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and
III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Nasdaq is proposing changes to Nasdaq Rule 7014, including adding a
national best bid or best offer (``NBBO'') Program, amending Nasdaq
Rule 7018 rebates, eliminating Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(4) that governs fees
and credits for execution of orders in select symbols, and increasing
the monthly cap on fees charged for participation in the Nasdaq Opening
Cross in Nasdaq Rule 7018(e).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at
nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com at Nasdaq principal office, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    Nasdaq proposes to amend Nasdaq Rules 7014 and 7018 by eliminating
the fees and credits for execution of orders in select symbols
(``Select Symbol Program'') under Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(4). The Exchange
proposes to make corresponding changes to remove references to the
Select Symbol Program in Nasdaq Rule 7014(b) and (e). Additionally,
Nasdaq proposes to clarify Nasdaq Rule 7014(b) by removing an outdated
reference to subsection (f) and specifying the rebates and credits are
from Nasdaq Rule 7018(a), as well as to clarify that the rebate in
Nasdaq Rule 7018(e) will be in addition to any rebate payable under
Nasdaq Rule 7018(a).
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 7014 by adding the
NBBO Program to the rule as subsection (g). Under the NBBO Program,
Nasdaq will provide a rebate per share executed with respect to all
other displayed orders (other than Designated Retail Orders, as defined
in Nasdaq Rule 7018) in securities priced at $1 or more per share that
provide liquidity and establish the NBBO. The rebate will be in
addition to any rebate or credit payable under Nasdaq Rule 7018(a) and
the Investor Support Program (``ISP'') and Qualified Market Maker
(``QMM'') Program under Nasdaq Rule 7014.
    To qualify for the $0.0002 per share executed rebate under the NBBO
Program, a member must either: (1) Execute shares of liquidity provided
in all securities through one or more of its MPIDs that represents
0.475% or more of consolidated volume (``Consolidated Volume'') during
the month, or (2) add Nasdaq Options Market (``NOM'') market maker
liquidity, as defined in chapter XV, section 2 of the NOM rules, in
penny pilot options and/or non-penny pilot options above 0.90% of total
industry customer equity and exchange-traded fund (``ETF'') option
average daily volume (``ADV'') contracts per day in a month.
    Next, Nasdaq proposes to amend midpoint pricing credit tiers in
Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(1), (2) and (3). Specifically, in Nasdaq Rule
7018(a)(1) currently there is a credit of $0.0017 per share executed
for midpoint orders if the member provides an average daily volume of
between 5 million and less than 6 million shares through midpoint
orders during the month. The credit of $0.0017 per share executed for
midpoint orders will now be available if the member provides an average
daily volume of 3 million or more shares through midpoint orders during
the month. The same change is being made in Nasdaq Rule 7018(b) and
(c), but for the $0.0020 per share executed credit for midpoint orders
tier. Additional language is being modified within each of these
subsections solely for purposes of clarification.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 7018(e) by
increasing the monthly maximum amount that firms are subject to for
executing orders in the Nasdaq Opening Cross from $20,000 to $30,000
(provided that such firms add at least one million shares of liquidity,
on average, per month). The change is intended to keep the charges
incurred by members to participate in the Nasdaq Opening Cross
comparable to the charges incurred by the New York Stock Exchange
(``NYSE'') members to participate in its opening process.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See SR-NYSE-2015-28 (as of yet unpublished).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of section 6 of the Act,\4\ in general, and with
sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\5\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which Nasdaq operates or controls and is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest; and are not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq believes that the proposed changes to Nasdaq Rule 7018 to
eliminate the Select Symbol Program

under Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(4), as well as the removal of corresponding
references in Nasdaq Rule 7014(b) and (e), are reasonable because the
Exchange has fulfilled its commitment in its continuing efforts to
improve market quality to consider the impact the pricing has had on
market quality and off-exchange volume of existing Select Symbols and
has now gathered sufficient meaningful data to determine to eliminate
the program.\6\ Nasdaq believes that the data generated by this
experimental approach contributed to the on-going debate on the
structure of U.S. markets. The Exchange believes this proposed rule
change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because its
liquidity provider rebates continue to be set at reasonable levels and
apply uniformly to all members that qualify. The Exchange also believes
that these proposed rule changes are also equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the elimination of this program applies
uniformly to all members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73967 (December 30,
2014), 80 FR 594 (January 6, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-128).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the clarifying change to Nasdaq Rule
7014(b) of removing an outdated reference to subsection (f) and
specifying the rebates and credits are from Nasdaq Rule 7018(a), as
well as stipulating that the rebate in Nasdaq Rule 7018(e) will be in
addition to any rebate payable under Nasdaq Rule 7018(a), are
reasonable because these modifications will enhance the clarity and
reduce possible confusion among members, which serves to benefit the
marketplace. The Exchange also believes that these proposed rule
changes are also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they
apply uniformly to all members who qualify for the programs.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to amend Nasdaq
Rule 7014 by adding the NBBO Program to the rule as subsection (g) is
reasonable because it provides an opportunity for members that qualify
to receive a rebate of $0.0002 per share executed for all other
displayed orders (other than Designated Retail Orders, as defined in
Rule 7018) in securities priced at $1 or more per share that provide
liquidity and establish the NBBO.\7\ The rebate will be in addition to
any rebate or credit payable under Rule 7018(a) and the ISP and QMM
Program under Rule 7014. To qualify to receive this rebate, members
must either (1) execute shares of liquidity provided in all securities
through one or more of its [sic] Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that
represents 0.475% or more of Consolidated Volume during the month, or
(2) add NOM market maker liquidity, as defined in Chapter XV, Section 2
of the NOM rules, in penny pilot options and/or non-penny pilot options
above 0.90% of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV
contracts per day in a month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This is similar to other programs originating from the BATS
Global Markets 2011 filing. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
73967 (January 3, 2011), 80 FR 594 (January 7, 2011) (SR-BATS-2010-
038).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, Nasdaq believes this rule change is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the $0.0002 per share executed rebate
under the NBBO Program is open to all members on an equal basis and
provides a rebate for activity that improves the exchange's market
quality through increased activity and by encouraging the setting of
the NBBO. The NBBO Program encourages higher levels of liquidity
provision into the price discovery process and is consistent with the
overall goals of enhancing market quality. Also, the Exchange believes
that the two specific conditions (either of which a member can meet to
qualify for this rebate) are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because each represents an attainable level for members to achieve and
to qualify for this rebate. In addition, requiring a member to execute
shares of liquidity provided in all securities through one or more of
its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that represents 0.475% or more of
Consolidated Volume during the month represents a lower Consolidated
Volume requirement than the QMM Program, but the NBBO Program rebates
do not apply to all shares of liquidity provided, and thus the
Consolidated Volume threshold is lower.
    The proposed NBBO Program is intended to encourage members to add
liquidity at prices that benefit all Nasdaq market participants and the
Nasdaq market itself, and enhance price discovery. Nasdaq believes that
the level of the rebate available through the NBBO Program ($0.0002 per
share executed) is reasonable in that it does not reflect a
disproportionate increase above the rebates provided to all members
with respect to the provision of displayed liquidity under Rule
7018(a). The QMM and ISP Programs both provide members with the
opportunity to receive additional rebates of $0.0002 per share
executed. Nasdaq further notes that the NBBO Program is consistent with
the Act's requirement for an equitable allocation of fees because
members that provide liquidity and establish the NBBO benefit all
investors by promoting price discovery and increasing the depth of
liquidity available. Such members also benefit Nasdaq itself by
enhancing its competitiveness as a market that attracts actionable
orders. Accordingly, Nasdaq believes that it is consistent with an
equitable allocation of fees to pay an enhanced rebate in recognition
of these benefits to Nasdaq and its market participants. The Exchange
further notes that the NBBO Program is consistent with an equitable
allocation of fees because it is immediately available to all market
participants that qualify. Finally, Nasdaq believes that the NBBO
Program and the payment of a higher rebate with respect to qualifying
orders is not unfairly discriminatory because it is intended to promote
the benefits described above, and because the additional rebate amount
is in line with the rebate paid with respect to other displayed
liquidity-providing orders.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to amend
midpoint pricing credit tiers in Nasdaq Rule 7018(a)(1), (2) and (3) is
reasonable because it creates a more attainable credit tier (3 million
or more rather than between 5 million and 6 million) for members that
execute midpoint orders. Also, Nasdaq believes this rule change is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all members that
qualify are eligible to receive the corresponding rebate under Tapes A,
B or C. The proposed rule change is intended to encourage members to
execute midpoint orders and to further enhance liquidity. The Exchange
also believes that the additional language being modified within each
of these subsections solely for purposes of clarification will enhance
the clarity and reduce possible confusion among members, which serves
to benefit the marketplace.
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed change to the monthly cap on fees
charged for participation in the Nasdaq Opening Cross (provided that
such firms add at least one million shares of liquidity, on average,
per month) from $20,000 to $30,000 in Nasdaq Rule 7018(e) is reasonable
because it ensures that total monthly costs of members to participate
in the Nasdaq Opening Cross are comparable to the monthly costs of
members to participate in the opening process of Nasdaq's primary
competitor. As is currently the case, once a member reaches the cap,
its marginal rate thereafter will be zero and its blended rate will
decrease with each additional transaction. Nasdaq believes that the
proposed change reflects an equitable allocation of fees because it
believes that the Nasdaq Opening Cross provides an extremely robust
price discovery

process for its members, and that accordingly, it is equitable to
increase the maximum fees payable by members that participate in the
process. Additionally, Nasdaq believes that the change is not unfairly
discriminatory because it applies solely to members that opt to
participate in the Nasdaq Opening Cross.
    Finally, Nasdaq notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues
if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive. In such
an environment, Nasdaq must continually adjust its fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems
that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards
applicable to exchanges. Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change
reflects this competitive environment because it is designed to reduce
fees for members that enhance the quality of Nasdaq's market.

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule changes will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.\8\ Nasdaq notes
that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels
at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities
available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment,
Nasdaq must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with
other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been
exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee changes may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq believes that the degree to which fee changes in this market
may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited or even non-
existent. In this instance, the changes to Nasdaq Rules 7014 and 7018
do not impose a burden on competition because these Nasdaq incentive
programs (other than the program for select symbols in Nasdaq Rule
7018), remain in place and now also include the NBBO Program, still
offer economically advantageous credits, and are reflective of the need
for exchanges to offer and to let the financial incentives to attract
order flow evolve. While the Exchange does not believe that the
proposed changes will result in any burden on competition, if the
changes proposed herein are unattractive to market participants, it is
likely that Nasdaq will lose market share as a result.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing change has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-062 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-062. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange.
All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2015-
062, and should be submitted on or before July 17, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15694 Filed 6-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 177 (Thursday, September 16, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51636-51639]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19959]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1006; Project Identifier 2019-CE-047-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Piper Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 78-
02-03, which applies to all Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper), Model PA-23-
250 airplanes. AD 78-02-03 requires repetitively inspecting the
stabilator tip tube and weight assemblies for cracks, inspecting for
missing rivets and screws, replacing the forward rib/horn assemblies,
and reinforcing the mounting. Since AD 78-02-03 was issued, Piper
developed a newly-designed stabilator, which is not subject to the
unsafe condition, and revised its service information. This proposed AD
would retain the actions of AD 78-02-03, but would reduce the
applicability and require the actions in the revised service
information. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 1,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Piper
Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, FL 32960; phone: (772)
299-2141; website: https://www.piper.com/. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-1006; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Marshall, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park,
GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket Number FAA-2020-1006; Project

Identifier 2019-CE-047-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. The most
helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain
the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The
FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to John
Marshall, Aviation Safety Engineer, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 78-02-03 [Reg. Docket No. 77-EA-81, Amendment 39-
3128] (43 FR 3079, January 23, 1978) (AD 78-02-03), for all Piper Model
PA-23-250 airplanes. AD 78-02-03 was prompted by cracks found on the
stabilator structure during routine inspections, including cracks in
the tip balance weight, abnormal trim tab horn bushing wear, and skin
and nose rib cracks. The FAA issued AD 78-02-03 to prevent weakening of
the stabilator structure and loss of the trim tab and counter balance
weight, which could result in reduced airplane control.
    For all Model PA-23-250 airplanes, AD 78-02-03 requires
repetitively inspecting both the stabilator tip tube and the weight
assemblies for cracks, with follow-on alterations or replacements as
necessary, in accordance with Piper Service Bulletin (SB) No. 540,
dated January 4, 1977 (Piper SB 540). For different groups of serial-
numbered airplanes, AD 78-02-03 requires a one-time inspection of the
stabilator tip ribs for missing rivets and missing tube and weight
assembly attachment screws with alteration as necessary, replacement of
the right and left stabilator tab forward inboard rib/horn assemblies,
and/or reinforcement of the mounting of the stabilator tube and weight
assemblies. The repetitive inspections in AD 78-02-03 for all serial-
numbered airplanes have no terminating action and are required
regardless of any corrective actions performed.

Actions Since AD 78-02-03 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 78-02-03, Piper changed the design of the
stabilator structure. Airplanes beginning with serial number 27-7954122
were manufactured with the stabilator design change and are not subject
to the unsafe condition addressed by AD 78-02-03. The FAA determined
the applicability of AD 78-02-03 should be revised to exclude those
later-manufactured airplanes.
    In addition, Piper revised SB 540, the service bulletin required by
AD 78-02-03 for the repetitive inspections of the stabilator tip tube
and the weight assemblies. Piper SB 540B, dated February 9, 2021 (Piper
SB 540B), reduces the applicability of the affected serial numbers and
contains separate instructions for inspecting and repairing airplanes
with a modified tube and weight assembly or with a stabilizer balance
weight replacement kit part number (P/N) 763 987.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed the following service documents proposed for
compliance with this NPRM:
     Piper SB No. 547, dated March 1, 1977, which contains
instructions for inspecting the stabilator tip rib;
     Piper SB No. 569, dated August 24, 1977, which contains
information for replacing the stabilator tab horn;
     Piper Service Letter No. 807A, dated September 8, 1977,
which contains information for installing the stabilator outboard nose
rib; and
     Piper SB No. 540B, February 9, 2021, which contains
instructions for inspecting the stabilator tip tube and weight assembly
and addressing any cracks found.
    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.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed the following documents for information related to
this NPRM:
     Piper SB 540, which contains instructions for inspecting
and reinforcing the stabilator tip tube and weight assembly; and
     Piper Aztec Service Manual, Part Number 753-564, dated
January 1, 2009. Paragraphs 4-65 through 4-67 of this manual contain
procedures for checking control surface balance.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of
the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would retain all of the requirements of AD 78-02-
03 but would reduce the applicability and update some of the service
information that would be required for compliance.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Piper SB 540B specifies contacting Piper for repair instructions.
This proposed AD would require contacting the FAA for an approved
repair method instead.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 625 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                   Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspect the stabilator tip tube   0.5 work-hour x     Not applicable....  $42.50 per          $26,562.50 per
 and weight assembly.              $85 per hour =                          inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
                                   $42.50.
Inspect the stabilator tip ribs.  0.5 work-hour x     Not applicable....  $42.50............  $26,562.50.
                                   $85 per hour =
                                   $42.50.
Replace the stabilator tab        4 work-hours x $85  $817..............  $1,157............  $723,125.
 forward rib/horn assemblies.      per hour = $340.
Install additional nose ribs....  1 work-hour x $85   $367..............  $452..............  $282,500.
                                   per hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary repairs
or replacements that would be required based on the results of the
proposed inspection. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
airplanes that might need these repairs or replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                 Action                           Labor cost                  Parts cost              product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair stabilator tip tube and weight     4 work-hours x $85 per      $80.......................            $420
 assemblies (airplanes without kit P/N     hour = $340.
 763 987).
Install missing stabilator tip rib        1 work hour x $85 per hour  39........................             124
 rivets and/or the stabilator tip tube     = $85.
 and weight assembly attachment screws.
Balance stabilator......................  5 work-hours x $85 per      Not applicable............             425
                                           hour = $425.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For airplanes with kit P/N 763 987, the cost to repair cracking may
vary significantly from airplane to airplane, and therefore the FAA has
no way of determining an estimated cost.

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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA has determined that this proposed AD would not have
federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD
would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 78-02-03 [Reg. Docket No. 77-EA-81,
Amendment 39-3128] (43 FR 3079, January 23, 1978); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2020-1006; Project Identifier
2019-CE-047-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by November 1, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 78-02-03 [Reg. Docket No. 77-EA-81,
Amendment 39-3128] (43 FR 3079, January 23, 1978) (AD 78-02-03).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Piper Aircraft, Inc., Model PA-23-250
airplanes, serial numbers 27-7654001 through 27-7954121,
certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 5510, Horizontal
Stabilizer Structure.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks developing on the
stabilator structure. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent
weakening of the stabilator structure and to detect and correct
cracks on the stabilator tip tube and

weight assembly. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could cause
weakening of the complete structure and lead to loss of the trim tab
and counter balance weight, which may result in reduced airplane
control.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Previously Required Actions Retained From AD 78-02-03

    (1) Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) after January 26, 1978
(the effective date of AD 78-02-03), do the following inspections
and modifications.
    (i) For airplanes with serial numbers 27-7654001 through 27-
7754054, inspect both stabilator tip ribs for missing rivets and
missing tube and weight assembly attachment screws and if necessary
alter in accordance with Piper Service Bulletin (SB) 547, dated
March 1, 1977.
    (ii) For airplanes with serial numbers 27-7654001 through 27-
7754127, 27-7754130, 27-7754131, 27-7754133 through 27-7754136, and
27-7754138 through 27-7754144, replace the right and left stabilator
tab forward inboard rib/horn assemblies by installing Piper Kit 761
143 or equivalent kit in accordance with Piper SB 569, dated August
24, 1977.
    (iii) For airplanes with serial numbers 27-7654001 through 27-
7754041 equipped with stabilators Piper part number (P/N) 15658-2,
15658-3, 15658-22 or 15658-23, reinforce the mounting of the
stabilator tube and weight assemblies by installing additional nose-
ribs with Piper Kit 761 141 or equivalent kit in accordance with
Piper Service Letter 807A, dated September 8, 1977.
    (2) Before further flight after completing the alterations in
paragraphs (g)(1)(ii) and (iii) of this AD, balance the stabilator.

(h) Inspection of Stabilator Tip Tube and Weight Assembly

    Within 10 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD or
within 100 hours TIS after completing the last inspection required
by paragraph (a) of AD 78-02-03, whichever occurs later, and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, inspect the
left and right stabilator balance weight assemblies for cracks and
complete any necessary repairs by following Parts I and II of the
Instructions in Piper SB No. 540B, dated February 9, 2021, except
you are not required to contact Piper for repair instructions.
Instead, repair in accordance with FAA-approved procedures.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    You may take credit for the initial inspection and corrective
actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD if you performed those
actions before the effective date of this AD using Piper SB No. 540,
dated January 4, 1977, or SB No. 540A, dated October 20, 1980.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in Related Information.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) For service information that contains steps that are labeled
as Required for Compliance (RC), the following provisions apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact John Marshall,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701 Columbia
Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (404)
474-5605; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Piper
Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, FL 32960; phone: (772)
299-2141; website: https://www.piper.com/. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on September 9, 2021.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-19959 Filed 9-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 186 (Thursday, September 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57559-57560]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22806]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-D-1344]

Policy Clarification for Fluoroscopic Equipment Requirements;
Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff;
Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of the draft guidance entitled ``Policy Clarification for
Fluoroscopic Equipment Requirements.'' This draft guidance describes
FDA's intent to clarify the application of certain aspects of the
performance standard requirements for fluoroscopic equipment when
manufacturers comply with certain International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) standards. This draft guidance is not final nor is it
in effect at this time.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by December 24, 2014.

ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for
download from the Internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written
requests for a single hard copy of the draft guidance document entitled
``Policy Clarification for Fluoroscopic Equipment Requirements'' to the
Office of the Center Director, Guidance and Policy Development, Center
for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-
0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in
processing your request.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Miller, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4646, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The draft guidance document, ``Policy Clarification for
Fluoroscopic Equipment Requirements'' was developed to describe FDA's
intent to clarify the application of certain aspects of the performance
standard requirements in 21 CFR 1020.32 for fluoroscopic equipment when
the manufacturer has complied with certain IEC standards. FDA believes
that a declaration of conformity with the applicable IEC standard and
the applicable measure(s) set forth in this guidance as part of the
510(k) submission for their device will sufficiently address the
concerns intended to be addressed by certain parts of the requirements
of Sec.  1020.32, such that the public health is adequately protected.

II. Significance of Guidance

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will

represent the Agency's current thinking on the policy clarification for
certain fluoroscopic equipment requirements. It does not create or
confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA
or the public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach
satisfies the requirements of the applicable statute and regulations.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may do
so by downloading an electronic copy from the Internet. A search
capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance
documents is available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. Guidance
documents are also available at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons
unable to download an electronic copy of ``Policy Clarification for
Fluoroscopic Equipment Requirements'' may send an email request to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to receive an electronic copy of the
document. Please use the document number 1806 to identify the guidance
you are requesting.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to currently approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E are currently
approved under OMB control number 0910-0120, and the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 1020 have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0025.

V. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 19, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-22806 Filed 9-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9452-9453]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03605]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2022-0002; FRL-9413-01-R4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Georgia:
Approval of Revisions to State Implementation Plan; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction and clarification.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting
statements contained in a July 11, 2002, Federal Register notice of
direct final rulemaking approving changes to the Georgia State
Implementation Plan (SIP). Specifically, EPA stated that it was
approving a change to the public notice requirements in Georgia's SIP
for federally-enforceable operating permits. However, this change was
never effective at the state level and, therefore, was never
incorporated into the SIP. EPA is publishing this correction notice to
eliminate any potential confusion regarding the public notice
requirements in Georgia's SIP for these permits.

DATES: Effective February 22, 2022.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this notice of correction
under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2022-0002 to provide
electronic access to the July 11, 2002, submittal. All documents in the
docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed
in the index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Brad Akers, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Akers can be
reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via electronic mail at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
requires states to develop and submit to EPA a SIP to ensure that state
air quality meets the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
These NAAQS currently address six criteria pollutants: Carbon monoxide,
nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
Each state has a SIP containing the control measures and strategies
used to attain and maintain the NAAQS. The SIP is extensive, containing
such elements as air pollution control and permitting regulations,
emission inventories, attainment demonstrations, and enforcement
mechanisms. Each state must formally adopt the elements it proposes to
include in its SIP after the public has had an opportunity to comment
on them and must then submit the proposed SIP revisions to EPA. If the
revisions meet all relevant CAA requirements, EPA must approve them
through notice and comment rulemaking and incorporate the elements into
the SIP at 40 Code of Federal Regulations part 52--``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Georgia's SIP is set forth at 40 CFR 52.570.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA incorporated Georgia's ``Operating (SIP) Permits'' rule--Ga.
Comp. R. & Regs. 391-3-1-.03, Permits, at Section (2) (hereinafter Rule
391-3-1-.03(2))--into the Georgia SIP on August 30, 1995. See 60 FR
45048. Paragraph (i) of this rule requires the State to notify EPA and
the public prior to issuing any federally-enforceable operating permit
and provide the opportunity to comment on the draft permit. Georgia has
not revised this public notice provision since its initial
incorporation into the SIP.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The SIP-approved version of Rule 391-3-1-.03(2) states
``Prior to the issuance of any federally enforceable operating
permit, EPA and the public will be notified and given a chance for
comment on the draft permit.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 11, 2002 (67 FR 45909), EPA approved numerous changes to
the Georgia SIP through a direct final rule. This rule addressed
regulatory changes transmitted to EPA on December 6, 1999, March 21,
2000, January 4, 2001, August 21, 2001, and December 28, 2001, by the
State of Georgia, through the Georgia Department of Natural Resources'
Environmental Protection Division (also known as GA EPD).
    GA EPD's March 21, 2000, submittal contained several revisions to
Rule 391-3-1-.03 and information indicating that it included changes to
Rule 391-3-1-.03(2) for EPA approval. Specifically, the submittal
contained a strikeout/underline draft version of Rule 391-3-
1-.03(2)(i), that purported to eliminate the phrase ``on the draft
permit.'' In the preamble of the July 11, 2002, notice of direct final
rulemaking, EPA indicated it was removing this phrase, stating that
``Rule 391-3-1-.03(2)(i) is being amended to allow the public and EPA
notification and review of a permit application to begin upon receipt
of a permit application rather than upon completion of a draft
permit.'' 3 4 See 67 FR 45909 at 45910. However, the
submittal also included a final version of the rule that retained the
phrase ``on the draft permit'' and a hearing record showing that the
draft version of Rule 391-3-1-.03(2)(i) (eliminating the phrase ``on
the draft permit''), was never adopted by the Georgia Board of Natural
Resources, and, therefore, was never state effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA erroneously made the draft change to Rule 391-3-
1-.03(2)(i) in its online Georgia SIP compilation at https://www.epa.gov/sips-ga. EPA will correct this error in the SIP
compilation at the time of publication or shortly thereafter.
    \4\ The SIP table at 40 CFR 52.570(c) contains an error in the
entry for Rule 391-3-1-.03(2) indicating a December 26, 2001, state
effective date. EPA intends to correct this table entry to reflect a
state effective date of August 17, 1994, in the next routine update
to the materials incorporated by reference into the Georgia SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The direct final rule incorporated the final version of Rule 391-3-
1-.03 into the SIP at 40 CFR 52.570(c). Because the draft change to the
public notice requirement in Rule 391-3-1-.03(2)(i) (eliminating the
phrase ``on the draft permit''), was never state effective, EPA could
not have incorporated it into the SIP. Therefore, EPA did not approve
any change to 391-3-1-.03(2) in the July 11,

2002, direct final rule, and the preamble description of EPA's action
was erroneous.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: February 4, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022-03605 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 46588]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19007]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86799; File No. SR-ICC-2019-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule
Change Relating to the ICC Rules, ICC End-of-Day Price Discovery
Policies and Procedures, and ICC Risk Management Framework

August 28, 2019.
    On June 28, 2019, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC''), filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act (``Act'') \1\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to make certain changes to
ICC's Clearing Rules and related procedures to provide for the clearing
of credit default index swaptions. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on July 17, 2019.\3\ To
date, the Commission has not received comments on the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86358 (July 11, 2019),
84 FR 34220 (July 17, 2019) (SR-ICC-2019-007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day from the publication of notice of filing of this proposed rule
change is August 31, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission
action on the proposed rule change, in which ICC would introduce
clearing of credit default index swaptions. The Commission finds it is
appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on
the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider
ICC's proposed rule change.
    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) \5\ of the Act, and for
the reasons discussed above, the Commission designates October 15,
2019, as the date by which the Commission should either approve or
disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-ICC-2019-007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-19007 Filed 9-3-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P