[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 183 (Thursday, September 22, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57834-57836]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20421]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2021-0342; FRL-9971-02-R4]

Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Revision of Enhanced Inspection and
Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving changes
to State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of
Georgia, through the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GA DNR),
Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD), in a letter dated April 30,
2021. The revisions remove obsolete references and provisions, clarify
the State's inspection and maintenance (I/M) requirements, and update
terminology, in part to reflect advances in test and vehicle
technology. EPA evaluated the SIP revisions and determined the changes
will not impact emissions under the Georgia I/M program. EPA also
determined that approval of the SIP revisions will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of any national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS) or with any other applicable requirement of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act). Therefore, EPA is approving the Georgia's April 30, 2021,
SIP revisions as consistent with the applicable provisions of the CAA.

DATES: This rule is effective October 24, 2022.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2021-0342. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9222. Ms. Kelly Sheckler can also be reached via electronic
mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    EPA is approving changes to the Georgia SIP that were provided to
EPA under a cover letter dated April 30, 2021.\1\ Specifically, GA EPD
submitted changes to Georgia's Rule 391-3-20--Enhanced Inspection and
Maintenance (``Georgia I/M Regulation''), which were adopted by the GA
DNR Board of Directors and became state-effective on April 13, 2021.
The changes update the Georgia SIP to remove obsolete references,
requirements, and terminology, and update terminology to reflect
advances in technology. These proposed changes include removing and
revising definitions applicable to the Georgia I/M Regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA officially received Georgia's I/M SIP revision request
on May 4, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Georgia's April 30, 2021, SIP revisions sought to modify the
following sections of the Georgia's SIP-approved I/M Regulation: Rule
391-3-20-.01--``Definitions''; Rule 391-3-20-.04--``Emission Inspection
Procedures''; Rule 391-3-20-.05--``Emission Standards''; Rule 391-3-
20-.07--``Inspection Equipment System Specifications''; Rule 391-3-
20-.09--``Inspection Station

Requirements''; and Rule 391-3-20-.11--``Inspector Qualifications and
Certification.''
    On July 11, 2022, EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) to propose approval of the aforementioned changes to Georgia's
SIP. See 87 FR 41080. EPA's July 11, 2022, NPRM includes further detail
on the changes made in Georgia's April 30, 2021, submittal as well as
EPA's rationale for approving these changes to the SIP. Comments were
due on the July 11, 2022, NPRM on or before August 10, 2022, and EPA
received no comments on that proposal. Therefore, EPA is approving the
changes in this final action.

II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, and as discussed in Section I of this preamble, EPA is finalizing
the incorporation by reference of Georgia Rules 391-3-20-.01--
Definitions; 391-3-20-.04--Emission Inspection Procedures; 391-3-
20-.05--Emission Standards; 391-3-20-.07--Inspection Equipment System
Specifications; 391-3-20-.09--Inspection Station Requirements; and 391-
3-20-.11--Inspector Qualifications and Certification, all of which have
an effective date of April 13, 2021, into the Georgia SIP. EPA has made
and will continue to make these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information). Therefore, the revised materials
as stated above, have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the State
implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's
approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next update to
the SIP compilation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action approving changes to the Georgia SIP
that were provided to EPA in a cover letter dated April 30, 2021. GA
EPD submitted changes to Georgia's Rule 391-3-20--Enhanced Inspection
and Maintenance (``Georgia I/M Regulation''), which were adopted by the
GA DNR Board of Directors and became state-effective on April 13, 2021.
Specifically, Georgia's April 30, 2021, SIP revisions modify the
following sections of the Georgia's SIP-approved I/M Regulation: Rule
391-3-20-.01--Definitions; Rule 391-3-20-.04 --Emission Inspection
Procedures; Rule 391-3-20-.05--Emission Standards; Rule 391-3-20-.07--
Inspection Equipment System Specifications; Rule 391-3-20-.09--
Inspection Station Requirements; and Rule 391-3-20-.11--Inspector
Qualifications and Certification.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 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. 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);
     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 Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; 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 as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 21, 2022. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 15, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
as follows:

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 L--Georgia

0
2. In Sec.  52.570(c), amend the table by revising the entries for
``391-3-20-.01'', ``391-3-20-.04'', ``391-3-20-.05'', ``391-3-20-.07'',
``391-3-20-.09'', and ``391-3-20-.11,'', to read as follows:

Sec.  52.570   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA Approved Georgia Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
391-3-20-.01.....................  Definitions........       4/13/2021  9/22/2022, [Insert   ...................
                                                                         citation of
                                                                         publication].

                                                  * * * * * * *
391-3-20-.04.....................  Emission Inspection       4/13/2021  9/22/2022, [Insert   ...................
                                    Procedures.                          citation of
                                                                         publication].
391-3-20-.05.....................  Emission Standards.       4/13/2021  9/22/2022, [Insert   ...................
                                                                         citation of
                                                                         publication].

                                                  * * * * * * *
391-3-20-.07.....................  Inspection                4/13/2021  9/22/2022, [Insert   ...................
                                    Equipment System                     citation of
                                    Specifications.                      publication].

                                                  * * * * * * *
391-3-20-.09.....................  Inspection Station        4/13/2021  9/22/2022, [Insert   ...................
                                    Requirements.                        citation of
                                                                         publication].

                                                  * * * * * * *
391-3-20-.11.....................  Inspector                 4/13/2021  9/22/2022, [Insert   ...................
                                    Qualifications and                   citation of
                                    Certification.                       publication].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-20421 Filed 9-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 153 (Thursday, August 8, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48300-48301]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18683]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1283; Airspace Docket No. 12-AGL-15]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Mahnomen, MN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Mahnomen, MN.
Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new Area Navigation
(RNAV) Standard Instrument Approach Procedures at Mahnomen County
Airport. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, October 17, 2013. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On April 30, 2013, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class E airspace for
the Mahnomen, MN, area, creating controlled airspace at Mahnomen County
Airport (78 FR 25233) Docket No. FAA-2012-1283. Interested parties were
invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written
comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Class E
airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9W dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15, 2012, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to ensure that required controlled airspace exists to
contain new standard instrument approach procedures within a 6-mile
radius of Mahnomen County Airport, Mahnomen, MN. Controlled airspace
enhances the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (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) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at Mahnomen County Airport,
Mahnomen, MN.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E. O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface.

* * * * *

AGL MN E5 Mahnomen, MN [New]

Mahnomen County Airport, MN
    (Lat. 47[deg]15'38'' N., long. 95[deg]55'41'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6-mile radius of Mahnomen County Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 19, 2013.
David P. Medina,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-18683 Filed 8-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 19436-19437]
[DOCID:fr14ap10-109]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61876; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2010-025]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1,
To Amend the By-Laws of The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.

April 8, 2010
    On February 24, 2010, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
amend the By-Laws of its parent corporation, The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.
(``NASDAQ OMX''). The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on March 4, 2010.\3\ The Commission received no
comment letters on the proposed rule change. On March 24, 2010, Nasdaq
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. Because Amendment
No. 1 is technical in nature, the Commission is not publishing it for
comment.\4\ This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified
by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61582 (February 25,
2010), 75 FR 9985 (``Notice'').
    \4\ In Amendment No. 1, Nasdaq noted that the Board of Directors
(``Board'') of NASDAQ OMX originally approved the proposed rule
change on December 16, 2009 and, on March 23, 2010 approved a
portion of the proposed rule change that had not been previously
approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On behalf of its parent company, Nasdaq proposed to make certain
amendments to the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws to modify its direct election
procedures set forth in Article IV, Section 4.4 of the NASDAQ OMX By-
Laws. Under the existing NASDAQ OMX By-Laws, each director receiving a
plurality of the votes at any election of directors at which a quorum
is present is duly elected to the Board.\5\ The NASDAQ OMX Corporate
Governance Guidelines, however, provide a different standard for
uncontested elections and also set forth additional election

procedures and practices.\6\ Nasdaq proposed to amend the NASDAQ OMX's
By-Laws to codify the majority voting standard for uncontested
elections contained in the Corporate Governance Guidelines; contested
elections would remain subject to the plurality standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In the Notice, Nasdaq stated that this is derived from
Section 216 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,
which provides that in the absence of the specification in the
certificate of incorporation or bylaws of a Delaware corporation (as
is the case with NASDAQ OMX), the directors of a Delaware
corporation shall be elected by a plurality of the shares present in
person or represented by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote
on the election of directors. See Notice, supra note 3.
    \6\ The proposed rule change incorporates a modified version of
the election procedures and practices contained in the NASDAQ OMX
Corporate Governance Guidelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For uncontested elections, Nasdaq proposed to amend Article IV,
Section 4.4 of the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws to impose a majority voting
standard, instead of the plurality voting standard, that would require
directors to be elected by the holders of a majority of the votes cast
at any meeting for the election of directors at which a quorum is
present. However, because a director holds office until his or her
successor is duly elected and qualified, any incumbent director-nominee
who fails to receive the requisite vote would not automatically cease
to be a director. Instead, NASDAQ OMX would have such director continue
as a ``holdover director'' until such director's death, resignation or
removal, or until his or her successor is duly elected and qualified.
To this end, the proposal also includes a provision that would require
any incumbent nominee, as a condition to his or her nomination for
election, to submit in writing an irrevocable resignation, the
effectiveness of which would be conditioned upon the director's failure
to receive the requisite vote in any uncontested election and the
Board's acceptance of the resignation. The resignation would be
considered by the Nominating & Governance Committee and acted upon by
the Board in the same manner as a resignation tendered under current
rules.\7\ Acceptance of that resignation by the Board would be in
accordance with the policies and procedures adopted by the Board for
such purpose.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See NASDAQ OMX By-Law Article IV, Section 4.5.
    \8\ In the Notice, Nasdaq stated that NASDAQ OMX's policies and
procedures pertaining to the acceptance of the resignation of its
directors are specified in By-Law Article IV, Section 4.4, and that
there are no additional policies and procedures other than the
provisions in the By-Laws. See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\9\
In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,\10\ which requires an
exchange to be so organized and have the capacity to carry out the
purposes of the Act and to comply and to enforce compliance by its
members and persons associated with its members with the Act. The
Commission also finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ which requires that the rules of the
exchange be designed, among other things, to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes
that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78(b)(1).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed rule change to amend the
NASDAQ OMX By-Laws to adopt a majority vote standard for uncontested
elections is consistent with the Act. The Commission believes that the
proposed rule change is designed to allow the members of NASDAQ OMX's
Board of Directors to be elected in a manner that closely reflects the
desires of its shareholders, while also providing a process for
addressing the circumstance when a director fails to receive a majority
of votes in an uncontested election.\12\ The Commission notes that
Nasdaq explained that the process for contested elections is to remain
unchanged because if a majority voting standard were to apply in a
contested election, the likelihood of a ``failed election'' (i.e., a
situation in which no director receives the requisite vote) would be
more pronounced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Commission notes that Nasdaq represented that the
proposed change would not affect NASDAQ OMX's general election
requirements, specifically the voting limitations contained in
NASDAQ OMX's certificate of incorporation. The Commission also notes
that Nasdaq represented that if NASDAQ OMX seeks to further amend
its By-Laws with respect to director elections, including the
adoption of any policies and procedure with respect to such
elections, it will file a proposed rule change with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2010-025), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, be, and it hereby is, approved.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-8469 Filed 4-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 241)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 75983-75986]
[DOCID:fr15de08-21]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 72, 73, 74, 77, and 78

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0774; FRL-8750-7
RIN 2060-AP35

Rulemaking To Reaffirm the Promulgation of Revisions of the Acid
Rain Program Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to reaffirm the promulgation of certain
revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules in order to prevent disruption
of the program, which has achieved significant, cost-effective
reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from utility
sources since its commencement in 1995. These rule revisions were
finalized in the Federal Register notices that also finalized the Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the final Federal Implementation Plans
for CAIR (CAIR FIPs). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit recently issued a decision vacating and remanding CAIR
and the CAIR FIPs. EPA and other parties have petitioned for rehearing,
and the Court has not yet issued a mandate in the case. These revisions
to the Acid Rain Program rules were not addressed by, or involved in
any of the issues raised by, any parties in the proceeding or the
Court. EPA believes it is reasonable to view these revisions as
unaffected by the Court's decision. However, EPA is proposing to
reaffirm--pursuant to its authority under Title IV of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and CAA section 301--the promulgation of these revisions in order
to remove any uncertainty about their regulatory status because they
have been in effect since mid-2006, most of them are crucial to the
ongoing operation of the Acid Rain Program, and the rest of them
streamline and clarify requirements of the program.

DATES: Written comments must be received by January 29, 2009. Any
request for a public hearing must be made by telephone or by e-mail to
the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble by December 22, 2008. If such a telephone or e-mail request
for a public hearing is received by that date, a public hearing will be
held on December 30, 2008 in Washington, DC. For additional information
on a public hearing and comments, see the ADDRESSES and SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION sections of this preamble.

ADDRESSES: Submit any comments, identified by Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0774 (which incorporates by reference the dockets for CAIR and the
CAIR FIPs, i.e., Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0053 and EPA-HQ-OAR-
2004-0076), by mail to Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Any comments may also be
submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier by following
the detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES section of the direct final
rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dwight C. Alpern, Clean Air Markets
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets
Division, Mailcode: 6204J, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Electronic copies of this document can be
accessed through the EPA Web site at: http://epa.gov/airmarkets.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Regulated Entities. Entities regulated by this action primarily are
fossil fuel-fired boilers, turbines, and combined cycle units that
serve generators that produce electricity for sale or cogenerate
electricity for sale and steam. Regulated categories and entities
include:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Examples of potentially regulated
                Category                           NAICS code                          industries
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry................................  221112 and others..........  Electric service providers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities, of which EPA is now
aware, that could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types
of entities not listed in this table could also be regulated. To
determine whether

your facility, company, business, organization, etc., is regulated by
this action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions
in Sec. Sec.  72.6, 72.7, and 72.8 of title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Administrative Procedures Used in This Action. This notice proposes
to reaffirm the promulgation of certain revisions, of the Acid Rain
Program rules, that were previously promulgated and have been in effect
since mid-2006 and to withdraw the interim final rule reaffirming the
promulgation of these same revisions. EPA is publishing at the same
time a direct final rule, reaffirming the promulgation of these
revisions of the Acid Rain Program rules and withdrawing the interim
final rule reaffirming the promulgation of these same revisions, in the
``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no
adverse comment. EPA is also publishing at the same time the interim
final rule (referenced above), reaffirming the promulgation of these
revisions, in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal
Register. The effectiveness of the interim final rule is immediate upon
the date of promulgation in the Federal Register and continues for 12
months from that date, unless the interim final rule is withdrawn on an
earlier date by the direct final rule or, if the direct final rule
itself is withdrawn, the final rule, addressing these rule revisions.
    EPA has explained its reasons for this action in the preamble of
the direct final rule and, in more detail, in the preamble of the
interim final rule.
    If EPA receives no adverse comment during the comment period, the
Agency will not take further action on this proposed rule. If EPA
receives any adverse comment during the comment period, the Agency will
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the direct final rule is being
withdrawn and will not take effect and that the interim final rule is
not being withdrawn. EPA will address timely comments on the direct
final rule in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule.
    EPA does not intend to institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so during the
comment period established in this notice.
    Considerations in Preparing Comments for EPA. For information on
submitting Confidential Business Information and tips on preparing your
comments, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the direct final
rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register.
    Public Hearing. If requested, EPA will hold a public hearing on
this proposed rule. EPA will hold a hearing only if the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble receives by
telephone or e-mail by December 22, 2008 a request for a public hearing
in order to present oral testimony on this proposed rule. If a public
hearing is held on this proposed rule, the hearing will be held on
December 30, 2008. Any person who plans to attend the public hearing
should visit the EPA's Web site at http://epa.gov/airmarkets or contact
the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble to learn if a hearing will be held and, if so, what will be
the location and time for the hearing. Because the hearing will be held
at a U.S. Government facility, everyone planning to attend should be
prepared to show valid picture identification to the security staff in
order to gain access to the meeting room.
    The public hearing, if held, will be limited to comments on this
proposed rule. Each commenter's oral testimony will be limited to 5
minutes. EPA encourages commenters to provide written versions of their
oral testimonies either electronically (on computer disk or CD-ROM) or
in paper copy. The public hearing schedule, including the list of
speakers, will be posted on EPA's Web site at http://epa.gov/
airmarkets. Verbatim transcripts and written statements will be
included in the rulemaking docket.
    The public hearing, if held, will provide interested parties the
opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning this
proposed rule. EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral
presentations, but will not respond to the presentations or comments at
that time. Any oral comments and supporting information presented at
the public hearing will be given the same weight as any other written
statements and supporting information submitted during the comment
period.
    Outline. The following outline is provided to aid in locating
information in this preamble.

I. Acid Rain Rule Revisions Whose Promulgation Is Reaffirmed
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations

I. Acid Rain Rule Revisions Whose Promulgation Is Reaffirmed

    The Acid Rain Program rule revisions whose promulgation EPA
proposes to reaffirm in this notice are described in the preamble of
the direct final rule, and in more detail in the preamble of the
interim final rule, published in the Federal Register simultaneously
with this notice. The reasons why the rule revisions are appropriate
for the Acid Rain Program, why EPA maintains that it should remove any
uncertainty about the legal status of the rule revisions, and therefore
why EPA is issuing this proposed rule are also set forth in the
preambles of the direct final rule and the interim final rule. As
discussed above, EPA also proposes to withdraw the interim final rule
as of effective date of any final rule issued as a result of this
proposed rule.

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)) and is
therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order. In this
action, EPA is simply proposing to reaffirm the promulgation of Acid
Rain Program rule revisions that were previously issued and are
currently in effect and have been since mid-2006.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
This rule simply reaffirms the promulgation of Acid Rain Program rule
revisions that were previously issued, does not change the existing
requirements in 40 CFR parts 72, 73, 74, 77, and 78, and thus does not
change the existing information collection burden. Moreover, EPA
maintains that the effect of these revisions when they were first

promulgated was, if anything, to reduce somewhat the information
collection burden on regulated sources, e.g., by requiring compliance
with the allowance-holding requirement at a source, rather than unit,
level (thereby removing the need to transfer allowances among units at
the same source) and by making other changes to the rules in place when
the rule revisions were originally promulgated (such as removing the
requirement for submission of an annual compliance certification
report). However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
previously approved the information collection requirements in the
existing rules under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0258.
OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40
CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.) (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking
requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other
statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of
today's rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business as defined by the SBA's regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a
small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county,
town, school district or special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on small
entities, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic
impact on small entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory
flexibility analysis is to identify and address regulatory alternatives
``which minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small
entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden or
otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small entities
subject to the rule.
    This rule does not change the existing Acid Rain Program rules and
thus the economic impact of those rules on small entities. The rule
simply proposes to reaffirm the promulgation of existing Acid Rain
Program rule revisions that have been in effect since mid-2006.
Moreover, the effect of these revisions when they were first
promulgated was, if anything, to reduce somewhat the economic impact of
the then-existing rules on all regulated sources and thus on small
entities that might be, or own, regulated sources. For example, by
requiring compliance on a source, rather than a unit, basis, the
revisions reduced the potential for excess emissions penalties due to
an inadvertent error, e.g., in the owner's distribution of allowances
among the units at a source that would cause one unit to have more than
enough allowances to cover emissions and another unit to not have
enough allowances to cover emission. As a further example, the
revisions removed some requirements (e.g., the required submission of
an annual compliance certification report) and thereby removed some
costs of compliance for all regulated sources.
    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
    This rule does not change the existing Acid Rain Program rules and
therefore does not result in any additional expenditures to State,
local, and tribal governments or to the private sector. The rule simply
proposes to reaffirm the promulgation of Acid Rain Program rule
revisions that were previously issued and that are still in effect and
have been since mid-2006. Moreover, the effect of these revisions when
they were first promulgated was, if anything, to reduce somewhat the
expenditures of State, local, and tribal governments and the private
sector under the then-existing Acid Rain Program rules. For the same
reasons, EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255 (Aug.
10, 1999)), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects 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.''
    This rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule simply proposes to
reaffirm the promulgation of Acid Rain Program rule revisions that

were previously issued and that are still in effect and have been since
mid-2006. Moreover, when first promulgated, these revisions did not
have substantial direct effects on States, the relationship between the
national government and the States, or the distribution of power and
responsibilities. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this
rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000)), requires
EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' This rule does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule simply
proposes to reaffirm the promulgation of Acid Rain Program rule
revisions that were previously issued and that are still in effect and
have been since mid-2006. Moreover, when first promulgated, these
revisions did not have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885 (Apr. 23,
1997)), applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be
``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866,
and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has
reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children,
and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency. EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to
those regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such
that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order
has the potential to influence the regulation.
    This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and is not
based on health or safety risks. This rule simply proposes to reaffirm
the promulgation of Acid Rain Program rule revisions that were
previously issued and that are still in effect and have been since mid-
2006. Moreover, when first promulgated, these revisions implemented
certain requirements of the Acid Rain Program that were not on based on
health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This
rule simply proposes to reaffirm the promulgation of Acid Rain Program
rule revisions that were previously issued and that are still in effect
and have been since mid-2006. Moreover, when first promulgated, these
revisions did not address the use of any technical standards. Thus,
this rule is not subject to the NTTAA.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States. EPA has determined that this rule
will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it
does not change the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment, but simply proposes to reaffirm the promulgation of Acid
Rain Program rule revisions that were previously issued and that are
still in effect and have been since mid-2006. Moreover, when first
promulgated, these revisions did not change the level of protection
provided to human health or the environment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 72, 73, 74, 77, and 78

    Environmental protection, Acid rain, Administrative practice and
procedure, Air pollution control, Electric utilities, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: December 5, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E8-29386 Filed 12-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 224 (Thursday, November 20, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69090-69091]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27027]

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

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0772; FRL-9919-09-Region 4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina; Inspection and Maintenance Program Updates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources on January 31, 2008, May 24, 2010,
October 11, 2013, and February 11, 2014, pertaining to rules for
changes for the North Carolina Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)
program. Specifically, these SIP revisions update the North Carolina I/
M program as well as repeal one rule from the federally-approved SIP.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 22,
2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2013-0772, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0772,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0772. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
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 through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The 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 email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email 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. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
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 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nacosta Ward, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9140. Ms. Ward can be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For information regarding the I/M program,
contact Ms. Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality Modeling and
Transportation Section, at the same address above. Telephone number:
(404) 562-9025; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the
associated direct final rule which is published in the Rules Section of
this Federal Register. A detailed rationale for the approval is set
forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are
received in response to this rule by December 22, 2014, no further
activity is contemplated. If EPA receives relevant adverse comments by
December 22, 2014, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
relevant adverse comments received during the public comment period
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting on this document must do so by
December 22, 2014.

    Dated: October 23, 2014.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2014-27027 Filed 11-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22092-22093]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08678]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-2235]

Draft Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Finding of No
Significant Impact Concerning Investigational Use of Oxitec OX513A
Mosquitoes; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is extending the
comment period for the notice that appeared in the Federal Register of
March 14, 2016. In the notice, FDA requested comments on the Draft
Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Finding of No Significant
Impact Concerning Investigational Use of Oxitec OX513A Mosquitoes. The
Agency is taking this action in response to requests for an extension
to allow interested persons additional time to submit comments.

DATES: FDA is extending the comment period on the notice published
March 14, 2016 (81 FR 13371). Submit either electronic or written
comments by May 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2014-N-2235 for ``Draft Environmental Assessment and Preliminary
Finding of No Significant Impact Concerning Investigational Use of
Oxitec OX513A Mosquitoes.'' Received comments will be placed in the
docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of
Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the

claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not
wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available,
you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body
of your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) and preliminary Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) to the Policy and Regulations Staff (HFV-6), Center for
Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist
that office in processing your requests. Persons with access to the
Internet may obtain the draft EA and preliminary FONSI at either http://www.fda.gov/animalveterinary/developmentapprovalprocess/environmentalassessments/ucm300656.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brinda Dass, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-2), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of March 16, 2016,
FDA published a notice with a 30-day comment period to request comments
on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Finding of No
Significant Impact Concerning Investigational Use of Oxitec OX513A
Mosquitoes.
    The Agency has received requests for a 90-day extension of the
comment period for the notice. Each request conveyed concern that the
current 30-day comment period does not allow sufficient time to develop
a meaningful or thoughtful response to the notice.
    FDA has considered the requests and is extending the comment period
for the notice for 30 days, until May 13, 2016. The Agency believes
that a 30-day extension allows adequate time for interested persons to
submit comments without significantly delaying the Agency's decision on
whether to finalize these documents or prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement.

    Dated: April 7, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-08678 Filed 4-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1337-1339]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0892; Notice No. 25-13-21-SC]

Special Conditions: Airbus, A350-900 Series Airplane;
Crashworthiness--Emergency Landing Conditions

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for the Airbus Model
A350-900 series airplanes. These airplanes will have a novel or unusual
design feature associated with crashworthiness of carbon fiber
reinforced plastic used in the construction of the fuselage. The
applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These proposed
special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the
Administrator considers

necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established
by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: Send your comments on or before February 24, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2013-0892
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Martin, FAA, Airframe/Cabin
Safety, ANM-115, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington, 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the proposed special conditions,
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting
data. We ask that you send us two copies of written comments.
    We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We may change these proposed special conditions
based on the comments we receive.

Background

    On August 25, 2008, Airbus applied for a type certificate for their
new Model A350-900 series airplane. Later, Airbus requested and the FAA
approved an extension to the application for FAA type certification to
June 28, 2009, The Model A350-900 series has a conventional layout with
twin wing-mounted Rolls-Royce Trent XWB engines. It features a twin
aisle 9-abreast economy class layout, and accommodates side-by-side
placement of LD-3 containers in the cargo compartment. The basic Model
A350-900 series configuration will accommodate 315 passengers in a
standard two-class arrangement. The design cruise speed is Mach 0.85
with a Maximum Take-Off Weight of 602,000 lbs. Airbus proposes the
Model A350-900 series to be certified for extended operations (ETOPS)
beyond 180 minutes at entry into service for up to a 420-minute maximum
diversion time.
    Changes in the structural behavior of the Airbus Model A350-900
series airplanes compared to currently certificated designs could
degrade the survivability of Model A350-900 series occupants in crash
conditions that are within the limits of survivability for other
designs.
    There is no aircraft-level survivable crash condition specified in
the airworthiness regulations, and metallic aircraft have not been
specifically designed against survivable impact conditions. However,
the structural behavior of previously certificated aircraft in a
survivable crash event and the associated limits are considered
generally acceptable. It is therefore reasonable to expect that a
design using new materials, such as the Model A350-900 series airplanes
use, should be assessed to ensure that the material meets the currently
accepted level of safety. The FAA and industry have collected a
significant amount of experimental data as well as data from crashes of
transport category airplanes that show a high occupant survival rate at
vertical descent velocities up to 30 ft/sec. Based on this information,
the FAA finds it appropriate and necessary for an assessment of the
Model A350-900 series airplanes to span a range of airplane vertical
descent speeds up to 30 ft/sec.

Type Certification Basis

    Under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, Airbus
must show that the Model A350-900 series meets the applicable
provisions of 14 CFR part 25, as amended by Amendments 25-1 through 25-
129.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model A350-900 series because of a
novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed
under Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar
novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also
apply to the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Model A350-900 series must comply with the fuel vent
and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise
certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36 and the FAA must issue a
finding of regulatory adequacy under Sec.  611 of Public Law 92-574,
the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19,
under Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type-certification basis
under Sec.  21.17(a)(2).

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Airbus Model A350-900 series will incorporate the following
novel or unusual design feature: fuselage fabricated with a combination
of carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) and metallic structure. This
is a novel and unusual design feature for a large transport airplane.
Structure fabricated from CFRP may behave differently than metallic
structure in crash conditions because of differences in material
ductility, stiffness, failure modes, and energy absorption
characteristics. Therefore, the impact response characteristics of the
Model A350-900 series airplane must be evaluated to ensure that its
survivable crashworthiness characteristics provide at least the same
level of safety as those of a similarly sized airplane constructed from
traditionally used metallic materials.
    There are no existing regulations that adequately address this
potential difference in impact response

characteristics for what are considered survivable crash conditions.
The proposed special conditions are necessary to ensure a level of
safety equivalent to that provided by 14 CFR part 25.

Discussion

    Factors in crash survivability are retention of items of mass,
maintenance of occupant emergency egress paths, maintenance of
acceptable acceleration and loads experienced by the occupants, and
maintenance of a survivable volume. To provide the same level of safety
as exists with conventional airplane construction, Airbus should show
that the Model A350-900 series airplanes have sufficient
crashworthiness capabilities under foreseeable survivable impact
events. To show this, Airbus should evaluate the impact response
characteristics of the Model A350-900 series airplane to ensure that
its crashworthiness characteristics are not significantly different
from those of a similarly sized airplane built from traditionally used
metallic materials.
    In their evaluation of the Model A350-900 series airplane response
to an impact event, Airbus should demonstrate that the structural
behavior is similar to that expected from a metallic airframe of
similar size to the Model A350-900, or incorporate mitigating design
features that provide a similar level of safety.
    Airbus should demonstrate either through analysis using validated
analytical tools or by direct test evidence that the crash dynamics of
the A350 fuselage structure provides a level of occupant protection
consistent with previously certificated large transport category
airplanes.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these proposed special conditions apply to
Airbus Model A350-900 series airplanes. Should Airbus apply later for a
change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating
the same novel or unusual design feature, the proposed special
conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on the Airbus Model A350-900 series airplanes. It is not a rule of
general applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Proposed Special Conditions

    Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for Airbus Model A350-900 series airplanes.
    The Airbus Model A350-900 series airplanes must provide an
equivalent level of occupant safety and survivability to that provided
by previously certificated wide-body transports of similar size under
foreseeable survivable impact events for the following four criteria.
In order to demonstrate an equivalent level of occupant safety and
survivability, the applicant must demonstrate that Model A350-900
series airplanes meet the following criteria for a range of airplane
vertical descent velocities up to 30 ft/sec.
    1. Retention of items of mass. The occupants, i.e., passengers,
flight attendants, and flightcrew, must be protected during the impact
event from release of seats, overhead bins, and other items of mass due
to the impact loads and resultant structural deformation of the
supporting airframe and floor structures. The applicant must show that
loads due to the impact event and resultant structural deformation of
the supporting airframe and floor structure at the interface of the
airplane structure to seats, overhead bins, and other items of mass are
comparable to those of previously certificated wide-body transports of
similar size for the range of descent velocities stated above. The
attachments of these items need not be designed for static emergency
landing loads in excess of those defined in Sec.  25.561 if impact
response characteristics of the Airbus Model A350-900 series airplanes
yield load factors at the attach points that are comparable to those
for a previously certificated wide-body transport category airplane.
    2. Maintenance of acceptable acceleration and loads experienced by
the occupants. The applicant must show that the impact response
characteristics of the Airbus Model A350-900 series airplane,
specifically the vertical acceleration levels experienced at the seat/
floor interface and loads experienced by the occupants during the
impact events, are consistent with those found in Sec.  25.562(b) or
with levels expected for a previously certificated wide-body transport
category airplane for the conditions stated above.
    3. Maintenance of a survivable volume. For the conditions stated
above, the applicant must show that all areas of the airplane occupied
for takeoff and landing provide a survivable volume comparable to that
of previously certificated wide-body transports of similar size during
and after the impact event. This means that structural deformation will
not result in infringement of the occupants' normal living space so
that passenger survivability will not be significantly affected.
    4. Maintenance of occupant emergency egress paths. The evacuation
of occupants must be comparable to that from a previously certificated
wide-body transport of similar size. To show this, the applicant must
show that the suitability of the egress paths, as determined following
the vertical impact events, is comparable to the suitability of the
egress paths of a comparable, certificated wide-body transport, as
determined following the same vertical impact events.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 22, 2013.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-00104 Filed 1-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67512-67514]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28213]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65637; File No. SR-CME-2011-12]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Mercantile Exchange,
Inc.; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change To Expand Its OTC FX Swaps Clearing Offering

October 26, 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 October 17, 2011, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (``CME'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change described in Items I and II below, which items
have been prepared primarily by CME. The Commission is publishing this
Notice and Order to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons and to approve the proposed rule change on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The proposed rule changes amend current CME rules to expand its
cleared-only, foreign currency (``FX'') swaps offering to support the
introduction of (1) Twenty-six new foreign FX currency derivatives for
over-the counter (``OTC'') cash settlement; and (2) eleven new FX non-
deliverable forward transaction currency pairs for traditional, OTC
cash settlement. Both types of new FX derivatives products will be
offered as cleared-only products.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on CME's Web site
at http://www.cmegroup.com, at the principal office of CME, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CME included statements
concerning the purpose 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 III below. CME 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 Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    CME currently offers clearing for certain U.S. Dollar/Chilean Peso
(``USD/CLP'') spot, forward and swap contracts that are executed
between two counterparties on an over-the-counter (``OTC'') basis.
These products, described in CME Rule 274H, are listed for clearing-
only; after two counterparties submit qualifying transactions to CME,
the transactions are novated to the CME Clearing House. For purposes of
CME Rules, the minimum-fluctuations currency is the Chilean peso and
the clearing-unit currency is the U.S. dollar.
    CME's proposed rule changes are intended to amend certain rules to
support the introduction of additional cleared-only OTC foreign
currency derivatives. More specifically, the proposed filing would add:
(1) Twenty-six new foreign exchange (``FX'') currency derivatives for
over-the counter (``OTC'') cash settlement; and (2) eleven new FX non-
deliverable forward (``NDF'') transaction currency pairs for
traditional, OTC cash settlement. As mentioned above, both categories
of new FX derivatives products will be offered as cleared-only
products.
    The twenty-six new FX pairs are branded as CME WM/Reuters spot,
forward and swap products. They include the following currency pairs:
GBP/USD; USD/CAD; USD/JPY; USD/CHF; AUD/USD; USD/MXN; NZD/USD; USD/ZAR;
EUR/USD; USD/NOK; USD/SEK; USD/CZK; USD/HUF; USD/PLN; USD/ILS; USD/TRY;
USD/DKK; EUR/GBP; EUR/JPY; EUR/CHF; AUD/JPY; CAD/JPY; EUR/AUD; USD/HKD;
USD/SGD; and USD/THB. Although the twenty-six new OTC CME WM/Reuters
currency pairs are capable of being physically deliverable, they may
also be cash settled in U.S. dollars to the OTC FX benchmark WM/Reuters
London FX Closing Spot Rate (4 p.m. London time).
    The eleven new NDF FX pairs are very similar to CME's current USD/
CLP product. These cash-settled OTC products will include the following
currency pairs: USD/BRL; USD/RMB; USD/RUB; USD/COP; USD/PEN; USD/KRW;
USD/INR; USD/MYR; USD/IDR; USD/TWD; and USD/PHP. Like the current CME
USD/CLP product, the USD versus BRL, RMB, RUB, COP, PEN, KRW, INR, MYR,
IDR, TWD and PHP products are offered as NDF-style contracts
financially or cash settled in U.S. dollars with positions held in
clearing at the original trade price marked to the applicable standard
OTC NDF settlement rate option (many are central bank determined/
sanctioned rates). For example, final settlements for USD/BRL spot
transactions are concluded based on the difference between (1) The spot
exchange rate of Brazilian real per U.S. dollar ``Central Bank of
Brazil PTAX offered rate'' as reported for the valid value date for
cash settlement by Banco Central do Brasil for the formal exchange
market, and (2) the original trade price for each transaction, and (3)
the result divided by the BRL per USD spot exchange rate to convert
notional BRLs to USDs. Cash settlement of cleared only transactions

occurs on a net basis at the customer account level.
    OTC FX transactions that are executed bilaterally through brokers,
ECNs or other FX trading platforms, when submitted to CME Clearing, are
novated for purposes of clearing and application of financial
safeguards, bookkeeping, trade processing, and final delivery or cash
settlement. These contracts will be carried in CME's OTC sequestered
account class.
    CME Clearing uses the SPAN system to establish performance bond or
``margin'' requirements for FX spot, forwards and swaps. Initial
performance bond requirements are established at levels that are
consistent with observed levels of volatility in the particular
currency pairing and generally aligned with initial margin levels
applied to current CME FX futures and option contracts, where
applicable. CME Clearing collects and pays in cash between the
counterparties each day. CME Clearing will accept as collateral cash or
any other instruments currently designated as approved collateral for
posting for performance bonds. In order to calculate variation
requirements, settlement prices will be established for each contract
and for each delivery date referencing data collected from a variety of
market sources.
    CME notes that it has also submitted the proposed rule changes that
are the subject of this filing to its primary regulator, the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC'').
    CME believes the proposed rule changes are consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act including Section 17A of the Exchange
Act because they involve clearing of swaps and thus relate solely to
CME's swaps clearing activities pursuant to its registration as a
derivatives clearing organization under the Commodity Exchange Act
(``CEA'') and do not significantly affect any securities clearing
operations of the clearing agency or any related rights or obligations
of the clearing agency or persons using such service. CME further notes
that the policies of the CEA with respect to clearing are comparable to
a number of the policies underlying the Exchange Act, such as promoting
market transparency for over-the-counter derivatives markets, promoting
the prompt and accurate clearance of transactions and protecting
investors and the public interest. The proposed rule changes accomplish
those objectives by offering investors clearing for an expanded range
of FX OTC swap products.

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

    CME does not believe that the proposed rule change will have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition.

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

    CME has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments
regarding this proposed rule change. CME has not received any
unsolicited written comments from interested parties.

III. 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 may be submitted by using the
Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml), or send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-CME-2011-12 on the subject line.
     Paper comments should be sent 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-CME-2011-12. 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of CME. 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-CME-2011-12 and should be
submitted on or before November 22, 2011.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing, CME requested that the Commission approve this
request on an accelerated basis, for good cause shown. CME has
articulated three reasons for granting this request on an accelerated
basis. One, the products covered by this filing, and CME's operations
as a derivatives clearing organization for such products, are regulated
by the CFTC under the CEA. Two, the proposed rule changes relate solely
to FX swap products and therefore relate solely to its swaps clearing
activities and do not significantly relate to CME's functions as a
clearing agency for security-based swaps. Three, not approving this
request on an accelerated basis will have a significant impact on the
swap clearing business of CME as a designated clearing organization.
    Section 19(b) of the Act \3\ directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization. The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of the Act, in particular the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act,\4\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to CME. Specifically, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act which requires, among other things, that the
rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of derivative agreements, contracts,
and transactions because it should allow CME to enhance its services in
clearing foreign currency derivative products, thereby promoting the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1. In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds good cause for accelerating approval because:
(i) The proposed rule change does not

significantly affect any securities clearing operations of the clearing
agency (whether in existence or contemplated by its rules) or any
related rights or obligations of the clearing agency or persons using
such service; (ii) CME has indicated that not providing accelerated
approval would have a significant impact on the foreign currency
derivative products clearing business of CME as a designated clearing
organization; and (iii) the activity relating to the non-security
clearing operations of the clearing agency for which the clearing
agency is seeking approval is subject to regulation by another
regulator.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) \6\ of the
Act, that the proposed rule change (SR-CME-2011-12) is approved on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-28213 Filed 10-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P