[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63229-63231]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22084]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2009-0025]

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.: Application for Expansion of
Recognition

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the application of Underwriters
Laboratories, Inc., for expansion of its recognition as a Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) and presents the Agency's
preliminary finding to grant the application.

DATES: Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this
notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on
or before September 29, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments by any of the following methods:
    1. Electronically: Submit comments and attachments electronically
at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions.
    2. Facsimile: If submissions, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, commenters may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at
(202) 693-1648.
    3. Regular or express mail, hand delivery, or messenger (courier)
service: Submit comments, requests, and any attachments to the OSHA
Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2009-0025, Technical Data Center, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-2625,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY number: (877) 889-
5627). Note that security procedures may result in significant delays
in receiving comments and other written materials by regular mail.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about security
procedures concerning delivery of materials by express mail, hand
delivery, or messenger service. The hours of operation for the OSHA
Docket Office are 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    4. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
the OSHA docket number (OSHA-2009-0025). OSHA places comments and other
materials, including any personal information, in the public docket
without revision, and these materials will be available online at
http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the Agency cautions commenters
about submitting statements they do not want made available to the
public, or submitting comments that contain personal information
(either about themselves or others) such as Social Security numbers,
birth dates, and medical data.
    5. Docket: To read or download submissions or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g.,
copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download
through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection at the OSHA Docket Office. Contact the
OSHA Docket Office for assistance in locating docket submissions.
    6. Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of
the comment period on or before September 29, 2016 to the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-
1644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room N-3647, Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3655, Washington, DC 20210; phone:
(202) 693-2110 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Notice of the Application for Expansion

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is providing
notice that Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL), is applying for
expansion of its current recognition as an NRTL. UL requests the
addition of twenty-five (25) test standards to its NRTL scope of
recognition.
    OSHA recognition of an NRTL signifies that the organization meets
the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.7. Recognition is an
acknowledgment that the organization can perform independent safety
testing and certification of the specific products covered within its
scope of recognition. Each NRTL's scope of recognition includes (1) the
type of products the NRTL may test, with each type specified by its
applicable test standard; and (2) the recognized site(s) that has/have
the technical capability to perform the product-testing and product-
certification activities for test standards within the NRTL's scope.
Recognition is not a delegation or grant of government authority;
however, recognition enables employers to use products approved by the
NRTL to meet OSHA standards that require product testing and
certification.
    The Agency processes applications by an NRTL for initial
recognition and for an expansion or renewal of this recognition,
following requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix
requires that the Agency publish two notices in the Federal Register in
processing an application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the
application and provides its preliminary finding. In the second notice,
the Agency provides its final decision on the application. These
notices set forth the NRTL's scope of recognition or modifications of
that scope. OSHA maintains an informational Web page for each NRTL,
including UL, which details the NRTL's scope of recognition. These
pages are available from the OSHA Web site at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    UL currently has fifteen facilities (sites) recognized by OSHA for
product testing and certification, with its headquarters located at:
Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL
60062. A complete list of UL's scope of recognition is available at
https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/ul.html.

II. General Background on the Application

    UL submitted an application, dated June 30, 2015 (OSHA-2009-0025-
0017), to expand its recognition to include twenty-five additional test
standards. OSHA staff performed detailed analysis of the application
packet and reviewed other pertinent information. OSHA performed an on-
site review in relation to this application on April 4-5, 2016.
    Table 1 below lists the appropriate test standards found in UL's
application for expansion for testing and certification of products
under the NRTL Program.

  Table 1--Proposed List of Appropriate Test Standards for Inclusion in
                     UL's NRTL Scope of Recognition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Test standard                     Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISA 60079-0..............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 0: Equipment--
                            General Requirements.
ISA 60079-1..............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 1: Equipment
                            Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ``d''.
ISA 60079-2..............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 2: Equipment
                            Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ``p''.
ISA 60079-5..............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 5: Equipment
                            Protection by Powder Filling ``q''.
ISA 60079-6..............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 6: Equipment
                            Protection by Oil Immersion ``o''.
ISA 60079-7..............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 7: Equipment
                            Protection by Increased Safety ``e''.
ISA 60079-11.............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 11: Equipment
                            Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i''.
ISA 60079-15.............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 15: Equipment
                            Protection by Type of Protection ``n''.
ISA 60079-18.............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 18: Equipment
                            Protection by Encapsulation ``m''.
ISA 60079-26.............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 26: Equipment for
                            Use in Class I, Zone 0 Hazardous
                            (Classified) Locations.
ISA 60079-28.............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 28: Protection of
                            Equipment and Transmission Systems Using
                            Optical Radiation, Edition 1.1.
ISA 60079-31.............  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 31: Equipment
                            Dust Ignition Protection by Enclosure ``t''.
ISA 61241-0..............  Electrical Apparatus for Use in Zone 20, Zone
                            21 and Zone 22 Hazardous (Classified)
                            Locations--General Requirements.
ISA 61241-1..............  Electrical Apparatus for Use in Zone 21 and
                            Zone 22 Hazardous (Classified) Locations--
                            Protection by Enclosures ``tD''.
ISA 61241-2..............  Electrical Apparatus for Use in Zone 21 and
                            Zone 22 Hazardous (Classified) Locations--
                            Protection by Pressurization ``pD''.
ISA 61241-11.............  Electrical Apparatus for Use in Zone 20, Zone
                            21 and Zone 22 Hazardous (Classified)
                            Locations--Protection by Intrinsic Safety
                            ``iD''.
ISA 61241-18.............  Electrical Apparatus for Use in Zone 20, Zone
                            21 and Zone 22 Hazardous (Classified)
                            Locations--Protection by Encapsulation
                            ``mD''.
ANSI/UL 60079-0..........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 0: Equipment--
                            General Requirements.
ANSI/UL 60079-1..........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 1: Equipment
                            Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ``d''.
ANSI/UL 60079-5..........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 5: Equipment
                            Protection by Powder Filling ``q''.
ANSI/UL 60079-6..........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 6: Equipment
                            Protection by Oil Immersion ``o''.
ANSI/UL 60079-7..........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 7: Equipment
                            Protection by Increased Safety ``o''.
ANSI/UL 60079-11.........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 11: Equipment
                            Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i''.
ANSI/UL 60079-15.........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 15: Equipment
                            Protection by Type of Protection ``n''.
ANSI/UL 60079-18.........  Explosive Atmospheres--Part 18: Equipment
                            Protection by Encapsulation ``m''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Preliminary Findings on the Application

    UL submitted an acceptable application for expansion of its scope
of recognition. OSHA's review of the application file, and pertinent
documentation, indicate that UL can meet the requirements prescribed by
29 CFR 1910.7 for expanding its recognition to include the addition of
these twenty-five test standards for NRTL testing and certification
listed above. This preliminary finding does not constitute an interim
or temporary approval of UL's application.
    OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether UL meets the
requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of its recognition as an
NRTL. Comments should consist of pertinent written documents and
exhibits. Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request
in writing, stating the reasons for the request. Commenters must submit
the written request for an extension by the due date for comments. OSHA
will limit any extension to 10 days unless the requester justifies a
longer period. OSHA may deny a request for an extension if the request
is not adequately justified. To obtain or review copies of the exhibits
identified in this notice, as well as comments submitted to the docket,
contact the Docket Office, Room N-2625, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, at the above address. These
materials also are available online at http://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. OSHA-2009-0025.
    OSHA staff will review all comments to the docket submitted in a
timely manner and, after addressing the issues raised by these
comments, will recommend to the Assistant Secretary for Occupational
Safety and Health whether to grant UL's application for expansion of
its scope of recognition. The Assistant Secretary will make the final
decision on granting the application. In making this decision, the
Assistant Secretary may undertake other proceedings prescribed in
Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7.
    OSHA will publish a public notice of its final decision in the
Federal Register.

Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice.
Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25,
2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on September 9, 2016.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2016-22084 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6913-6917]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02427]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94116; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2022-010]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Update the Obvious Error Rule

February 1, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''), and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, notice is hereby given that on
January 26, 2022, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, 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.

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Options 3, Section 20 (Nullification
and Adjustment of Options Transactions including Obvious Errors).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rules, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend Options 3,
Section 20 (Nullification and Adjustment of Options Transactions
including Obvious Errors) to improve the operation of the Rule.
Following discussions with other exchanges and a cross-section of
industry participants and in coordination with the Listed Options
Market Structure Working Group (``LOMSWG'') (collectively, the
``Industry Working Group''), the Exchange proposes: (1) To amend
section (b)(3) of the Rule to permit the Exchange to determine the
Theoretical Price of a Customer option transaction in a wide market so
long as a narrow market exists at any point during the 10-second period
after an opening or re-opening; and (2) to amend section (c)(4)(B) of
the Rule to adjust, rather than nullify, Customer transactions in
Obvious Error situations, provided the adjustment does not violate the
limit price. The foregoing changes are based on the recently amended
rules of NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Arca'').\1\ Further, the Exchange proposes
to make non-substantive, corrective changes. Each change is discussed
in detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Arca Rule 6.87-O. See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 93818 (December 17, 2021), 86 FR 73009 (December 23,
2021) (SR-NYSEArca-2021-91) (Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change
to Amend Rule 6.87-O).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Change to Section (b)(3)
    Options 3, Section 20 has been part of various harmonization
efforts by the Industry Working Group.\2\ These efforts have often
centered around the Theoretical Price for which an options transaction
should be compared to determine whether an Obvious Error has occurred.
For instance, all options exchanges have adopted language comparable to
Supplementary Material .03,\3\ which explains how an exchange is to
determine Theoretical Price at the open, when there are no valid
quotes, and when there is a wide quote. This includes at times the use
of a singular third-party vendor, known as a TP Provider (currently
CBOE Livevol, LLC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74915 (May 8,
2015), 80 FR 27801 (May 14, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-054).
    \3\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81323 (August
7, 2017), 82 FR 37639 (August 11, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2017-078).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, section (b)(3) of Options 3, Section 20 was previously
harmonized across all options exchanges to handle situations where
executions occur in markets that are wide (as set forth in the
rule).\4\ Under that section, the Exchange determines the Theoretical
Price if the NBBO for the subject series is wide immediately before
execution and a narrow market (as set forth in the rule) existed
``during the 10 seconds prior to the transaction.'' The rule goes on to

clarify that, should there be no narrow quotes ``during the 10 seconds
prior to the transaction,'' the Theoretical Price for the affected
series is the NBBO that existed at the time of execution (regardless of
its width).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74915 (May 8,
2015), 80 FR 27801 (May 14, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-054).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In recent discussions, the Industry Working Group has identified
proposed changes to section (b)(3) of Options 3, Section 20 that would
improve the Rule's functioning. Currently, section (b)(3) does not
permit the Exchange to determine the Theoretical Price unless there is
a narrow quote 10 seconds prior to the transaction. However, in the
first seconds of trading, there is no 10-second period ``prior to the
transaction.'' Further, the Industry Working Group has observed that
prices in certain series can be disjointed at the start of trading.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to provide additional protections to
trading in certain circumstances immediately after the opening before
liquidity has had a chance to enter the market. The Exchange proposes
to amend section (b)(3) to allow the Exchange to determine the
Theoretical Price in a wide market so long as a narrow market exists at
any point during the 10-second period after an opening or reopening.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes that the existing text of
section (b)(3) would become sub-section (A). The Exchange proposes to
add the following heading and text as sub-section (B):

    (B) Customer Transactions Occurring Within 10 Seconds or Less
After an Opening or Re-Opening:
    (i) The Exchange will determine the Theoretical Price if the
bid/ask differential of the NBB and NBO for the affected series just
prior to the Customer's erroneous transaction was equal to or
greater than the Minimum Amount set forth in paragraph (A) above and
there was a bid/ask differential less than the Minimum Amount during
the 10 seconds prior to the transaction.
    (ii) If there was no bid/ask differential less than the Minimum
Amount during the 10 seconds prior to the transaction, then the
Exchange will determine the Theoretical Price if the bid/ask
differential of the NBB and NBO for the affected series just prior
to the Customer's erroneous transaction was equal to or greater than
the Minimum Amount set forth in paragraph (A) above and there was a
bid/ask differential less than the Minimum Amount anytime during the
10 seconds after an opening or re-opening.
    (iii) If there was no bid/ask differential less than the Minimum
Amount during the 10 seconds following an Opening or Re-Opening,
then the Theoretical Price of an option series is the last NBB or
NBO just prior to the Customer transaction in question, as set forth
in paragraph (b) above.
    (iv) Customer transactions occurring more than 10 seconds after
an opening or re-opening are subject to paragraph (A) above.

    The following examples illustrate the functioning of the proposed
rule change. Consider that the NBBO of a series opens as $0.01 at
$4.00. A marketable limit order to buy one contract arrives one second
later and is executed at $4.00. In the third second of trading, the
NBBO narrows from $0.01 at $4.00 to $2.00 at $2.10. While the execution
occurred in a market with wide widths, there was no tight market within
the 10 seconds prior to execution. Accordingly, under the current rule,
the trade would not qualify for obvious error review, in part due to
the fact that there was only a single second of trading before the
execution. Under the proposal, since a tight market existed at some
point in the first 10 seconds of trading (i.e., in the third second),
the Exchange would be able to determine the Theoretical Price as
provided in Supplementary Material .03.
    As another example, the NBBO for a series opens as $0.01 at $4.00.
In the seventh second of trading, a marketable limit order is received
to buy one contract and is executed at $4.00. Five seconds later (i.e.,
in the twelfth second of trading), the NBBO narrows from $0.01 at $4.00
to $2.00 at $2.10. While the execution occurred in a market with wide
widths, there was no tight market within 10 seconds prior to execution.
Accordingly, under the current rule, the trade would not qualify for
obvious error review. Under the proposal, since no tight market existed
at any point during the first 10 seconds of trading (i.e., the narrow
market occurred in the twelfth second), the trade would not qualify for
obvious error review.
    The proposed rule change would also better harmonize section (b)(3)
with section (b)(1) of the Rule. Under section (b)(1), the Exchange is
permitted to determine the Theoretical Price for transactions occurring
as part of the Opening Process (as defined in Options 3, Section 8) if
there is no NBB or NBO for the affected series just prior to the
erroneous transaction. However, under the current version of section
(b)(3), a transaction during regular trading hours could occur in the
same wide market but the Exchange would not be permitted to determine
the Theoretical Price. Consider an example where one second after the
Exchange opens a selected series, the NBBO is $1.00 at $5.00. At
9:30:03, a customer submits a marketable buy order to the Exchange and
pays $5.00. At 9:30:03, a different exchange runs an opening auction
that results in a customer paying $5.00 for the same selected series.
At 9:30:06, the NBBO changes from $1.00 at $5.00 to $1.35 at $1.45.
Under the current version of section (b)(3), the Exchange would not be
able to determine the Theoretical Price for the trade occurring during
regular trading hours. However, the trade on the other exchange could
be submitted for review under (b)(1) and that exchange would be able to
determine the Theoretical Price. If the proposed change to section
(b)(3) were approved, both of the trades occurring at 9:30:03 (on the
Exchange during regular trading and on another exchange via auction)
would also be entitled to the same review regarding the same
Theoretical Price based upon the same time.
    The proposal would not change any obvious error review beyond the
first 10 seconds of an opening or re-opening.
Proposed Change to Section (c)(4)(B)
    The Exchange proposes to amend section (c)(4)(B)--the ``Adjust or
Bust'' rule for Customer transactions in Obvious Error situations--to
adjust rather than nullify such orders, provided the adjustment does
not violate the Customer's limit price. Currently, the Rule provides
that in Obvious Error situations, transactions involving non-Customers
should be adjusted, while transactions involving Customers are
nullified, unless a certain condition applies.\5\ The Industry Working
Group has concluded that the treatment of these transactions should be
harmonized under the Rule, such that transactions involving Customers
may benefit from adjustment, just as non-Customer transactions
currently do, except where such adjustment would violate the Customer's
limit price; in that instance, the trade would be nullified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Specifically, the current Rule provides at section (c)(4)(C)
that if a Participant has 200 or more Customer transactions under
review concurrently and the orders resulting in such transactions
were submitted during the course of 2 minutes or less, where at
least one party to the Obvious Error is a non-Customer, then the
Exchange will apply the non-Customer adjustment criteria found in
section (c)(4)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend the text of section
(c)(4)(B) to add that where at least one party to the Obvious Error is
a Customer, ``the execution price of the transaction will be adjusted
by the Official pursuant to the table immediately above. Any Customer
Obvious Error exceeding 50 contracts will be subject to the Size
Adjustment Modifier defined in sub-paragraph (a)(4) above. However, if
such adjustment(s) would result in an execution price higher (for buy
transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's
limit price,'' the trade will be nullified. The ``table immediately
above'' referenced in

the proposed text refers to the table at current Section (c)(4)(A),
which provides for the adjustment of prices a specified amount away
from the Theoretical Price, rather than adjusting the Theoretical
Price.
Non-Substantive Amendments
    The Exchange proposes non-substantive changes to the table in
Options 3, Section 20(d)(3). Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
amend the Theoretical Price (TP) column as follows:
Theoretical Price (TP)
Below $2.00
$2.00 to $5.00
Above $5.00 to $10.00
Above $10.00 to $20.00
Above $20.00 to $50.00
Above $50.00 to $100.00
Above $100.00

The proposed changes are corrective in nature and aligns to the other
options exchanges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., Phlx Options 3, Section 20(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Date
    The proposed rule change will become operative no sooner than six
months following the approval of the Arca proposal to coincide with
implementation on other options exchanges.\7\ The Exchange will
announce the effective date of the proposed changes in an alert
distributed to all Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, 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 because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to section (b)(3) of
the Rule would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
protect investors and the public interest because it provides a method
for addressing Obvious Error Customer transactions that occur in a wide
market at the opening of trading. Generally, a wide market is an
indication of a lack of liquidity in the market such that the market is
unreliable. Current section (b)(3) recognizes that a persistently wide
quote (i.e., more than 10 seconds) should be considered the reliable
market regardless of its width, but does not address transactions that
occur in a wide market in the first seconds of trading, where there is
no preceding 10-second period to reference. Accordingly, in the first
10 seconds of trading, there is no opportunity for a wide quote to have
persisted for a sufficiently lengthy period such that the market should
consider it a reliable market for the purposes of determining an
Obvious Error transaction.
    The proposed change would rectify this disparity and permit the
Exchange to consider whether a narrow quote is present at any time
during the 10-second period after an opening or re-opening. The
presence of such a narrow quote would indicate that the market has
gained sufficient liquidity and that the previous wide market was
unreliable, such that it would be appropriate for the Exchange to
determine the Theoretical Price of an Obvious Error transaction. In
this way, the proposed rule harmonizes the treatment of Customer
transactions that execute in an unreliable market at any point of the
trading day, by making them uniformly subject to Exchange determination
of the Theoretical Price.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to section (c)(4)(B)
of the Rule would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and enhance the
protection of investors by harmonizing the treatment of non-Customer
transactions and Customer transactions under the Rule. Under the
current Rule, Obvious Error situations involving non-Customer
transactions are adjusted, while those involving Customer transactions
are generally nullified, unless they meet the additional requirements
of section (c)(4)(C) (i.e., where a Participant has 200 or more
Customer transactions under review concurrently and the orders
resulting in such transactions were submitted during the course of 2
minutes or less). The proposal would harmonize the treatment of non-
Customer and Customer transactions by providing for the adjustment of
all such transactions, except where such adjustment would violate the
Customer's limit price.
    When it proposed the current rule in 2015, the Exchange believed
there were sound reasons for treating non-Customer transactions and
Customer transactions differently. At the time, the Exchange stated its
belief that ``Customers are not necessarily immersed in the day-to-day
trading of the markets, are less likely to be watching trading activity
in a particular option throughout the day, and may have limited funds
in their trading accounts,'' and that nullifying Obvious Error
transactions involving Customers would give Customers ``greater
protections'' than adjusting such transactions by eliminating the
possibility that a Customer's order will be adjusted to a significantly
different price. The Exchange also noted its belief that ``Customers
are . . . less likely to have engaged in significant hedging or other
trading activity based on earlier transactions, and thus, are less in
need of maintaining a position at an adjusted price than non-
Customers.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74915 (May 8,
2015), 80 FR 27801 (May 14, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-054).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Those assumptions about Customer trading and hedging activity no
longer hold. The Exchange and the Industry Working Group believe that
over the course of the last five years, Customers that use options have
become more sophisticated, as retail broker-dealers have enhanced the
trading tools available. Pursuant to OCC data, volumes clearing in the
Customer range have expanded from 12,022,163 ADV in 2015 to 35,081,130
ADV in 2021. This increase in trading activity underscores the greater
understanding of options by Customers as a trading tool and its use in
the markets. Customers who trade options today largely are more
educated, have better trading tools, and have better access to
financial news than any time prior.\11\ The proposed rule would extend
the hedging protections currently enjoyed by non-Customers to
Customers, by allowing them to maintain an option position at an
adjusted price, which would in turn prevent a cascading effect by
maintaining the hedge relationship between the option transaction and
any other transactions in a related security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See ``Retail Traders Adopt Options En Masse'' by Dan Raju,
available at https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/retail-traders-adopt-options-en-masse-2020-12-08.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that extending such hedging protections to
Customer transactions would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and
enhance the protection of investors by providing greater certainty of
execution for all participants to options transactions. Under the
current Rule, a Customer that believes its transaction was executed
pursuant to an Obvious Error may be disincentivized from

submitting the transaction for review, since during the review process,
the Customer would be uncertain whether the trade would be nullified,
and if so, whether market conditions would still permit the opportunity
to execute a related order at a better price after the nullification
ruling is finalized. In contrast, under the proposed rule, the Customer
would know that the only likely outcomes of submitting a trade to
Obvious Error review would be that the trade would stand or be re-
executed at a better price; the trade would only be nullified if the
adjustment would violate the order's limit. Similarly, under the
current Rule, during the review period, a market maker who traded
contra to the Customer would be uncertain if it should retain any
position executed to hedge the original trade, or attempt to unwind it,
possibly at a significant loss. Under the proposed rule change, this
uncertainty is largely eliminated, and the question would be whether
the already-executed and hedged trade would be adjusted to a better
price for the Customer, or if it would stand as originally executed. In
this way, the proposed rule enhances the protection of investors and
removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system.
    The proposed rule also addresses the concern the Exchange cited in
its 2015 filing that adjusting, rather than nullifying, Customer
transactions could lead to a Customer's order being adjusted to a
significantly different price. To address that concern, the proposed
rule would prevent Customer transactions from being adjusted to a price
that violates the order's limit; if the adjustment would violate a
Customer's limit, the trade would instead be nullified. The Exchange
believes it is in the best interest of investors to expand the
availability of adjustments to Customer transactions in all Obvious
Error situations except where the adjustment would violate the
Customer's limit price.
    Further, the Exchange believes that, with respect to such proposed
adjustments to Customer transactions, it is appropriate to use the same
form of adjustment as is currently in place with respect to non-
Customer transactions as laid out in the table in section (c)(4)(A).
That is, the Exchange believes that it is appropriate to adjust to
prices a specified amount away from the Theoretical Price rather than
to adjust the Theoretical Price, even though the Exchange has
determined a given trade to be erroneous in nature, because the parties
in question should have had some expectation of execution at the price
or prices submitted. Also, it is common that by the time it is
determined that an Obvious Error has occurred, additional hedging and
trading activity has already occurred based on the executions that
previously happened. The Exchange believes that providing an adjustment
to the Theoretical Price in all cases would not appropriately
incentivize market participants to maintain appropriate controls to
avoid potential errors, while adjusting to prices a specified amount
away from the Theoretical Price would incentivize such behavior.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is not designed to permit
unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
The proposed change to section (b)(3) would apply to all instances of a
wide market occurring within the first 10 seconds of trading followed
by a narrow market at any point in the subsequent 10-second period,
regardless of the types of market participants involved in such
transactions. The proposed change to section (c)(4)(B) would harmonize
the treatment of Obvious Error transactions involving Customers and
non-Customers, no matter what type of market participants those parties
may be.
    Lastly, the Exchange believes that the non-substantive corrections
to the chart in Options 3, Section 20(d)(3) is consistent with the Act
because it will bring greater transparency to the Rulebook and reduce
potential confusion by investors.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange anticipates that
the other options exchanges will adopt substantively similar proposals,
such that there would be no burden on intermarket competition from the
Exchange's proposal. Accordingly, the proposed change is not meant to
affect competition among the options exchanges. For these reasons, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment and does not impose any undue burden on
intermarket competition.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \12\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-010 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-010. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of 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-NASDAQ-2022-010 and should be submitted
on or before February 28, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-02427 Filed 2-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 192 (Thursday, October 7, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55685-55688]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21932]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0782; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00915-A;
Amendment 39-21732; AD 2021-19-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; AERO Sp. z o.o. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
AERO Sp. z o.o. (AERO) Model AT-3R100 airplanes with an ELPROP 3-1-1P
propeller. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of another country
to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI identifies the unsafe condition as cracks in the propeller hub.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 27, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 27,
2021.

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by November 22, 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 final rule, contact AERO
AT Sp. z o.o., Dzia[lstrok] Serwisu, ul. Wa[lstrok]
Miedzeszy[nacute]ski 844, 03-942 Warszawa, Poland; phone: +48 22 616 20
exception occurred on : 2021-21932.htm
exception occurred on : 2021-21932.htm
87; fax: +48 22 617 85 28; email: 3.com">[email protected]3.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 (816)
329-4148. It is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0782.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0782; 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 final rule, the
MCAI, any comments received, and other information. The street address
for the Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Rudolph, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International
Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106; phone:
(816) 329-4059; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments
about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0782 and Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-00915-A'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, 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
this final rule 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 final rule.

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 AD 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 AD, 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 AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent Doug
Rudolph, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, MO 64106. 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 European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued
EASA AD 2021-0189-E, dated August 9, 2021 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to address an unsafe condition on ELPROP 3-1-1P
propellers that are installed on, but not limited to, AERO Models AT-
3R100 and AT-4LSA airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences have been reported of finding cracks on the
propeller hub during service inspections. Cracks were detected on
the propeller hub surface, near the blade attachment bolt holes and
in the blade root area.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
loss of the propeller blade with consequent loss of control of the
aeroplane.
    To address this unsafe condition, AERO issued [mandatory service
bulletin] MSB EPB.01.B to provide inspection instructions for
certain propellers, and EASA issued Emergency AD 2009-0134-E to
require repetitive detailed visual inspections of those propeller
hubs and, depending on findings, replacement.
    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, additional occurrences were
reported of finding propeller hub cracks. Prompted by these
findings, AERO issued MSB EPB.02.B applicable to propellers with s/n
3E.089 and higher.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA Emergency AD 2009-0134-E, which is superseded,
and expands the Applicability to all propeller s/n.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0782.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed AERO Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) EPB.01.B,
Issue 1, dated May 14, 2009, which applies to propellers with serial
numbers 3E.001 through 3E.088; and AERO MSB EPB.02.B, Issue 1, dated
July 20, 2021, which applies to propellers with serial numbers 3E.089
and larger. This service information specifies procedures for
inspecting the propeller hub for cracks and contacting the design
approval holder for corrective action. 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
ADDRESSES.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority,
it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is issuing this AD
because it has determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information already described.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI

    The MCAI applies to the Model AT-4LSA airplane, and this AD does
not

because it does not have an FAA type certificate.

Justification for Immediate Adoption and Determination of the Effective
Date

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 551 et seq.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and
comment procedures for rules when the agency, for ``good cause,'' finds
that those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to
the public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking
comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA
authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days,
upon a finding of good cause.
    The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
foregoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
there are no airplanes currently on the U.S. registry and thus, it is
unlikely that the FAA will receive any adverse comments or useful
information about this AD from U.S. operators. Accordingly, notice and
opportunity for prior public comment are unnecessary pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
    In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days,
for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forego notice and
comment.

Costs of Compliance

    There are currently no affected airplanes on the U.S. registry. In
the event an affected airplane becomes a U.S. registered airplane, the
following is an estimate of the costs to comply with this AD.
    The FAA estimates that it would take .5 work-hour per airplane to
comply with the inspection requirement in this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, the FAA estimates
the cost of this AD to be $42.50 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    Corrective action if cracks are found would vary significantly from
airplane to airplane. Therefore, the FAA is unable to estimate what the
cost of corrective action would be per airplane.

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 Flexibility Act

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because FAA has determined
that it has good cause to adopt this rule without prior notice and
comment, RFA analysis is not required.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866, and
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2021-19-14 AERO Sp. z o.o.: Amendment 39-21732; Docket No. FAA-2021-
0782; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00915-A.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective October 27, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to AERO Sp. z o.o. Model AT-3R100 airplanes, all
serial numbers, certificated in any category, with an ELPROP 3-1-1P
propeller installed.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 6114, Propeller Hub
Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe condition as cracks in the
propeller hub. The FAA is issuing this AD to detect and correct
cracked propeller hubs, which could lead to loss of the propeller
blade with consequent loss of airplane control.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Replacement

    (1) Before further flight after the effective date of this AD
and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 50 hours time-in-service,
inspect the propeller hub for cracks in accordance with paragraphs
5.1, 5.2, and 5.4 of the Instructions in AERO Sp. z o.o Mandatory
Service Bulletin EPB.01.B, Issue 1, dated May 14, 2009; or AERO Sp.
z o.o Mandatory Service Bulletin EPB.02.B, Issue 1, dated July 20,
2021, as applicable to your propeller, except you are not required
to contact the manufacturer. If any crack or other discrepancy is
found, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the
Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, or the European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
    (2) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install an
ELPROP 3-1-1P propeller on any airplane unless the propeller hub has
passed the inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation 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 International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Doug Rudolph,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301,
Kansas City, MO 64106; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to EASA AD 2021-0189-E, dated August 9, 2021, for more
information. You may examine the EASA AD in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2021-0782.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference 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 the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) AERO Sp. z o.o. Mandatory Service Bulletin EPB.01.B, Issue
1, dated May 14, 2009.
    (ii) AERO Sp. z o.o. Mandatory Service Bulletin EPB.02.B, Issue
1, dated July 20, 2021.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact AERO
AT Sp. z o.o., Dzia[lstrok] Serwisu, ul. Wa[lstrok]
Miedzeszy[nacute]ski 844, 03-942 Warszawa, Poland; phone: +48 22 616
exception occurred on : 2021-21932.htm
exception occurred on : 2021-21932.htm
20 87; fax: +48 22 617 85 28; email: 3.com">[email protected]3.com.
    (4) 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>. It is also
available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0782.
    (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, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on September 7, 2021.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-21932 Filed 10-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P