[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17082-17084]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6584]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2001-10486]

Standards for Living Organisms in Ships' Ballast Water Discharged
in U.S. Waters: Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Coast Guard announces the availability of a final
programmatic environmental impact statement (FPEIS) for the rulemaking
entitled ``Standards for Living Organisms in Ships' Ballast Water
Discharged in U.S. Waters'' (Docket No. USCG-2001-10486). This FPEIS
provides an assessment of the potential

environmental impacts associated with the establishment of a ballast
water discharge standard for the allowable concentration of living
organisms in ships' ballast water discharged in waters of the United
States. The standard will be used to approve ballast water management
methods that are effective in preventing or reducing the introduction
of nonindigenous species via discharged ballast water into waters of
the United States.

DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before April 23,
2012 or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2001-10486 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Mr. Greg Kirkbride, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (202)
372-1479, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Submitting comments: If you submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this notice (USCG-2001-10486) and provide a reason
for each suggestion or recommendation. All comments received will be
posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have provided. You may submit your
comments and material online, or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. We recommend that you include your
name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in
the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have
questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. Insert ``USCG-2001-10486'' in the Keyword box,
click ``Search'', and then click on the balloon shape in the Actions
column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit
them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable
for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.
    Viewing the comments and FPEIS: To view the comments and the FPEIS,
go to http://www.regulations.gov, enter the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2001-10486) in the Keyword box, and click ``Search.''
If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the docket
online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
    Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a
Privacy Act system of records notice regarding our public dockets in
the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Basis and Purpose

    Under the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act
of 1990 (NANPCA) as reauthorized and amended in the National Invasive
Species Act of 1996 (NISA), the United States Coast Guard (USCG) is the
lead federal agency for implementing regulations to reduce or prevent
the introduction of nonindigenous species (NIS) via shipping activities
in waters of the United States.
    In order to give effect to this statutory directive, on September
26, 2003, the USCG published a Notice of Intent with Request for
Comments to seek public and agency input to develop the scope of this
FPEIS on its proposed action to establish a ballast water discharge
standard (BWDS) that would be effective in preventing the introduction
and spread of NIS via discharged ballast water (68 FR 55559).
    On July 28, 2004 the USCG published a final rule on a mandatory
ballast water management (BWM) program for all waters of the United
States, which was authorized under NISA (69 FR 44952). This program is
currently in effect and requires vessels that enter U.S. waters after
operating outside the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to use one of
the following BWM practices: Conduct mid-ocean Ballast Water Exchange
(BWE) 200 nautical miles from any shore, retain ballast water onboard,
or use a USCG-approved alternative method. At the time the final rule
was published, BWE and retention of ballast water were the only
available ballast water management methods. On August 28, 2009, the
Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled
``Standards for Living Organisms in Ships' Ballast Water Discharged in
U.S. Waters'' in the Federal Register (74 FR 44632) which proposed to
establish a BWDS.
    The purpose of the proposed action in the FPEIS is for the USCG to
establish, via a rulemaking, a BWDS that is practicable, enforceable,
and which would be used to approve ballast water management methods,
including development and approval of shipboard BWM systems. The need
for the action is to prevent or reduce the introduction of NIS via
discharged ballast water from vessels entering waters of the United
States after operating outside the U.S. EEZ, and from vessels operating
within the U.S. EEZ.
    The FPEIS evaluates the impacts to the environment from a range of
alternative ballast water discharge standards. The BWDS will be used to
approve ballast water management methods that are effective in
preventing or reducing the introduction of NIS via discharged ballast
water. The USCG believes that to prevent or reduce the introduction of
NIS, the preferred alternative must be biologically protective,
scientifically sound, practicable in implementation, and enforceable.
    Ballast water is taken on by a vessel to increase the water draft,
change the trim, regulate the stability, or maintain stress loads
within acceptable operational limits. The term NIS refers to organisms
found outside of their native or historical range. In cases where they
invade ecosystems, NIS may alter aquatic and marine ecosystems and

biodiversity, impact commercial and recreational fisheries, cause
infrastructure damage, contribute to potential risks to human health,
and create economic impacts. Ballast water discharge is a major pathway
for NIS introduction from vessels operating in or entering waters of
the United States.
    The FPEIS identifies and assesses reasonable alternatives for the
proposed action, including the No Action Alternative, addresses the
likely consequences of a BWDS on the human and natural environment, and
presents potential mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse
effects upon the quality of the human and natural environment. In the
FPEIS, the USCG analyzed five alternatives for a BWDS. These
alternatives are summarized as follows:
    Alternative 1--No Action Alternative: Under the No Action
Alternative, the USCG would not establish a BWDS, but would continue
the existing BWM program. As currently in force, the BWM program,
established in 2004, directs ships to conduct mid-ocean BWE, retain
ballast water onboard, or use an environmentally sound ballast water
management method approved by the USCG.
    Alternatives 2-4--Ballast Water Discharge Concentrations: These
alternatives differ from each other in the concentration and size
classes of organisms that would be permitted and the standard is
progressively more stringent from Alternative 2 to Alternative 4.
Alternative 2 provides for a protective standard of less than 10
organisms per cubic meter for organisms larger than 50 microns in
minimum dimension; and less than 10 organisms per milliliter for
organisms between 10 and 50 microns in minimum dimension. Alternative 3
provides for a protective standard of less than 1 organism per cubic
meter for organisms larger than 50 microns in minimum dimension; and
less than 1 organism per milliliter for organisms between 10 and 50
microns in minimum dimension. Alternative 4 provides for a protective
standard of less than 0.1 organisms per cubic meter for organisms
larger than 50 microns in minimum dimension; and less than 0.1
organisms per milliliter for organisms between 10 and 50 microns in
minimum dimension.
    Alternative 5--Sterilization: Alternative 5 would require the
removal or inactivation of all living membrane-bound organisms
(including bacteria and some viruses) larger than 0.1 microns.
    Alternative 2 has been selected as the USCG's preferred
alternative.
    The USCG will file the FPEIS with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), as required. The EPA will then publish an NOA in the
Federal Register, which reports all environmental impact statements
filed with the EPA during the preceding week. The publication of the
EPA NOA initiates a 30-day public review period. The timing of
publication of this NOA in the Federal Register will be coordinated
with the EPA NOA. By reason of this being a rulemaking action under the
Administrative Procedure Act, the Final Rule constitutes the Record of
Decision and it is being published this same date, consistent with 40
CFR 1506.10(b).

    Dated: March 9, 2012.
J. G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012-6584 Filed 3-16-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 3760]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01460]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4352-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001]

Pueblo of Acoma; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the Pueblo of Acoma (FEMA-4352-DR), dated December 20,
2017, and related determinations.

DATES:  The declaration was issued December 20, 2017.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated December 20, 2017, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage to the lands associated with
the Pueblo of Acoma resulting from severe storms and flooding during
the period of October 4-6, 2017, is of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists for the Pueblo of Acoma.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance and Hazard
Mitigation for the Pueblo of Acoma. Direct Federal assistance is
authorized. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance
be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act
for Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the
eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage
under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for
Debris Removal implemented pursuant to Section 428 of the Stafford
Act.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Gerard Stolar, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas have been designated as adversely affected by
this major disaster:

    The Pueblo of Acoma for Public Assistance.
    The Pueblo of Acoma is eligible to apply for assistance under
the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

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

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-01460 Filed 1-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 209 (Wednesday, October 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64434-64436]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25668]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73414; File No. SR-BATS-2014-050]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to
Fees for Use of BATS Exchange, Inc.

October 23, 2014.
    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 October 16, 2014, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BATS
'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
a proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit

comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fees applicable to
securities listed on the Exchange pursuant to BATS Rule 14.13. Changes
to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal are effective upon
filing.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com/, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On August 30, 2011, the Exchange received approval of rules
applicable to the qualification, listing, and delisting of companies on
the Exchange,\3\ which it modified on February 8, 2012 in order to
adopt pricing for the listing of exchange traded products (``ETPs'' \4\
on the Exchange,\5\ which it subsequently modified again on June 4,
2014.\6\ The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 14.13, entitled ``Company
Listing Fees'' to eliminate the annual fees for ETPs that are not
participating in the competitive liquidity provider program under
Interpretation and Policy .02 to Rule 11.8 (the ``CLP Program'').\7\
The Exchange is not proposing to eliminate the $5,000 application fee
for ETPs. For ETPs that are participating in the CLP Program, the
Exchange proposes that the annual fees continue to be $35,000. In
conjunction with the proposed elimination of annual fees for ETPs
listed on the Exchange, the Exchange is also planning to file a
separate proposal that will eliminate enhanced rebates for lead market
makers (``LMMs'') in LMM Securities \8\ under the Exchange's LMM
Program,\9\ which was in part subsidized by the annual listing fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65225 (August 30,
2011) 76 FR 55148 (September 6, 2011) (SR-BATS-2011-018).
    \4\ As defined in BATS Rule 11.8(e)(1)(A), the term ``ETP''
means any security listed pursuant to Exchange Rule 14.11.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66422 (February 17,
2012) 77 FR 11179 (February 24, 2012) (SR-BATS-2012-010).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72377 (June 12,
2014) 79 FR 34822 (June 18, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-024).
    \7\ The Exchange notes that the CLP Program referenced in this
proposal will be discontinued as of December 31, 2014. The
references to the CLP Program herein do not apply to the Exchange's
Supplemental CLP Program for ETPs, which is defined in
Interpretation and Policy .03 to Rule 11.8.
    \8\ As defined in Rule 11.8(e)(1)(C), LMM Security means an ETP
that has an LMM.
    \9\ See BATS Rule 11.8(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Rule 14.13(b)(2)(C) provides that the annual fee for an
ETP that is not participating in the CLP Program is charged quarterly
on a tiered basis based on the ETP's consolidated average daily volume
(the ``CADV''), as defined below, during the quarter preceding the
billing date. Specifically, the Exchange charges issuers of ETPs on a
quarterly basis as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Quarterly    Annual
                       CADV                            fee         fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0-10,000.........................................       $1,250    $5,000
10,001-40,000....................................        2,000     8,000
40,001-80,000....................................        3,000    12,000
80,001-150,000...................................        3,750    15,000
150,001-400,000..................................        4,500    18,000
Greater than 400,000.............................        (\1\)     (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Free.

    As mentioned above, the Exchange is proposing to eliminate all
annual fees for ETPs that are not participating in the CLP Program,
which includes the fees associated with each of the CADV tiers above.
Specifically, the Exchange is proposing that issuers of each class of
securities that is a domestic or foreign issue listed on the Exchange
as an ETP that is not currently participating in the CLP Program will
pay no annual fee to the Exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\10\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among issuers and it does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to eliminate all annual listing fees for
ETPs listed on the Exchange, except for those ETPs that are
participating in the CLP Program, which will significantly reduce
listing fees for most new issuers and transfer listings in ETPs (with
the exception of ETPs with a CADV greater than 400,000 for which there
already was no annual listing fee), which the Exchange believes is
equitable, reasonable, and non-discriminatory because the annual fee
for listings will be applied equally to all ETPs newly listed on the
Exchange. Further, there are currently no ETPs listed on the Exchange
that are receiving the pricing for having a CADV of greater than
400,000. The Exchange also believes that continuing to charge $35,000
annually for ETPs that continue to participate in the CLP Program is
equitable and non-discriminatory because the costs associated with
operating the CLP Program are significantly higher than the anticipated
costs associated with the listing of ETPs on the Exchange that are not
participating in the CLP Program and are generally designed to at least
in part offset the costs to the Exchange to operate the CLP Program.
Further, ETPs participating in the CLP Program may opt out of the CLP
Program at any time in order to be eligible for having no annual
listing fees.
    Based on the foregoing, the Exchange believes that its proposed
elimination of annual fees for ETPs that are not participating in the
CLP Program is a reasonable, equitable, and non-discriminatory
allocation of fees to issuers.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. With
respect to the proposed new pricing for the listing of ETPs, the
Exchange does not believe that the changes burden competition, but
instead, enhance competition, as it is intended to increase the
competitiveness of the Exchange's listings program by allowing the

Exchange to offer ETPs the ability to list on the Exchange without
having to pay any annual fees. As such, the proposal is a competitive
proposal that is intended to attract additional ETP listings, which
will, in turn, benefit the Exchange and all other BATS-listed ETPs.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder\13\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-BATS-2014-050 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-BATS-2014-050. 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-BATS-2014-050,
and should be submitted on or before November 19, 2014.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-25668 Filed 10-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11269-11273]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05073]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82827; File No. SR-PEARL-2018-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange
Rule 402, Criteria for Underlying Securities

March 8, 2018.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 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 February 22, 2018, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX
PEARL'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change'') a proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend Exchange Rule 402,
Criteria for Underlying Securities, to modify the criteria for listing
an option on an underlying covered security.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 402, Criteria for
Underlying Securities, to modify the criteria for listing options on an
underlying security as defined in Section 18(b)(1)(A) of the Securities
Act of 1933 (hereinafter ``covered security'' or ``covered
securities''). This is a competitive filing that is based on a proposal
recently submitted by Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Nasdaq Phlx'') and approved by
the Commission.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82474 (January 9,
2018), 83 FR 2240 (January 16, 2018) (Order Approving SR-Phlx-2017-
75).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange proposes to modify Rule 402(b)(5)(i) to
permit the listing of an option on an underlying covered security that
has a market price of at least $3.00 per share for the previous three
(3) consecutive business days preceding the date on which the Exchange
submits a certificate to the Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') for
listing and trading. The Exchange does not intend to amend any other
criteria for listing options on an underlying security in Rule 402.
    Currently the underlying covered security must have a closing
market

price of $3.00 per share for the previous five (5) consecutive business
days preceding the date on which the Exchange submits a listing
certificate to OCC. In the proposed amendment, the market price will
still be measured by the closing price reported in the primary market
in which the underlying covered security is traded, but the measurement
will be the price over the prior three (3) consecutive business day
period preceding the submission of the listing certificate to OCC,
instead of the prior five (5) business day period.
    The Exchange acknowledges that the Options Listing Procedures Plan
\4\ requires that the listing certificate be provided to OCC no earlier
than 12:01 a.m. and no later than 11:00 a.m. (Chicago time) on the
trading day prior to the day on which trading is to begin.\5\ The
proposed amendment will still comport with that requirement. For
example, if an initial public offering (``IPO'') occurs at 11:00 a.m.
on Monday, the earliest date the Exchange could submit its listing
certificate to OCC would be on Thursday by 12:01 a.m. (Chicago time),
with the market price determined by the closing price over the three-
day period from Monday through Wednesday. The option on the IPO would
then be eligible for trading on the Exchange on Friday. The proposed
amendment would essentially enable options trading within four (4)
business days of an IPO becoming available instead of six (6) business
days (five (5) consecutive days plus the day the listing certificate is
submitted to OCC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Plan for the Purpose of Developing and Implementing
Procedures Designed to Facilitate the Listing and Trading of
Standardized Options Submitted Pursuant to Section 11a(2)(3)(B) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (a/k/a the Options Listing
Procedures Plan (``OLPP'')) is a national market system plan that,
among other things, sets forth procedures governing the listing of
new options series. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44521
(July 6, 2001), 66 FR 36809 (July 13, 2001) (Order approving OLPP).
The sponsors of OLPP include OCC; BATS Exchange, Inc.; BOX Options
Exchange LLC; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC; MIAX PEARL, LLC; The Nasdaq
Stock Market LLC; NASDAQ BX, Inc.; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Nasdaq GEMX,
LLC; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; NYSE American, LLC; and NYSE
Arca, Inc.
    \5\ See OLPP at page 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's initial listing standards for equity options in Rule
402 (including the current price/time standard of $3.00 per share for
five (5) consecutive business days) are substantially similar to the
initial listing standards adopted by other options exchanges.\6\ At the
time the Exchange received its initial approval from the Commission, as
part of its Rules, the Exchange adopted the ``look back'' period of
five (5) consecutive business days, it determined that the five-day
period was sufficient to protect against attempts to manipulate the
market price of the underlying security and would provide a reliable
test for stability.\7\ Surveillance technologies and procedures
concerning manipulation have evolved since then to provide adequate
prevention or detection of rule or securities law violations within the
proposed time frame, and the Exchange represents that its existing
trading surveillances are adequate to monitor the trading of options on
the Exchange.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., Phlx Rule 1009, Commentary .01; see also BOX Rule
5020(b)(5).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79543 (December 13,
2016), 81 FR 92901 (December 20, 2016) (order granting approval of
MIAX PEARL for registration as a National Securities Exchange).
    \8\ Such surveillance procedures generally focus on detecting
securities trading subject to opening price manipulation, closing
price manipulation, layering, spoofing or other unlawful activity
impacting an underlying security, the option, or both. The Exchange,
through the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA''), has
price movement alerts, unusual market activity and order book alerts
active for all trading symbols. These real time patterns are active
for the new security as soon as the IPO begins trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the Exchange notes that the scope of its surveillance
program also includes cross market surveillance for trading that is not
just limited to the Exchange. In particular, the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority (``FINRA''), pursuant to a regulatory services
agreement, operates a range of cross-market equity surveillance
patterns on behalf of the Exchange to look for potential manipulative
behavior, including spoofing, algorithm gaming, marking the close and
open, and momentum ignition strategies, as well as more general,
abusive behavior related to front running, wash shales, quoting/
routing, and Reg SHO violations. These cross-market patterns
incorporate relevant data from various markets beyond the Exchange and
its affiliate, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX
Options''), including data from the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'')
and from the Nasdaq Stock Market (``Nasdaq'').
    Additionally, for options, MIAX PEARL, through FINRA, utilizes an
array of patterns that monitor manipulation of options, or manipulation
of equity securities (regardless of venue) for the purpose of impacting
options prices on both MIAX Options and MIAX PEARL options markets
(i.e., mini-manipulation strategies). Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the cross market surveillance performed by FINRA on
behalf of the Exchange, coupled with the Exchange staff's real-time
monitoring of similarly violative activity on MIAX PEARL and its
affiliated market as described herein, reflects a comprehensive
surveillance program that is adequate to monitor for manipulation of
the underlying security and overlying option within the proposed three-
day look back period.
    Furthermore, the Exchange notes that the proposed listing criteria
would still require that the underlying security be listed on NYSE, the
American Stock Exchange (now known as NYSE American), or the National
Market System of The Nasdaq Stock Market (now known as the Nasdaq
Global Market) (collectively, the ``Named Markets''), as provided for
in the definition of ``covered security'' from Section 18(b)(1)(A) of
the 1933 Act.\9\ Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change would still ensure that the underlying security meets the
high listing standards of a Named Market, and would also ensure that
the underlying is covered by the regulatory protections (including
market surveillance, investigation and enforcement) offered by these
exchanges for trading in covered securities conducted on their
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 15 U.S.C. 77r(b)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the Nasdaq, Nasdaq Phlx's affiliated listing market,
had no cases within the past five years where an IPO-related issue for
which it had pricing information qualified for the $3.00 price
requirement during the first three (3) days of trading and did not
qualify for the $3.00 price requirement during the first five (5)
days.\10\ In other words, none of these qualifying issues fell below
the $3.00 threshold within the first three (3) or five (5) days of
trading. As such, the Exchange believes that its existing surveillance
technologies and procedures, coupled with Nasdaq's findings related to
the IPO-related issues as described herein, adequately address
potential concerns regarding possible manipulation or price stability
within the proposed timeframe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ There were over 750 IPO-related issues on Nasdaq within the
past five years. Out of all of the issues with pricing information,
there was only one issue that had a price below $3 during the first
five consecutive business days. The Exchange notes, however, that
Nasdaq allows for companies to list on the Nasdaq Capital Market at
$2.00 or $3.00 per share in some instances, which was the case for
this particular issue. See Nasdaq Rule 5500 Series for initial
listing standards on the Nasdaq Capital Market. See also supra note
3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed look back period can
be implemented in connection with the other initial listing criteria
for underlying covered securities. In

particular, the Exchange recognizes that it may be difficult to verify
the number of shareholders in the days immediately following an IPO due
to the fact that stock trades generally clear within two business days
(T+2) of their trade date and therefore the shareholder count will
generally not be known until T+2.\11\ The Exchange notes that the
current T+2 settlement cycle was recently reduced from T+3 on September
5, 2017 in connection with the Commission's amendments to Exchange Rule
15c6-1(a) to adopt the shortened settlement cycle,\12\ and the look
back period of three (3) consecutive business days proposed herein
reflects this shortened T+2 settlement period. As proposed, stock
trades would clear within T+2 of their trade date (i.e., within three
(3) business days) and therefore the number of shareholders could be
verified within three (3) business days, thereby enabling options
trading within four (4) business days of an IPO (three (3) consecutive
business days plus the day the listing certificate is submitted to
OCC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The number of shareholders of record can be validated by
large clearing agencies such as The Depository Trust and Clearing
Corporation (``DTCC'') upon the settlement date (i.e., T+2).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78962 (September
28, 2016), 81 FR 69240 (October 5, 2016) (Amendment to Securities
Transaction Settlement Cycle) (File No. S7-22-16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the Exchange notes that it can verify the shareholder
count with various brokerage firms that have a large retail customer
clientele. Such firms can confirm the number of individual customers
who have a position in the new issue. The earliest that these firms can
provide confirmation is usually the day after the first day of trading
(T+1) on an unsettled basis, while others can confirm on the third day
of trading (T+2). The Exchange has confirmed with some of these
brokerage firms who provide shareholder numbers to the Exchange that
they are T+2 after an IPO. For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange
believes that basing the proposed three (3) business day look back
period on the T+2 settlement cycle would allow for sufficient
verification of the number of shareholders.
    The proposed rule change will apply to all covered securities that
meet the criteria of Rule 402. Pursuant to Rule 402, the Exchange
establishes guidelines to be considered in evaluating the potential
underlying securities for Exchange option transactions.\13\ However,
the fact that a particular security may meet the guidelines established
by the Exchange does not necessarily mean that it will be approved as
an underlying security.\14\ As part of the established criteria, the
issuer must be in compliance with any applicable requirement of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.\15\ Additionally, in considering the
underlying security, the Exchange relies on information made publicly
available by the issuer and/or the markets in which the security is
traded.\16\ Even if the proposed option meets the objective criteria,
the Exchange may decide not to list, or place limitations or conditions
upon listing.\17\ The Exchange believes that these measures, together
with its existing surveillance procedures, provide adequate safeguards
in the review of any covered security that may meet the proposed
criteria for consideration of the option within the timeframe contained
in this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Exchange Rule 402(b). The Exchange established specific
criteria to be considered in evaluating potential underlying
securities for Exchange Option Transactions.
    \14\ Id.
    \15\ See Exchange Rule 402(b)(3).
    \16\ See Exchange Rule 402(d).
    \17\ See Exchange Rule 402(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that this filing is substantially similar to a
companion MIAX Options filing, modifying the criteria for listing an
option on an underlying covered security on its exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX PEARL believes that its proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \18\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \19\ in particular, in that it
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 facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to its listing
standards for covered securities would allow the Exchange to more
quickly list options on a qualifying covered security that has met the
$3.00 eligibility price without sacrificing investor protection. As
discussed above, the Exchange believes that its existing trading
surveillances provide a sufficient measure of protection against
potential price manipulation within the proposed three (3) consecutive
business day timeframe. The Exchange also believes that the proposed
three (3) consecutive business day timeframe would continue to be a
reliable test for price stability in light of Nasdaq's findings that
none of the IPO-related issues on Nasdaq within the past five years
that qualified for the $3.00 per share price standard during the first
three trading days fell below the $3.00 threshold during the fourth or
fifth trading day. Furthermore, the established guidelines to be
considered by the Exchange in evaluating the potential underlying
securities for Exchange option transactions,\20\ together with existing
trading surveillances, provide adequate safeguards in the review of any
covered security that may meet the proposed criteria for consideration
of the option within the proposed timeframe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See notes 13-17 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes that basing the proposed
timeframe on the T+2 settlement cycle adequately addresses the
potential difficulties in confirming the number of shareholders of the
underlying covered security. Having some of the largest brokerage firms
that provide these shareholder counts to the Exchange confirm that they
are able to provide these numbers within T+2 further demonstrates that
the 2,000 shareholder requirement can be sufficiently verified within
the proposed timeframe. For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange
believes that the proposed amendments will remove and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
providing an avenue for investors to swiftly hedge their investment in
the stock in a shorter amount of time than what is currently in
place.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ This proposed rule change does not alter any obligations of
issuers or other investors of an IPO that may be subject to a lock-
up or other restrictions on trading related securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, it should be noted that a price/time standard for the
underlying security was first adopted when the listed options market
was in its infancy, and was intended to prevent the proliferation of
options being listed on low-priced securities that presented special
manipulation concerns and/or lacked liquidity needed to maintain fair
and orderly markets.\22\ When options trading commenced in 1973, the
Commission determined that it was necessary for securities underlying
options to meet certain minimum standards regarding both the quality of
the issuer and the quality of the market

for a particular security.\23\ These standards, including a price/time
standard, were imposed to ensure that those issuers upon whose
securities options were to be traded were widely-held, financially
sound companies whose shares had trading volume and float substantial
enough so as not to be readily susceptible to manipulation.\24\ At the
time, the Commission determined that the imposition of these standards
was reasonable in view of the pilot nature of options trading and the
limited experience of investors with options trading.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 29628 (August 29,
1991), 56 FR 43949-01 (September 5, 1991) (SR-AMEX-86-21; SR-CBOE-
86-15; SR-NYSE-86-20; SR-PSE-86-15; and SR-PHLX-86-21) (``1991
Approval Order'') ay 43949 (discussing the Commission's concerns
when options trading initially commenced in 1973).
    \23\ See 1991 Approval Order at 43949.
    \24\ Id.
    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Now more than 40 years later, the listed options market has evolved
into a mature market with sophisticated investors. In view of this
evolution, the Commission has approved various exchange proposals to
relax some of these initial listing standards throughout the years,\26\
including reducing the price/time standard in 2003 from $7.50 per share
for the majority of business days over a three month period to the
current $3.00 per share/five business day standard (``2003
Proposal'').\27\ It has been almost fifteen years since the Commission
approved the 2003 proposal, and both the listed options market and
exchange technologies have continued to evolve since then. In this
instance, MIAX PEARL is only proposing a modest reduction of the
current five (5) business day standard to three (3) business days to
correspond to the securities industry's move to a T+2 standard
settlement cycle.\28\ The $3.00 per share standard and all other
initial options listing criteria in Rule 402 will remain unchanged by
this proposal. For the reasons discussed herein, the Exchange therefore
believes that the proposed three (3) business day period will be
beneficial to the marketplace without sacrificing investor protections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See e.g., 1991 Approval Order (modifying a number of
initial listing criteria, including the reduction of the price/time
standard from $10 per share each day during the preceding three
calendar months to $7.50 per share for the majority of days during
the same period).
    \27\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 47190 (January 15,
2003), 68 FR 3072 (January 22, 2003) (SR-CBOE-2002-62); 47352
(February 11, 2003), 68 FR 8319 (February 20, 2003) (SR-PCX-2003-
06); 47483 (March 11, 2003), 68 FR 13352 (March 19, 2003) (SR-ISE-
2003-04); 47613 (April 1, 2003), 68 FR 17120 (April 8, 2003) (SR-
Amex-2003-19); and 47794 (May 5, 2003), 68 FR 25076 (May 9, 2003)
(SR-Phlx-2003-27).
    \28\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In this regard and as
indicated above, the Exchange notes that the rule change is being
proposed as a competitive response to a filing submitted by Nasdaq Phlx
that was recently approved by the Commission.\29\ The proposed rule
change will reduce the number of days to list options on an underlying
security, and is intended to bring new options listings to the
marketplace quicker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 \30\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \31\ 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) \32\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\33\ 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 so that the proposal
may become operative upon filing. The Commission believes that waiving
the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest as it will allow the Exchange to
modify the criteria for listing an option on an underlying covered
security to align with the criteria of other options exchanges, and the
Exchange's proposal does not raise new issues. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay requirement and
designates the proposed rule change as operative upon filing.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \33\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \34\ 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-PEARL-2018-04 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2018-04. 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-
PEARL-2018-04, and should be submitted on or before April 4, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-05073 Filed 3-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 15736-15737]
[DOCID:fr02ap07-118]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55531; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-94]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No.
1 Thereto Relating to Off-Floor DPMs

March 26, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On November 13, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to allow DPMs to operate off-
floor. The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change
on January 18, 2007. The proposed rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on February 20, 2007.\3\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55275 (February 12,
2007), 72 FR 7782.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    CBOE proposes to amend its rules to allow a DPM to operate remotely
away from CBOE's trading floor. DPMs are member organizations that
function in option classes allocated to them as Market-Makers, and also
are subject to the obligations under Rule 8.85 or as otherwise provided
in CBOE's Rules. Currently, all DPMs operate on CBOE's trading floor.
However, some member organizations have expressed an interest in acting
as DPM remotely away from CBOE's trading floor. As discussed below, the
proposed rule change is intended to provide DPMs with the flexibility
to operate on CBOE's trading floor (``On-Floor DPM'') or remotely away
from CBOE's trading floor (``Off-Floor DPM''). A DPM would only be
permitted to operate as an Off-Floor DPM in equity option classes
traded on the Hybrid Trading System.
    CBOE proposes to amend Rule 8.83 to provide that in selecting an
applicant for approval as a DPM, the appropriate exchange committee may
place one or more conditions on the approval, including, but not
limited to, whether the DPM will operate on-floor or off-floor.
Additionally, CBOE proposes to amend Rule 8.83 to provide that an On-
Floor DPM can request that the appropriate Exchange committee authorize
it to operate as an Off-Floor DPM in one or more equity option classes
traded on the Hybrid Trading System. The appropriate Exchange committee
will consider the factors specified in Rule 8.83(b) in determining
whether to permit an On-Floor DPM to operate as an Off-Floor DPM. In
the event a DPM is approved to operate as an Off-Floor DPM, Rule 8.83
provides that the Off-Floor DPM can have a DPM Designee trade in open
outcry in the option classes allocated to the Off-Floor DPM, but the
Off-Floor DPM shall not receive a participation entitlement under Rule
8.87 with respect to orders represented in open outcry. CBOE also
proposes to amend Rule 6.45A(a)(C) and Rule 6.74 to make clear that the
DPM participation entitlement is only applicable to an On-Floor DPM.
    As provided in new Interpretation .01 to Rule 8.83, if an Off-Floor
DPM wishes to operate as an On-Floor DPM, the Off-Floor DPM can request
that the appropriate Exchange Committee authorize it to do so. In
making a determination pursuant to this Interpretation, the appropriate
Exchange committee would evaluate whether the change is in the best
interests of the Exchange, and the committee may consider any
information that it believes will be of assistance to it. Factors to be
considered may include, but are not limited to, any one or more of the
following: Performance, operational capacity of the Exchange or the
DPM, efficiency, number and experience of personnel of the DPM who will
be performing functions related to the trading of the applicable
securities, number of securities involved, number of Market-Makers
affected, and trading volume of the securities.
    In connection with this rule change, CBOE proposes to amend certain
DPM obligations contained in Rule 8.85. In particular, CBOE proposes to
amend the obligation contained in subparagraph (a)(iv), which currently
provides that the DPM must assure that the number of DPM Designees and
support personnel continuously present at the trading station
throughout every business day is not less than the minimum required by
the appropriate Exchange committee. CBOE proposes to amend subparagraph
(a)(iv) to state that an Off-Floor DPM similarly shall assure that the
number of DPM Designees and support personnel continuously overseeing
the DPM's activities is not less than the minimum required by the
appropriate Exchange committee. Additionally, an Off-Floor DPM shall
provide members with telephone access to a DPM Designee at all times
during market hours for purposes of resolving problems involving
trading on the Exchange.
    CBOE also proposes to amend subparagraph (a)(v) of Rule 8.85, which
states that a DPM shall trade in all securities allocated to the DPM
only in the capacity of a DPM and not in any other capacity. CBOE
proposes to allow, as part of an existing pilot program applicable to
e-DPMs,\4\ an Off-Floor DPM to have not more than one Market-Maker
affiliated with the Off-Floor DPM trade on CBOE's trading floor in any
specific option class allocated to the Off-Floor DPM, provided such
Market-Maker is trading on a separate membership.\5\ The affiliated
Market-Maker would also have to comply with the ``Guidelines for
Exemptive Relief Under Rule 8.91(e) for Members Affiliated with DPMs,''
set forth in Rule 8.91. (Absent the pilot program, an Off-Floor DPM may
not allow any Market-Makers affiliated with the Off-Floor DPM to trade
on CBOE's trading floor in any class allocated to the Off-Floor DPM.)
If the Off-Floor DPM has an affiliated Marker-Maker trade on CBOE's
trading floor in any specific option class allocated to the Off-Floor
DPM pursuant to the pilot program, Rule 8.85(a)(v) provides that the
Off-Floor DPM cannot also have a DPM Designee trading in open outcry in
the option classes allocated to the Off-Floor DPM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See CBOE Rule 8.93(vii).
    \5\ CBOE proposes to make a corresponding change to the
``Guidelines for Exemptive Relief Under Rule 8.91(e) for Members
Affiliated with DPMs.'' See Guidelines, Paragraph (b)(viii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, CBOE proposes to amend Interpretation .02 of Rule 3.8 to
allow an Off-Floor DPM to appoint one individual to be the nominee for
all memberships utilized by the organization in an Off-Floor DPM
capacity. Interpretation .02 of Rule 3.8 currently provides that a
member organization can appoint one individual to be the nominee for
all memberships utilized by the organization in an RMM capacity or an
e-DPM capacity. This is an exception to the general requirement of Rule
3.8(a)(ii) which provides that ``if a member organization is the owner
or lessee of more than one membership, the organization must designate
a different individual to be the nominee for each of the memberships.''

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to

a national securities exchange \6\ and, in particular, the requirements
of Section 6 of the Act.\7\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in that the
proposal has been designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, and to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Commission has considered the amended proposed rule
change's impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15
U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Commission believes that a Market Maker must have
an affirmative obligation to hold itself out as willing to buy and sell
options for its own account on a regular or continuous basis to justify
receiving market maker margin. The Commission believes that CBOE's
rules impose such affirmative obligations on DPMs that choose to
operate remotely and notes that, under the proposal, a DPM acting from
a remote location would still be required to meet the obligations of a
DPM set forth in CBOE Rule 8.85.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\9\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2006-94), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-5980 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: December 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 249)]
[Notices]
[Page 78172]
[DOCID:fr28de06-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-200-162]

CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Negotiated
Rate Filing

December 19, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 15, 2006, CenterPoint Energy Gas
Transmission Company (CEGT) tendered for filing and approval a
negotiated rate agreement between CEGT and Enbridge Marketing (U.S.),
LP. CEGT states that it has entered into an agreement to provide firm
transportation service to this shipper under Rate Schedule FT and
requests the Commission accept and approve the transaction under which
transportation service will commence upon the ``in-service'' date
following completion of certain Line CP facilities.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-22226 Filed 12-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 80 (Thursday, April 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24403-24404]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09777]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP13-792-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.
    Description: Fuel Tracker GT&C Section 38 to be effective 6/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/12/13.
    Accession Number: 20130412-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/24/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-793-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: April 16-30 2013 to be effective 4/16/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130415-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-794-000.
    Applicants: Viking Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Pooling Points to be effective 1/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130415-5159.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-795-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: 04/15/13 Negotiated Rates--BG Energy Merchants, LLC
(RTS) 6040-42 & 43 to be effective 4/15/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130415-5168.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-796-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: 04/15/13 Negotiated Rates--Tenaska Gas Storage (HUB)
2835-89 to be effective 4/15/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130415-5171.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/13.

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

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP13-708-001.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: 04/15/13 Negotiated Rates--BG Energy Merchants, LLC
(HUB) Amendment 6040-89 to be effective 4/15/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/15/13.
    Accession Number: 20130415-5185.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/13.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, and service can be found at:
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other
information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated April 16, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-09777 Filed 4-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


 [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2011)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 39798-39800] [FR Doc No: 2011-17060]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0572; FRL-9430-4]

EPA Responses to State and Tribal 2010 NO2 Designation

Recommendations: Notice of Availability and Public Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability and public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the EPA has posted its responses

to state and tribal designation recommendations for the 2010 Primary

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS) on its Internet website. The EPA invites public comments on its

responses during the 30-day comment period specified in the

DATES section. The EPA sent responses directly to the states and tribes

on June 29, 2011, and plans to make final designations determinations

for the 2010 Primary NO2 NAAQS by October 31, 2011.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 8, 2011. Please

refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on the

comment period.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2011-

0572 by one of the following methods:

     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.

     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No.

EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0572.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-

2011-0572.

     Mail: Air Docket, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-

0572, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 6102T, 1200

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.

     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 1301 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC. Such deliveries are only

accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special

arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-

2011-0572. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be

included in the public docket without change and may be made available

online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed

to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information

that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through

regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is

an ``anonymous access'' system, which means the EPA will not know your

identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of

your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without

going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is

placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you

submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your

name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with

any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA is unable to read your

comment and cannot contact you for clarification due to technical

difficulties, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form

of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional

information about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center

homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For additional

instructions on submitting comments, go to Section II of the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such

as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be

publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket

materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The Public

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public

Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Air

Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions concerning this

action, please contact Doug Solomon, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Air Quality Planning Division, C539-04,

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail at

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding the EPA Region 1,

please contact Donald Dahl, U.S. EPA, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail

at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding the EPA Region 2,

please contact Raymond Werner, U.S. EPA, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-

mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding the EPA Region

3, please contact Gregory Becoat, U.S. EPA, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,

e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding the EPA

Region 4, please contact Steve Scofield, U.S. EPA, telephone (404) 562-

9034, e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding the EPA

Region 5, please contact Gilberto Alvarez, U.S. EPA, telephone (312)

886-6143, e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding

the EPA Region 6, please contact Alan Shar, U.S. EPA, telephone (214)

665-6691, e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding the EPA

Region 7, please contact Elizabeth Kramer, U.S. EPA, telephone (913)

551-7186, email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions regarding

the EPA Region 8, please contact Crystal Freeman, U.S. EPA, telephone

(303) 312-6602, e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions

regarding the EPA Region 9, please contact Frances Wicher, U.S. EPA,

telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For

questions regarding the EPA Region 10, please contact Claudia Vaupel,

U.S. EPA, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Purpose

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit public comments from

interested parties other than states and tribes on the EPA's recent

responses to the state and tribal designation recommendations for the

2010 Primary NO2 NAAQS. The Clean Air Act (CAA) section

107(d) provides a process for designations that involves

recommendations by states and tribes to the EPA and responses from the

EPA to those parties, prior to the EPA promulgating final designations

and boundaries. The EPA is not required under CAA section 107(d) to

seek public comment during the designation process, but is electing to

do so for the 2010 Primary NO2 NAAQS in order to gather

additional information for EPA to consider before making final

designations. The EPA invites public comment on its responses to states

and tribes during the 30-day comment period provided in this notice.

Due to the statutory timeframe for promulgating designations set out in

CAA section 107(d), the EPA will not be able to consider any comments

submitted after August 8, 2011, notwithstanding what may have appeared

in any state-specific announcements. This notice and opportunity for

public comment does not affect any rights or obligations of any state,

tribe or the EPA which might otherwise exist pursuant to CAA section

107(d).

    Please refer to the ADDRESSES section in this document for specific

instructions on submitting comments and locating relevant public

documents.

     In providing comments to the EPA please consider the

agency's charge under CAA section 107(d). Under this section, the EPA

is obligated to identify every area as attainment, nonattainment,

or unclassifiable. Further, in establishing nonattainment area

boundaries, the agency is required to identify the area that does not

meet the 2010 Primary NO2 standard and any nearby area that

is contributing to the area that does not meet that standard. If you

believe that a specific geographic area that the EPA is proposing to

identify as a nonattainment area should not be categorized by the

section 107(d) criteria as nonattainment, or if you believe that a

specific area not proposed by the EPA to be identified as a

nonattainment area should in fact be categorized as nonattainment using

the section 107(d) criteria, please be as specific as possible in

supporting your belief.

     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical

information and/or data that you used.

     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how

you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be

reproduced.

     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and

suggest alternatives.

     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the

use of profanity or personal threats.

     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period

deadline identified.

II. Instructions for Submitting Public Comments

A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA

through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or

all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in

a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk

or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or

CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to

one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed

as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information

claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.

Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information

identified as CBI only to the following address: Roberto Morales, U.S.

EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Mail Code C404-02,

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail at

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2011-0572.

    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,

remember to:

     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other

identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and

page number).

     Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to

specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of

Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.

     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives

and substitute language for your requested changes.

III. Background

    The process for designating areas following promulgation of a new

or revised NAAQS is contained in CAA section 107(d) (42 U.S.C. 7407).

Following the promulgation of a new or revised standard, each Governor

or Tribal Leader has an opportunity to recommend air quality

designations, including the appropriate boundaries for nonattainment

areas, to the EPA. The EPA considers these recommendations as part of

its duty to promulgate the formal area designations and boundaries for

the new or revised standards. By no later than 120 days prior to

promulgating designations, the EPA is required to notify states or

tribes of any intended modification to an area designation or boundary

recommendation that the EPA deems necessary. On or around June 29,

2011, the EPA notified states and tribes of its intended area

designations for the 2010 Primary NO2 NAAQS. States and

tribes now have an opportunity to demonstrate why they believe a

modification proposed by the EPA may be inappropriate. In these

responses, the EPA encourages states and tribes to provide comments and

additional information for consideration by the EPA in finalizing

designations. The EPA plans to make final designation determinations

for the 2010 Primary NO2 NAAQS by October 31, 2011.

IV. Internet Web Site for Rulemaking Information

    The EPA has also established a Web site for this rulemaking at

http://www.epa.gov/no2designations. The Web site includes the EPA's

state and tribal designation recommendations, as well as the rulemaking

actions and other related information that the public may find useful.

    Dated: June 29, 2011.

Mary E. Henigin,

Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

[FR Doc. 2011-17060 Filed 7-6-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P