[Federal Register: January 18, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 11)]
[Notices]
[Page 2931-2934]
[DOCID:fr18ja11-100]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63700; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Relating
to Option Expiration Months and Series of Options Open for Trading on
the Exchange

January 11, 2011.
    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 January 4, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the 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 with the Commission a proposal to amend
Exchange Rule 1012 (Series of Options Open for Trading) to clarify that
the Exchange will open at least one expiration month and one series for
each class of stock options or Exchange Traded Fund Share (``ETF'')
options

open for trading on the Exchange; and that the Exchange may open
additional series of stock options or ETF options under certain
circumstances. The proposed change is based directly on the recently
approved rules of another options exchange, namely Chapter IV, Sections
6 and 8 of the NASDAQ Options Market.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXPHLX/
Filings/, at the principal office of the Exchange, on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.sec.gov, 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 Exchange Rule
1012 to clarify that the Exchange will open at least one expiration
month and one series for each class of stock options or ETF options
open for trading on the Exchange; and that the Exchange may open
additional series of stock options or ETF options under certain
circumstances. The proposed change is based directly on the recently
approved rules of another options exchange, namely Chapter IV, Sections
6 and 8 of the NASDAQ Options Market.
    The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. (``NASDAQ OMX'') owns several U.S.
registered securities exchanges that are self-regulatory
organizations--Phlx, with its equity, securities, and options
exchanges; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') and the NASDAQ
Options Market (``NOM''); and NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX''). In 2008,
the Commission approved the establishment of NOM and rules pertaining
thereto \3\ that, among others, included NOM Chapter IV, Section 6
regarding series of options contracts open for trading \4\ and Section
8 regarding long-term options contracts.\5\ The rule changes proposed
by the Exchange to Phlx Rule 1012(a) and Commentary .03 are, to the
extent practicable, identical to specified rule provisions in NOM
Chapter IV, Sections 6 and 8 as discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57478 (March 12,
2008), 73 FR 14521 (March 18, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-004 and SR-
NASDAQ-2007-080) (order approving rules for trading of options on
the NASDAQ Options Market, including Chapter IV, Sections 6 and 8).
    \4\ NOM Chapter IV, Sec 6 states, in relevant part: (b) At the
commencement of trading on NOM of a particular class of options, NOM
will open a minimum of one (1) series of options in that class. The
exercise price of the series will be fixed at a price per share,
relative to the underlying stock price in the primary market at
about the time that class of options is first opened for trading on
NOM.
    (c) Additional series of options of the same class may be opened
for trading on NOM when Nasdaq deems it necessary to maintain an
orderly market, to meet Customer demand or when the market price of
the underlying stock moves more than five strike prices from the
initial exercise price or prices. The opening of a new series of
options shall not affect the series of options of the same class
previously opened. New series of options on an individual stock may
be added until the beginning of the month in which the options
contract will expire. Due to unusual market conditions, Nasdaq, in
its discretion, may add a new series of options on an individual
stock until five (5) business days prior to expiration.
    \5\ NOM Chapter IV, Sec 8 states: (a) Notwithstanding
conflicting language in Section 5 of this Chapter IV (Series of
Options Contracts Open for Trading), Nasdaq may list long-term
options contracts that expire from twelve (12) to thirty-nine (39)
months from the time they are listed. There may be up to six (6)
additional expiration months. Strike price interval, bid/ask
differential and continuity rules shall not apply to such options
series until the time to expiration is less than nine (9) months.
    (b) After a new long-term options contract series is listed,
such series will be opened for trading either when there is buying
or selling interest, or forty (40) minutes prior to the close,
whichever occurs first. No quotations will be posted for such
options series until they are opened for trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is proper, and indeed
desirable, in light of its objective to continue to harmonize the
listing rules of the two options exchanges under the NASDAQ OMX
umbrella and thereby maximize operating efficiencies.
    Rule 1012 has developed in the latter portion of the last century
to indicate when, among other things, the Exchange may open months and
series, including long-term series, in classes of stock options, ETF
options, and foreign currency options (``FCOs'') \6\ that have been
approved for listing and trading on the Exchange. Rule 1012(a)
indicates how the Exchange initially fixes expiration months and series
in these options.\7\ The Exchange now conforms portions of its older
Rule 1012 to the more recently-approved NOM rules in Chapter IV,
Sections 6 and 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ FCOs are also known as World Currency Options and in Rule
1012 are known as U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency Options.
    \7\ Rule 1012(a)(i) states, in relevant part: At the
commencement of trading on the Exchange of a particular class of
stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Share options, series of options
therein having three different expiration months will normally be
opened, the first such expiration month being within approximately
three months thereafter, the second such month being approximately
three months after the first and the third being approximately three
months after the second. Additional series of stock or Exchange-
Traded Fund Share options of the same class may be opened for
trading on the Exchange at or about the time a prior series expires
and the expiration month of each such series shall normally be
approximately nine months following the opening of such series. The
exercise price of each series of stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Share
options opened for trading on the Exchange shall be fixed at a price
per share which is reasonably close to the price per share at which
the underlying stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Share is traded in the
primary market at or about the time such series of options is first
opened for trading on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to state in Rule 1012(a)(i)(A) that at
the commencement of trading on the Exchange of a particular class of
stock or ETF options, the Exchange will open at least one expiration
month and series for each class of options open for trading on the
Exchange, thereby replacing the current language in subsection
(a)(i)(A) about opening not less than three expiration months in every
option class open for trading. The proposed language regarding one
expiration month is taken directly from NOM Chapter IV, Section 6(e).
The proposed language regarding one expiration series is taken directly
from NOM Chapter IV, Section 6(b). These NOM rules have been
continually in use for years.\8\ The Exchange notes that the proposed
change affords additional flexibility so that multiple option classes
and series are not mandated if they are not needed, thereby potentially
reducing the proliferation of classes and series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Exchange proposes to add new language in Rule 1012
(a)(i)(B) to state that it may open additional option series when the
Exchange deems it necessary to maintain an orderly market, to meet
customer demand or when the market price of the underlying stock moves
more than five strike prices from the initial exercise price or prices.
New series of options on an individual stock may be added until the
beginning of the month in which the options contract will expire.
Additionally, due to unusual market conditions, the Exchange, in its
discretion, may add a new series of options on an individual stock
until five (5) business days prior

to expiration. The language for this proposed rule change is likewise
taken directly from NOM rules, specifically Chapter IV, Section
6(c).\9\ The Exchange notes that the proposed language establishes
specific criteria that are not all currently elucidated in Rule 1012
\10\ for adding new series to an existing option class up to five
business days prior to expiration.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange also proposes to transfer language from
subsection (a)(iv) of Rule 1012 into subsection (a)(i)(B), stating
that the opening of a new series of options shall not affect the
series of options of the same class previously opened. Similar
language is present in NOM Chapter IV, Section 6(c).
    \10\ See supra note 7.
    \11\ The Exchange has been following the practice of not adding
new series of options on individual stocks within five days of
expiration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, Rule 1012 has developed over several decades to include
stock options, ETF options and FCOs traded on the Exchange. As such,
discussion regarding these various types of options is sometimes
commingled within Rule 1012. The Exchange is now proposing to clarify
the rule by splitting out discussion regarding stock options and ETF
options, which are similarly treated within the rule. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to relocate the criteria for additional series of
stock and ETF options from its present location in subsection (a)(iv),
where it is applicable to FCOs as well as stock and ETF options, to
subsection (a)(i)(B), where it would be applicable only to stock and
ETF options.\12\ Subsection (a)(iv) as proposed would be renamed
(a)(iii)(E) and would pertain only to FCOs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In a similar vein, Commentary .03 is moved to new
subsection (a)(i)(D) so that it would be in the section of the rule
applicable only to stock and ETF options. Commentary .03 is
conformed to the language of NOM Chapter IV, Section 8 by removing
the superfluous language from the rule: There may be up to six
Traded Fund Share options series, options having up to thirty-nine
months from the time they are listed until expiration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal is being done to conform and harmonize
certain Phlx rules to recently-approved Nasdaq Options Market rules
regarding opening initial months and series and adding series of stock
options and ETF options. The Exchange believes that harmonization of
the rules of the two options exchanges under the NASDAQ OMX umbrella
would be beneficial to the Exchange and its traders, market
participants, and public investors in general.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ 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, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of
a free and open market and a national market system. The Exchange
proposes to clarify that it will open at least one expiration month and
one series for each class of stock options or ETF options open for
trading on the Exchange and clarify under what circumstances it may
open additional series of stock options or ETF options, and thereby
harmonize the rules of Phlx and NOM. The harmonization of the rules of
the two options exchanges would be beneficial to the Exchange and its
traders, market participants, and public investors in general.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

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 significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest, does not
impose any significant burden on competition, and, by its terms, does
not 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) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay. The Commission believes that waiver of the operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest because the proposed rule change is substantially similar to
that of another exchange that has been approved by the Commission.\17\
Therefore, the Commission designates the proposal operative upon
filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 3.
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has 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.

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2011-04 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2011-04. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-Phlx-2011-04 and should be
submitted on or before February 8, 2011.

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

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-901 Filed 1-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 150)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 47180-47182]
[DOCID:fr05au10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0044; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-084-AD;
Amendment 39-16381; AD 2010-16-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300,
and -300F Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes. This AD requires
inspecting to verify the part number of the low-pressure flex-hoses of
the flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen system installed under the
oxygen mask stowage box at flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen mask
locations, and replacing the flex-hose with a new non-conductive low-
pressure flex-hose if necessary. This AD results from reports of low-
pressure flex-hoses of the flightcrew oxygen system that burned through
due to inadvertent electrical current from a short circuit in an
adjacent audio select panel. We are issuing this AD to prevent
inadvertent electrical current, which can cause the low-pressure flex-
hoses used in the flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen systems to melt
or burn, resulting in oxygen system leakage and smoke or fire.

DATES: This AD is effective September 9, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of September 9,
2010.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan L. Monroe, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
certain Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes. That NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2010 (75 FR 3656).
That NPRM proposed to require inspecting to verify the part number of
the low-pressure flex-hoses of the flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen
system installed under the oxygen mask stowage box at flightcrew and
supernumerary oxygen mask locations, and replacing the flex-hose with a
new non-conductive low-pressure flex-hose if necessary.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Support for the NPRM

    Boeing concurs with the contents of the NPRM. United Airlines and
the Air Line Pilots Association, International, (ALPA) both support the
intent of the NPRM.

Request To Take Into Account a Non-Procurable Part

    United Airlines states that paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM refers to
the Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-35A0034,
Revision 1, dated June 22, 2000, which specifies the use of tape having
part number 232T8002-26. United Airlines states that this tape is no
longer available. United Airlines states that Boeing has advised them
to procure tape having part number<PHONE_NUMBER> instead. United Airlines
states that because compliance is mandated in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 767-35A0034, this will require all operators to
request an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to use the alternate
part numbered tape. United Airlines points out that it has formally
asked Boeing to use the term ``or equivalent'' in their service
bulletins when specifying part numbers for such items as tapes, marking
pens, and solvents, but Boeing has responded that the FAA expressly
forbids them to do so. United Airlines states that this is an on-going
problem that leads to nuisance AMOC requests that can be avoided.
    From these statements, we infer that United Airlines requests that
we revise the NPRM to either specify another tape or add the term ``or
equivalent,'' so that operators will not have to request AMOCs. We
disagree with adding the term ``or equivalent'' to the AD. We have
consulted with Boeing regarding this issue. Boeing has stated that tape
having part number 232T8002-26 is a valid part number. Boeing states
that when the customer receives a part number, the tape only shows the
material code. The omission of the part number is being resolved by
Boeing. Also, paragraphs 2.C.2.(d) and 2.C.2.(e) of Boeing Service
Bulletin 767-35A0034, Revision 1, dated June 22, 2000, describe the
tape that is required and can be purchased from Boeing with just a
reference to the name of the tape, ``3/4 wide Permacel P29.'' No change
has been made to the AD in this regard.

Request for Clarification Regarding Use of Tape or Sleeving

    United Airlines states that there is a disparity between the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletins 737-35A1053,
747-35A2101, and 757-35A0015, and Boeing Service Bulletin 767-35A0034,
Revision 1, dated June 22, 2000, referenced in the NPRM. United
Airlines states that Model 747 and 767 airplanes are required to wrap
the new hose assemblies with tape or sleeving, but it is not required
on Model 737 or 757 airplanes. United Airlines states that the function
of this tape or sleeving is to satisfy National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB) Safety Recommendation A-09-47, dated July 8, 2009. United
Airlines points out that application of this safety recommendation does
not appear to be consistent.
    From these statements, we infer that United Airlines requests
clarification regarding use of tape or sleeving. We

agree that clarification is necessary regarding the use of tape or
sleeving on oxygen system tubing. Tape or sleeving is not required on
Model 737 or 757 fleets due to acceptable clearance between the oxygen
system tubing and electrical wiring. The chafing present in the Model
747 and 767 fleets is not present in the Model 737 or 757 fleet. No
change has been made to the AD in this regard.

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance

    United Airlines states that it disagrees with the Costs of
Compliance section of the NPRM, as it includes only the inspection
labor and not the manpower and material costs in the event the hoses
must be replaced.
    From this statement, we infer that United Airlines is requesting
that we revise the Costs of Compliance section of the NPRM to include
additional work hours and the cost of replacement parts. We disagree
with changing the costs of compliance. The economic analysis of an AD
is limited to the cost of actions that are actually required. The
economic analysis does not consider the costs of conditional actions,
such as replacing a flex-hose detected during a required inspection
(``replace, if necessary''). Such conditional repairs would be
required--regardless of AD direction--to correct an unsafe condition
identified in an airplane and to ensure that the airplane is operated
in an airworthy condition, as required by the Federal Aviation
Regulations. The cost information describes only the direct costs of
the specific actions required by this AD. Based on the best data
available, the manufacturer provided the number of work-hours necessary
to do the required actions. This number represents the time necessary
to perform only the actions actually required by this AD. We recognize
that, in doing the actions required by an AD, operators might incur
incidental costs in addition to the direct costs. The cost analysis in
AD rulemaking actions, however, typically does not include incidental
costs such as the time required to gain access and close up. Those
incidental costs, which might vary significantly among operators, are
almost impossible to calculate. No change has been made to the AD in
this regard.

Request To Shorten Compliance Time

    ALPA requests that the 36-month compliance time specified in the
NPRM be shortened given the potential consequence of an oxygen-fed fire
in the vicinity of the flightcrew station.
    We do not agree. In developing the compliance time, we considered
the safety implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance
schedules for timely accomplishment of the inspection. Further, we
arrived at the compliance time with manufacturer concurrence. In
consideration of all of these factors, we determined that the
compliance time, as proposed, represents an appropriate interval in
which the inspections can be done in a timely manner within the fleet,
while still maintaining an adequate level of safety. Operators are
always permitted to accomplish the requirements of an AD at a time
earlier than the specified compliance time; therefore, an operator may
choose to do the inspection before 36 months in order to accomplish the
requirements of this AD. If additional data are presented that would
justify a shorter compliance time, we may consider further rulemaking
on this issue. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed.

Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance

    Since issuance of the NPRM, we have increased the labor rate used
in the Costs of Compliance from $80 per work-hour to $85 per work-hour.
The Costs of Compliance information, below, reflects this increase in
the specified hourly labor rate.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 297 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take 2 work-hours per product
to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S.
operators to be $50,490, or $170 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 AD:

2010-16-04 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16381. Docket No. FAA-
2010-0044; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-084-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective September 9,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300,
and -300F

series airplanes, certificated in any category; line numbers 1
through 763 inclusive, except line number 758, which was
accomplished in production.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35: Oxygen.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report of a low-pressure flex-hose of
the flightcrew oxygen system that burned through due to inadvertent
electrical current from a short circuit in an adjacent audio select
panel. We are issuing this AD to prevent inadvertent electrical
current, which can cause the low-pressure flex-hoses used in the
flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen systems to melt or burn,
resulting in oxygen system leakage and smoke or fire.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspection

    (g) Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, do an
inspection to determine whether any low-pressure flex-hose of the
flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen systems installed under the
oxygen mask stowage location has a part number identified in Table 1
of this AD. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable
in lieu of this inspection if the part number of the low-pressure
flex-hoses of the flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen systems can be
conclusively determined from that review.
    (1) For any hose having a part number identified in Table 1 of
this AD, before further flight, replace the hose with a new or
serviceable part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Service Bulletin 767-35A0034, Revision 1, dated June 22,
2000.
    (2) For any hose not having a part number identified in Table 1
of this AD, no further action is required by this paragraph.

                                        Table 1--Applicable Part Numbers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Equivalent Boeing supplier part Nos.
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Boeing specification part No.                                                      Puritan
                                      Sierra Engineering       Spencer Fluid          Bennett        Hydraflow
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
60B50059-70.......................  835-01-70............  9513-20S5-18.0.......        ZH784-20        38001-70
60B50059-81.......................  Not applicable.......  Not applicable.......  Not applicable        38001-81
60B50059-94.......................  Not applicable.......  Not applicable.......  Not applicable        38001-94
60B50059-101......................  Not applicable.......  Not applicable.......  Not applicable       38001-101
60B50059-130......................  Not applicable.......  Not applicable.......  Not applicable       38001-130
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parts Installation

    (h) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
flightcrew or supernumerary oxygen hose with a part number
identified in Table 1 of this AD on any airplane.

Actions Accomplished According to Previous Issue of Service Bulletin

    (i) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-35A0034, dated
September 2, 1999, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding actions specified in this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
Attn: Susan L. Monroe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and
Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Or, e-mail
information to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 767-35A0034, Revision
1, dated June 22, 2000, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 16, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-18623 Filed 8-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 229)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 71940-71941]
[DOCID:fr26no08-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0161; FRL-8745-2]
RIN 2060-AO80

Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Modifications to
Renewable Fuel Standard Program Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Partial withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Because EPA received adverse comment, we are withdrawing
several provisions of the direct final rule to amend the Renewable Fuel
Standard program requirements, published on October 2, 2008.

DATES: Effective November 26, 2008, EPA withdraws the amendments to 40
CFR 80.1129(b)(1), 80.1129(b)(4), 80.1129(b)(8), 80.1131(a)(8), and
80.1131(b)(4) published at 73 FR 57248 on October 2, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Brachtl, Compliance and
Innovative Strategies Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality (Mail Code: 6406J), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Because EPA received adverse comment, we are
withdrawing several provisions of the direct final rule to amend the
Renewable Fuel Standard program requirements, published on October 2,
2008. We stated in that direct final rule that if we received adverse
comment by November 3, 2008, the portions of the direct final rule on
which adverse comments were received would not take effect, and we
would publish a timely withdrawal of such portions of the direct final
rule in the Federal Register. We subsequently received adverse comments
on the following provisions: The amendments to 40 CFR 80.1129(b)(1) and
80.1129(b)(8) (providing that a party with a small refinery or small
refiner exemption may only separate RINs that have been assigned to a
volume of renewable fuel that the party blends into motor vehicle
fuel), 40 CFR 80.1129(b)(4) (providing that any party may separate the
RINs from renewable fuel that it produces or markets for use in motor
vehicles in neat form, or uses in motor vehicles in neat form), and 40
CFR 80.1131(a)(8) and 80.1131(b)(4) (changing the location in the RFS
regulations of a provision stating that a RIN that is transferred to
two or more parties is considered an invalid RIN). Because EPA received
adverse comments, we are withdrawing these provisions.
    EPA published a parallel proposed rule on the same day as the
direct final rule. The proposed rule invited comment on the substance
of the direct final rule. We will address the comments received on the
portions of the direct final rule being withdrawn today in a subsequent
final action based on the parallel proposed rule also published on
October 2, 2008 (73 FR 57274). As stated in the parallel proposal, we
will not institute a second comment period on this proposed action. The
provisions for which we did not receive adverse comment will become
effective on December 1, 2008, as provided in the October 2, 2008,
direct final rule.

    Dated: November 20, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
Accordingly, the amendments to 40 CFR 80.1129(b)(1), 80.1129(b)(4),
80.1129(b)(8), 80.1131(a)(8), and 80.1131(b)(4) published on October 2,
2008 (73 FR 57248) are withdrawn as of November 26, 2008.
[FR Doc. E8-28125 Filed 11-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 62)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 16273-16274]
[DOCID:fr31mr06-28]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[R03-OAR-2006-0151; FRL-8051-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Maryland; Revised Definition of Volatile Organic Compound

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Maryland. The revisions update the
SIP's reference to the EPA definition of volatile organic compounds
(VOC). In the Final Rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is
approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for
the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse
comments are received in response to this action, no further activity
is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final
rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period.

Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at
this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by May 1, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number R03-
OAR-2006-0151 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0151, Harold A. Frankford, Office of Air
Programs, Mailcode 3AP20, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
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-R03-OAR-
2006-0151. 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 http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site

is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to 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, 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 EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 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.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic 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 during normal business hours at the

Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the
Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland
21230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harold A. Frankford,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final action, with the same title,
that is located in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this
Federal Register publication.

    Dated: March 21, 2006.
William Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 06-3108 Filed 3-30-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65412-65414]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20519]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98420; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2023-071]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Fee Schedule Related to the Options Regulatory Fee

September 18, 2023.
    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 September 12, 2023, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the 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

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX'') proposes to
amend its Fee Schedule related to the Options Regulatory Fee. The text
of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to increase the Options Regulatory Fee
(``ORF'') from $0.0001 per contract to $0.0003 per contract.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee change on
September 1, 2023 (SR-CboeBZX-2023-066). On September 12, 2023, the
Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ORF is assessed by BZX Options to each Member for options
transactions cleared by the Member that are cleared by the Options
Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') in the customer range, regardless of the
exchange on which the transaction occurs. In other words, the Exchange
imposes the ORF on all customer-range transactions cleared by a Member,
even if the transactions do not take place on the Exchange. The ORF is
collected by OCC on behalf of the Exchange from the Clearing Member or
non-Member that ultimately clears the transaction. With respect to
linkage transactions, BZX Options reimburses its routing broker
providing Routing Services (pursuant to BZX Options Rule 21.9) for
options regulatory fees it incurs in connection with the Routing
Services it provides.
    Revenue generated from ORF, when combined with all of the
Exchange's other regulatory fees and fines, is designed to recover a
material portion of the regulatory costs to the Exchange of the
supervision and regulation of Member customer options business
including performing routine surveillances, investigations,

examinations, financial monitoring, and policy, rulemaking,
interpretive, and enforcement activities. Regulatory costs include
direct regulatory expenses and certain indirect expenses for work
allocated in support of the regulatory function. The direct expenses
include in-house and third-party service provider costs to support the
day-to-day regulatory work such as surveillances, investigations and
examinations. The indirect expenses include support from such areas as
human resources, legal, compliance, information technology, facilities
and accounting. These indirect expenses are estimated to be
approximately 50.5% of BZX Options' total regulatory costs for 2023.
Thus, direct expenses are estimated to be approximately 49.5% of total
regulatory costs for 2023. In addition, it is BZX Options' practice
that revenue generated from ORF not exceed more than 75% of total
annual regulatory costs. These expectations are estimated, preliminary
and may change. There can be no assurance that our final costs for 2023
will not differ materially from these expectations and prior practice;
however, the Exchange believes that revenue generated from the ORF,
when combined with all of the Exchange's other regulatory fees and
fines, will cover a material portion, but not all, of the Exchange's
regulatory costs.
    The Exchange monitors its regulatory costs and revenues at a
minimum on a semi-annual basis. If the Exchange determines regulatory
revenues exceed or are insufficient to cover a material portion of its
regulatory costs in a given year, the Exchange will adjust the ORF by
submitting a fee change filing to the Commission. The Exchange also
notifies Members of adjustments to the ORF via an Exchange Notice,
including for the change being proposed herein.\4\ Based on the
Exchange's most recent semi-annual review, the Exchange is proposing to
increase the amount of ORF that will be collected by the Exchange from
$0.0001 per contract side to $0.0003 per contract side. The proposed
increase is based on the Exchange's estimated projections for its
regulatory costs, which have increased.\5\ Particularly, based on the
Exchange's estimated projections for its regulatory costs, the revenue
being generated by ORF using the current rate, would result in
projected revenue that is insufficient to cover a material portion of
its regulatory costs (i.e., less than 75% of total annual regulatory
costs). Further, when combined with the Exchange's projected other non-
ORF regulatory fees and fines, the revenue being generated by ORF using
the current rate results is projected to result in combined revenue
that is less than 100% of the Exchange's estimated regulatory costs for
the year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Notice, C2023080104 ``Cboe BZX Options Exchange
Regulatory Fee Update Effective September 1, 2023.'' The Exchange
endeavors to provide at least 30 calendar days notice prior to any
effective change to ORF.
    \5\ The Exchange notes that in connection with proposed ORF rate
changes, it provides the Commission confidential details regarding
the Exchange's projected regulatory revenue, including projected
revenue from ORF, along with a breakout of its projected regulatory
expenses, including both direct and indirect allocations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will continue to monitor the amount of revenue
collected from the ORF to ensure that it, in combination with its other
regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed the Exchange's total
regulatory costs.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\6\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\ which provides that Exchange rules may provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its Members and other persons using its facilities.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed fee change is reasonable because
it would help ensure that revenue collected from the ORF, in
combination with other regulatory fees and fines, would help offset,
but not exceed, the Exchange's total regulatory costs. As discussed,
the Exchange has designed the ORF to generate revenues that would be
less than or equal to 75% of the Exchange's regulatory costs, which is
consistent with the practice across the options industry and the view
of the Commission that regulatory fees be used for regulatory purposes
and not to support the Exchange's business side. The Exchange
determined to increase ORF after its semi-annual review of its
regulatory costs and regulatory revenues, which includes revenues from
ORF and other regulatory fees and fines. The Exchange notes that
although recent options volumes have increased, it has not increased
its ORF rate since it was adopted in 2015. In fact, the Exchange has
been steadily decreasing the rate over the last several years.\9\
Accordingly, the Exchange believes it's reasonable to increase the ORF.
Additionally, the proposed change is reasonable as it would offset the
anticipated increased regulatory costs, while still not exceeding 75%
of the Exchange's total regulatory costs. Moreover, the proposed amount
is still significantly lower than the amount of ORF assessed on other
exchanges \10\ and lower than the Exchange has assessed previously.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89471 (August 4,
2020), 85 FR 49405 (August 13, 2020) (SR-CboeBZX-2020-057) and
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83879 (August 17, 2018), 83 FR
42739 (August 23, 2018) (SR-CboeBZX-2018-063). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 82660 (February 8, 2018), 83 FR 6664
(February 14, 2018) (SR-CboeBZX-2018-008), Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 80050 (February 16, 2017), 82 FR 11491 (February 23,
2017) (SR-CboeBZX-2017-013) and Securities Exchange Act Release No.
74214 (February 5, 2015), 80 FR 7665 (February 11, 2011) (SR-BATS-
2015-08).
    \10\ See e.g., NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges, Options
Regulatory Fee (``ORF'') and NYSE American Options Fees Schedule,
Section VII(A), which provide that ORF is assessed at a rate of
$0.0055 per contract for each respective exchange. See also Nasdaq
PHLX, Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 6(D), which provides for
an ORF rate of $0.0034 per contract.
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89471 (August 4,
2020), 85 FR 49405 (August 13, 2020) (SR-CboeBZX-2020-005) and
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83879 (August 17, 2018), 83 FR
42739 (August 23, 2018) (SR-CboeBZX-2018-063). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 82660 (February 8, 2018), 83 FR 6664
(February 14, 2018) (SR-CboeBZX-2018-008), Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 80050 (February 16, 2017), 82 FR 11491 (February 23,
2017) (SR-CboeBZX-2017-013) and Securities Exchange Act Release No.
74214 (February 5, 2015), 80 FR 7665 (February 11, 2011) (SR-BATS-
2015-08).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Exchange will also continue to monitor on at
least a semi-annual basis the amount of revenue collected from the ORF,
even as amended, to ensure that it, in combination with its other
regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed the Exchange's total
regulatory costs. If the Exchange determines regulatory revenues would
exceed its regulatory costs in a given year, the Exchange will reduce
the ORF by submitting a fee change filing to the Commission.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Consistent with Rule 15.2 (Regulatory Revenue), the
Exchange notes that should excess ORF revenue be collected prior to
any reduction in an ORF rate, such excess revenue will not be used
for nonregulatory purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes the proposed fee change is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory in that it is charged to all Members on all
their transactions that clear in the customer range at the OCC. The
Exchange believes the ORF ensures fairness by

assessing higher fees to those Members that require more Exchange
regulatory services based on the amount of customer options business
they conduct. Regulating customer trading activity is much more labor
intensive and requires greater expenditure of human and technical
resources than regulating non-customer trading activity, which tends to
be more automated and less labor-intensive. As a result, the costs
associated with administering the customer component of the Exchange's
overall regulatory program are materially higher than the costs
associated with administering the non-customer component (e.g., Member
proprietary transactions) of its regulatory program.\13\ Moreover, the
Exchange notes that it has broad regulatory responsibilities with
respect to its Members' activities, irrespective of where their
transactions take place. Many of the Exchange's surveillance programs
for customer trading activity may require the Exchange to look at
activity across all markets, such as reviews related to position limit
violations and manipulation. Indeed, the Exchange cannot effectively
review for such conduct without looking at and evaluating activity
regardless of where it transpires. In addition to its own surveillance
programs, the Exchange also works with other SROs and exchanges on
intermarket surveillance related issues. Through its participation in
the Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG'') \14\ the Exchange shares
information and coordinates inquiries and investigations with other
exchanges designed to address potential intermarket manipulation and
trading abuses. Accordingly, there is a strong nexus between the ORF
and the Exchange's regulatory activities with respect to its Members'
customer trading activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ If the Exchange changes its method of funding regulation or
if circumstances otherwise change in the future, the Exchange may
decide to modify the ORF or assess a separate regulatory fee on
Member proprietary transactions if the Exchange deems it advisable.
    \14\ ISG is an industry organization formed in 1983 to
coordinate intermarket surveillance among the SROs by cooperatively
sharing regulatory information pursuant to a written agreement
between the parties. The goal of the ISG's information sharing is to
coordinate regulatory efforts to address potential intermarket
trading abuses and manipulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. This proposal does not create
an unnecessary or inappropriate intra-market burden on competition
because the ORF applies to all customer activity, thereby raising
regulatory revenue to offset regulatory expenses. It also supplements
the regulatory revenue derived from non-customer activity. The Exchange
notes, however, the proposed change is not designed to address any
competitive issues. Indeed, this proposal does not create an
unnecessary or inappropriate inter-market burden on competition because
it is a regulatory fee that supports regulation in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The Exchange is obligated to ensure that the
amount of regulatory revenue collected from the ORF, in combination
with its other regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed regulatory
costs.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \15\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \16\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \17\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-CboeBZX-2023-071 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-CboeBZX-2023-071. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeBZX-2023-071 and should
be submitted on or before October 13, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-20519 Filed 9-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38755-38756]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15371]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69830; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2013-083]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Eliminate an Erroneous Reference to the Retired Automatic Quotation
Refresh Functionality Under Rule 4751(d)

June 21, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on June 13, 2013, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') 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 proposes to eliminate an erroneous reference to the
retired automatic quotation refresh functionality in Rule 4751(d).
NASDAQ will implement the change at the earliest time possible, but in
no event later than the 30th day following the date of the filing. The
text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed deletions are in
brackets; proposed additions are italicized.
* * * * *
4751. Definitions
    The following definitions apply to the Rule 4600 and 4750 Series
for the trading of securities listed on Nasdaq or a national securities
exchange other than Nasdaq.
    (a)-(c) No change.
    (d) With respect to System-provided quotation functionality:
    (1) The term ``Quote'' shall mean a single bid or offer quotation
submitted to the System and designated for display (price and size)
next to the Participant's MPID by a Participant that is eligible to
submit such quotations.
    (2) Reserved. [The term ``Automatic Quote Refresh'' shall mean the
default price increment away from the executed price and the size to
which a Participant's Quote will be refreshed if the Participant elects
to utilize this functionality. If the Participant does not designate an
Automatic Quote Refresh size, which must be at least one normal unit of
trading, the default Automatic Quote Refresh size shall be 100 shares
and the default Automatic Quote Refresh price increment shall be
$0.25.]
    (3) The term ``Reserve Size'' shall mean the System-provided
functionality that permits a Participant to display in its Displayed
Quote part of the full size of a proprietary or agency order, with the
remainder held in reserve on an undisplayed basis. Both the displayed
and non-displayed portions are available for potential execution
against incoming orders. If the Displayed Quote is reduced to less than
a normal unit of trading, the System will replenish the display portion
from reserve up to at least a single round-lot amount. A new timestamp
is created for the replenished portion of the order each time it is
replenished from reserve, while the reserve portion retains the time-
stamp of its original entry.
    (e)-(i) No change.
* * * * *

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
    On January 14, 2013, the Exchange filed an immediately effective
rule change to retire the automated quotation refresh functionality
(``AQR'') provided to Exchange market makers under Rules 4613(a)(2)(F)
and (G), and to make conforming changes to Rule 4751(f)(15), which
became effective February 25, 2013.\3\ AQR assisted market makers in
meeting their enhanced quotation obligations adopted after May 6, 2010,

and avoid execution of market maker ``stub quotes'' in instances of
aberrant trading. AQR was ultimately replaced by NASDAQ's Market Maker
Peg Order, which was approved by the Commission on August 2, 2012.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68654 (January 15,
2013), 78 FR 4536 (January 22, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-007); see also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68528 (December 21, 2012), 77 FR
77165 (December 31, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-140).
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67584 (August 2, 2012),
77 FR 47472 (August 8, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-066).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ recently became aware that a reference to the retired AQR
functionality remains in the NASDAQ rule book. Specifically, Rule 4751
provides definitions applicable to the Rule 4600 and 4750 Series,
relating to the trading of securities listed on NASDAQ or a national
securities exchange other than NASDAQ. Rule 4751(d) provides
definitions of terms used in the routing of orders and subparagraph (2)
of the rule provides a definition of the term ``Automatic Quote
Refresh,'' which references the AQR functionality that was retired.
Accordingly, NASDAQ is proposing to eliminate the current Rule
4751(d)(2) text in its entirety, holding the rule number in reserve.
2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the proposed rule change is Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act,\5\ which requires the rules of an exchange to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule meets these requirements in
that it eliminates language from the rule book that references the now-
retired AQR functionality. NASDAQ believes that leaving the language in
the rule book may be confusing to investors and it was NASDAQ's intent
when it retired AQR to remove all references to AQR from the rule book.
Accordingly, NASDAQ believes that it is consistent with the Act to
remove this now defunct reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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. The proposed
change will remove rule text from NASDAQ's rule book that references a
retired functionality and which now has no effect or purpose. As such,
NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change will have no effect
whatsoever on competition.

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 foregoing proposed rule change does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest, does not
impose any significant burden on competition, and, by its terms, does
not 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) of the Act \6\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest because the proposal will allow NASDAQ to make the
deletion operative in the quickest time possible to avoide potential
market participant confusion. Therefore, the Commission designates the
proposal operative upon filing.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the
Commission has 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2013-083 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2013-083. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2013-083 and should
be submitted on or before July 18, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15371 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32671-32672]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14005]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0339; FRL-9995-60-Region 7]

Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Revocation of Kansas City Area
Transportation Conformity Requirements Plans

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing
approval of Missouri's request to remove the transportation conformity
rule for the Kansas City area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 8, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2019-0339 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jed D. Wolkins, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number (913) 551-
7588; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2019-
0339, at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    The EPA is proposing to approve the removal of 10 CSR 10-2.390
Kansas City Area Transportation Conformity Requirements. Pursuant to 40
CFR 93.102 (b) transportation conformity must be conducted in all non-
attainment and maintenance areas and States must adopt State Plans to
conduct transportation conformity. The Kansas City Area, Clay, Jackson,
and Platte Counties, were designated non-attainment for the 1979 one
hour ozone standard (40 CFR 81.326, March 3, 1978). On July 23, 1992
the Kansas City Area was redesignated as attainment/maintenance (57 FR
27939, July 23, 1992). Pursuant to CAA Section 175A, the maintenance
status lasted for two consecutive ten year periods from the effective
date of the EPA's approval of the first ten-year maintenance plan and
redesignation of the area to attainment for the NAAQS. On July 23,
2012, the second maintenance plan ended as did the requirement for
transportation conformity in the Kansas City Area. Pursuant to 40 CFR
51.1118, as the Kansas City Area is in attainment for all standards,
the Kansas City Area Transportation Conformity Requirements are no
longer needed. If in the future, the Kansas City Area was to be
determined to be non-attainment with a standard requiring conformity,
the State would have to develop new transportation conformity
requirements. Furthermore, the Kansas City Area Transportation
Conformity Requirements are not relied on in any other maintenance or
attainment plan.

III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP

submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The
state provided public notice from May 15, 2018 to August 2, 2018, and
received no comments on this rule. In addition, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.

IV. What action is the EPA taking?

    We are processing this as a proposed action because we are
soliciting comments on this proposed action. Final rulemaking will
occur after consideration of any comments.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, as described in the proposed amendments to 40 CFR
part 52 set forth below, the EPA is proposing to remove provisions of
the EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations from the Missouri State
Implementation Plan, which is incorporated by reference in accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Administrator is required to
approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements
and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not
involve technical standards; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: June 24, 2019.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart--AA Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing
the entry ``10-2.390'' under the heading ``Chapter 2--Air Quality
Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the Kansas City
Metropolitan Area''.
[FR Doc. 2019-14005 Filed 7-8-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 67954]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23601]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 70

[EPA-R07-OAR-2016-0529; FRL-9953-33-Region 7]

Approval of Missouri's Air Quality Implementation Plans and
Operating Permits Program; Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule and Non-
Substantive Definition and Language Changes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) and the 40
CFR part 70 operating permits program. EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to two Missouri rule(s) entitled, ``Construction Permits
Required,'' and ``Operating Permits.'' This proposed action is
consistent with the July 12, 2013, U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia and the June 23, 2014, U.S. Supreme Court actions
regarding Greenhouse Gas Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
Title V Permitting. This action makes non-substantive changes to
definitions, and language clarifications.

DATES: Comments must be received by November 2, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2016-0529, http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Gonzalez, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document proposes to take action to
approve revisions to the Missouri Title V Operating Permits Program and
the Missouri SIP. We have published a direct final rule approving the
State's SIP revision(s) in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of
this Federal Register, because we view this as a noncontroversial
action and anticipate no relevant adverse comment. We have explained
our reasons for this action in the preamble to the direct final rule.
If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action on
this proposed rule. If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw the
direct final rule and it will not take effect. We would address all
public comments in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
For further information, please see the information provided in the
ADDRESSES section of this document.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 21, 2016.
Mark Hague,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2016-23601 Filed 9-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 128 (Thursday, July 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 43110]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14256]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP23-852-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement
Filing--Macquarie #154222 to be effective 7/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 6/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230628-5078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/10/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-853-000.
    Applicants: WTG Hugoton, LP.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Annual Fuel Retention
Percentage Filing 2023-2024 to be effective 8/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 6/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230628-5167.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/10/23.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: June 29, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-14256 Filed 7-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


2015 Ozone Transport FIP Meeting Title:Good Neighbor Plan Proposal Comments Submitted by ERCOT Date/Time: 9/22/2022, 11AM-12PM EST Agenda/Meeting Summary: Stakeholder engagement conducted to discuss the questions and concerns identified in the comment submissions regarding ensuring electric reliability under the proposed rule raised by reliability authorities during the GNP comment period.  Participants/Affiliations: Name Affiliation Corcoran, Katherine EPA Rickerson, Woody ERCOT Tom Hunter TEXAS PUC Lifland, David EPA Lalani, Imran EPA Bigbee, Nathan ERCOT Fisher, Brian EPA Profeta, Timothy EPA Murray, Beth EPA Powers, Garrett EPA Rebecca Zerwas TEXAS PUC Schramm, Daniel EPA