[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2587-2589]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01423]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2013-0012]

Proposed Modification to the List of Appropriate NRTL Program
Test Standards and the Scopes of Recognition of Several NRTLs

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA proposes to: (1) Remove and replace a
test standard from the NRTL Program's list of appropriate test
standards; and (2) update the scopes of recognition of several NRTLs.

DATES: Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this
notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on
or before March 11, 2019. All submissions must bear a postmark or
provide other evidence of the submission date.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at: http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2013-0012,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, Room N-3653, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.
Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are
accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal
business hours, 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., E.T.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the above address. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download through the website. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Kevin Robinson
at the address below.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2013-0012). All comments, including any personal
information you provide, are placed in the public docket without
change, and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov.
For further information on submitting comments, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the section of this notice titled
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Extension of comment period: Submit requests for an extension of
the comment period on or before March 11, 2019 to the Office of
Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of
Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW, Room N-3653, Washington, DC 20210, or by fax to (202) 693-
1644.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor by phone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson, NRTL
Program, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department
of Labor by phone<PHONE_NUMBER>. OSHA's web page includes information
about the NRTL Program (see http://www.osha.gov).
    Copies of this Federal Register notice: Electronic copies of this
Federal Register notice are available at http://www.regulations.gov.
This Federal Register notice, as well as other relevant information, is
also available on OSHA's web page at http://www.osha.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The NRTL Program recognizes organizations that provide product
safety testing and certification services to manufacturers. These
organizations perform testing and certification, for purposes of the
Program, to U.S. consensus-based product safety test standards. The
products covered by the NRTL Program consist of those items for which
OSHA safety standards require ``certification'' by a NRTL. The
requirements affect electrical products and 38 other types of products.
OSHA does not develop or issue these test standards, but generally
relies on standards development organizations (SDOs) which develop and
maintain the standards using a method that provides input and
consideration of views of industry groups, experts, users, consumers,
governmental authorities and others having broad experience in the
safety field involved.

Removal of Test Standards From the NRTL List of Appropriate Test
Standards

    OSHA may propose to remove a test standard from the NRTL list of
appropriate test standards based on an internal review in which NRTL
Program staff review the NRTL list of appropriate test standards to
determine if the test standard conforms to the definition of
appropriate test standard defined in NRTL Program regulations and
policy. There are several reasons for removing a test standard based on
this review. First, a document that provides the methodology for a
single test is a test method rather than an appropriate test standard.
A test standard must specify the safety requirements for a specific
type of product(s) (29 CFR 1910.7(c)). A test method, however, is a
``specified technical procedure for performing a test'' (CPL 1-0.3,
App. B). As such, a test method is not an appropriate test standard.
While a NRTL may use a test method to determine if certain safety
requirements are met, a test method is not itself a safety requirement
for a specific product category.
    Second, a document that focuses primarily on usage, installation,
or maintenance requirements would also not be considered an appropriate
test standard (CPL 1-0.3, App. D.IV.B). In some cases, however, a
document may also provide safety test specifications in addition to
usage, installation, and maintenance requirements. In such cases, the
document would be retained as an appropriate test standard based on the
safety test specifications.
    Finally, a document may not be considered an appropriate test
standard

if the document covers products for which OSHA does not require testing
and certification (CPL 1-0.3, App. D.IV.A).
    Similarly, a document that covers electrical product components
would not be considered an appropriate test standard. These documents
apply to types of components that have limitation(s) or condition(s) on
their use, in that they are not appropriate for use as end-use
products. These documents also specify that these types of components
are for use only as part of an end-use product. NRTLs, however,
evaluate such components only in the context of evaluating whether end-
use products requiring NRTL approval are safe for use in the workplace.
Testing such components alone would not indicate that the end-use
products containing the components are safe for use. Accordingly, as a
matter of policy, OSHA considers that documents covering such
components are not appropriate test standards under the NRTL Program.
OSHA notes, however, that it is not proposing to remove from NRTLs'
scopes of recognition any test standards covering end-use products that
contain such components.

II. Proposal To Remove and Replace Test Standards From the NRTL
Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards

    In this notice, OSHA proposes to remove one test standard from the
NRTL Program's list of appropriate test standards that has been
withdrawn by a standards development organization. Additionally, OSHA
is proposing to add a new test standard to replace the withdrawn test
standard.
    Table 1 lists the test standard that OSHA proposes to remove from
the NRTL Program's list of appropriate test standards, as well as an
abbreviated rationale for OSHA's proposed actions. For a full
discussion of the rationale, see, above, Section I of this notice.

 Table 1--Test Standard OSHA Proposes To Remove From NRTL Program's List
                      of Appropriate Test Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Proposed replacement
 Proposed test standard to be       Reason for      test standard(s) (if
            removed              proposed removal       applicable)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 61010A-2-020--Electrical     Standard           UL 61010-2-020--
 Equipment for Laboratory Use;   withdrawn by       Standard for Safety
 Part 2: Particular              Standards          Requirements for
 Requirements for Laboratory     Organization.      Electrical Equipment
 Equipment for Laboratory                           for Laboratory Use;
 Centrifuges.                                       Part 2-020:
                                                    Particular
                                                    Requirements for
                                                    Laboratory Equipment
                                                    for Laboratory
                                                    Centrifuges
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Modifications to Affected NRTLs' Scopes of Recognition

    In this notice, OSHA additionally proposes to update the scopes of
recognition of several NRTLs with a replacement for the test standard
OSHA proposes to remove. The tables in this section (Table 2 thru Table
5) list, for each affected NRTL, the test standard(s) that OSHA
proposes to remove from the scope of recognition of the NRTL along with
the proposed replacement test standard.
    OSHA seeks comment on whether its proposed deletion and replacement
are appropriate, and whether individual tables omit any appropriate
replacement test standard that is comparable to the withdrawn test
standard. If OSHA determines that it omitted any appropriate
replacement test standard that is comparable to the withdrawn test
standard, it will, in its final determination, incorporate the ommitted
replacement test standard into the scope of recognition of each
affected NRTL.
    Comments should consist of pertinent written documents and
exhibits. Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request
in writing, stating the reasons for the request, by the due date for
comments. OSHA will limit any extension to 10 days unless the requester
justifies a longer time period. OSHA may deny a request for an
extension if it is not adequately justified.

    Table 2--Test Standard OSHA Proposes To Remove From the Scope of
            Recognition of the Canadian Standards Association
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Proposed replacement
 Proposed test standard to be       Reason for      test standard(s) (if
            removed              proposed removal       applicable)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 61010A-2-020--Electrical     Standard           UL 61010-2-020--
 Equipment for Laboratory Use;   withdrawn by       Standard for Safety
 Part 2: Particular              Standards          Requirements for
 Requirements for Laboratory     Organization.      Electrical Equipment
 Equipment for Laboratory                           for Laboratory Use;
 Centrifuges.                                       Part 2-020:
                                                    Particular
                                                    Requirements for
                                                    Laboratory Equipment
                                                    for Laboratory
                                                    Centrifuges
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3--Test Standard OSHA Proposes To Remove From the Scope of
              Recognition of Intertek Testing Services, NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Proposed replacement
 Proposed test standard to be       Reason for      test standard(s) (if
            removed              proposed removal       applicable)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 61010A-2-020--Electrical     Standard           UL 61010-2-020--
 Equipment for Laboratory Use;   withdrawn by       Standard for Safety
 Part 2: Particular              Standards          Requirements for
 Requirements for Laboratory     Organization.      Electrical Equipment
 Equipment for Laboratory                           for Laboratory Use;
 Centrifuges.                                       Part 2-020:
                                                    Particular
                                                    Requirements for
                                                    Laboratory Equipment
                                                    for Laboratory
                                                    Centrifuges
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 4--Test Standard OSHA Proposes To Remove from the Scope of
                  Recognition of TUV SUD America, Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Proposed replacement
 Proposed test standard to be       Reason for      test standard(s) (if
            removed              proposed removal       applicable)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 61010A-2-020--Electrical     Standard           UL 61010-2-020--
 Equipment for Laboratory Use;   withdrawn by       Standard for Safety
 Part 2: Particular              Standards          Requirements for
 Requirements for Laboratory     Organization.      Electrical Equipment
 Equipment for Laboratory                           for Laboratory Use;
 Centrifuges.                                       Part 2-020:
                                                    Particular
                                                    Requirements for
                                                    Laboratory Equipment
                                                    for Laboratory
                                                    Centrifuges
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 5--Test Standard OSHA Proposes To Remove from the Scope of
              Recognition of Underwriters Laboratory, Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Proposed replacement
 Proposed test standard to be       Reason for      test standard(s) (if
            removed              proposed removal       applicable)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 61010A-2-020--Electrical     Standard           UL 61010-2-020--
 Equipment for Laboratory Use;   withdrawn by       Standard for Safety
 Part 2: Particular              Standards          Requirements for
 Requirements for Laboratory     Organization.      Electrical Equipment
 Equipment for Laboratory                           for Laboratory Use;
 Centrifuges.                                       Part 2-020:
                                                    Particular
                                                    Requirements for
                                                    Laboratory Equipment
                                                    for Laboratory
                                                    Centrifuges
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To obtain or review copies of comments submitted to the docket,
contact the Docket Office, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, at the above address. These
materials will also be available online at http://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. OSHA-2013-0012.
    OSHA staff will review all comments to the docket submitted in a
timely manner and, after addressing the issues raised by these
comments, will make a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for
Occupational Safety and Health regarding the removal of one test
standard from the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards and
to update the scopes of recognition of several NRTLs. The Assistant
Secretary will make the final decision. In making this decision, the
Assistant Secretary may undertake other proceedings prescribed in
Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. OSHA will publish a public notice of this
final decision in the Federal Register.

V. Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this notice.
Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
657(g)(2)), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25,
2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on February 1, 2019.
Loren Sweatt,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2019-01423 Filed 2-6-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


                             SUPPORTING STATEMENT
	PART A

1.  IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

      1(a) TITLE AND NUMBER OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

      Alternative Affirmative Defense Requirements for Ultra-low Sulfur Diesel.  The current OMB control number is 2060-0639.  The EPA number for this proposed information collection request (ICR) renewal is 2364.04. - RENEWAL

      (b) SHORT CHARACTERIZATION/ABSTRACT

      The highway diesel program regulations require motor vehicle (highway) diesel fuel sold at retail stations to contain 15 parts per million (ppm) sulfur or less (hereafter referred to as ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, or ULSD). General recordkeeping and reporting related to diesel fuel regulations for on-road, non-road and performance-based test methods are included in EPA ICR 1718.08 (OMB Control Number 2060-0277).

      Under the highway diesel fuel regulations, where a violation of the 15 ppm sulfur standard is identified at a retail outlet, the retailer responsible for dispensing the noncompliant fuel is deemed liable, as well as the refiner(s), importer(s) and distributor(s) of such fuel.  The highway diesel regulations further provide, however, that any person deemed liable can rebut this presumption by establishing an affirmative defense that includes, among other things, showing that it conducted a quality assurance sampling and testing program as prescribed by the regulations. This ICR covers burdens and costs associated with provisions that allow refiners and importers of ULSD an alternative means of meeting the affirmative defense requirements in the ULSD regulations by participating in a nationwide diesel fuel sampling and testing program.  The reporting burden covered by this ICR renewal relates to reports that refiners, importers and distributors, have to submit in the event they have a non-complying sulfur test result. (See 40 CFR § 80.613.)  The authority citation for the direct final rule and the association information collection is for the following Clean Air Act sections:  42 United States Code §§ 7414, 7542, 7545, and 7601(a).

2.  NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

      (a) NEED/AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION

      The basic need and authority for the collection of information were established in the ICR for the highway diesel final rule.  The rule established specific recordkeeping and reporting requirements in order to enforce compliance with the 15 ppm sulfur standard for highway diesel fuel.

      (b) PRACTICAL UTILITY/USERS OF THE DATA

      The alternative affirmative defense (survey) provisions are designed to grant flexibility to refiners and importers by permitting them to conduct activities normally conducted on a facility basis on a nationwide basis.  The burden described in this ICR only affects parties who receive a test result that indicates non-compliance.

      The EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, will be the governmental users of the information contained in this proposed information collection.

3.	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

      (a) NONDUPLICATION

      This ICR renewal is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the Agency.  Wherever possible, we have designed the proposed regulation to make sure that there is no unnecessary duplication.

      (b) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ICR SUBMISSION TO OMB

EPA is seeking comment on reporting requirements via Notice.  We have also docketed a copy of our draft ICR supporting statement

      (c) CONSULTATIONS

	We draw upon our experience with the highway diesel program regulations that require motor vehicle (highway) diesel fuel sold at retail stations to dispense compliant ultra low sulfur diesel fuel, or ULSD) containing 15 parts per million (ppm) sulfur or less   We have utilized the estimates used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics figures from "National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment & Wage Estimate "Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing" (May 2011).

      (d) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION

      Less frequent reporting would make discovery and correction of violations take too long to discover from the date of violation, and would give non-complying parties a competitive advantage for long periods of time.  A lesser recordkeeping burden would make verification of compliance extremely difficult.

      (e) GENERAL GUIDELINES

	The general guidelines for the collection of information pursuant to the highway diesel rule are approved in the ICR for the final highway diesel rule.  This rule exceeds the OMB guidelines. EPA requests an exception to the OMB guidelines that agencies may only require records to be maintained for no more than three years. Records can be kept either electronically or on paper. EPA needs to make sure regulated parties keep records long enough to be evaluated for compliance during this time period.  Section 40 CFR Part 80.1454(l) requires record retention for five years from the date the records were created. Any information claimed as confidential will be treated in accordance with 40 CFR Part 2 and established Agency procedures.  Information that is received without a claim of confidentiality may be made available to the public without further

      (f) CONFIDENTIALITY AND SENSITIVE QUESTIONS

       (i) Confidentiality

      Any information submitted to EPA for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to EPA regulations at 40 C.F.R. 2.201 et seq.

      (ii) Sensitive Questions

      This section is not applicable as this proposed ICR does not involve matters of a sensitive nature.

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

      (a) RESPONDENTS/NAICS and SIC CODES

      Recordkeeping and, in some cases, reporting affects the following respondents:  refiners (2911/324110), importers (5172/424720), marketers and other distributors (5171/424710 and 5172/424720).

      (b) INFORMATION REQUESTED

      (i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

      Knowledge of the following definitions at 40 CFR 80.2 is important for a thorough understanding of the reporting and recordkeeping requirements:

      "Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel" means any diesel fuel or other distillate fuel sold in any State (State means a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands) that is used, intended for use in, or made available for use in for use in motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines.

      "Refiner" means any person who own, leases, operates, controls, or supervises a refinery.

      "Importer" means a person who imports diesel fuel from a foreign country into the United States (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands).

      There is a respondent burden associated with refiners, importers and distributors preparing a report for EPA explaining the circumstances behind and root causes for any noncompliant ULSD samples.  There is also an Agency burden associated with reviewing each report.  This burden is estimated below under "ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION".  The following sections describe respondent and Agency activities.

 (ii) 	Respondent Activities

      The following may be required in the event of a non-complying sample:

* Read and comprehend the regulations.
* Gather and organize the information.
* Report the information to EPA, as specified in the regulations.

5.  	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED--AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 	METHODOLOGY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

      (a) AGENCY ACTIVITIES

      The following are required:
* Respond to inquiries.
* Provide access to the regulations and guidance documents.
* Review the submitted information.
* Contact the respondent when the information has not been submitted properly and provide guidance on correction of the problem.
* Perform data analysis and identify violations.

 	 (b) COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT

      The information collection has been developed by EPA offices that have planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of the information in a manner which will enhance the utility of the information for the Agency and the public.  The information collection, to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, Agency efficiency, and responsiveness to the public.  The information is carefully reviewed for compliance with the requirements.

      (c) SMALL BUSINESS FLEXIBILITY

      The alternative affirmative defense rule grants flexibility to all affected parties, regardless of size.  The recordkeeping and reporting burden has been designed to be minimal for respondents of all business sizes.

      (d) COLLECTION SCHEDULE

      Response is only required in the case of a non-complying sample.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

 	(a) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT BURDEN

      We drew upon consultation with industry and our own experience implementing similar regulations to estimate the burden associated with this ICR.  In this collection an association will collect samples of low sulfur diesel and report violations in the industry and report to the EPA. Upon a notice of violation to the EPA, industry has the burden to report reasons for the violation. We estimate 20 responses per year under this collection.

      b.	Estimating the Respondent Burden and Cost

	Three labor categories are involved:  managerial (includes legal and professional review), technical, and clerical. The estimates used the Bureau of Labor Statistics figures from "National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment & Wage Estimate "Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing" (May 2011), with a 3% annual inflation factor applied to bring the values to the present.  Using this method, the following wages and benefits apply by category:

Wages and Benefits

Managerial    		$67.44   per hour
Technical		$65.56   per hour
Clerical		$22.17   per hour

Doubling for company overhead beyond wages and benefits, and for convenience, rounding up to the dollar, gives the following rates for this ICR:

Total Employer Cost

Managerial		$135.00 per hour
Technical		$132.00 per hour
Clerical		 $ 45.00 per hour

It is assumed that for each hour of activity the mix will be about 0.1 hour managerial, 0.7 hour technical, and 0.2 hour clerical.  This gives an average labor cost of $115 per hour rounded up, which will be used in this ICR. This collection includes no annualized capital or operation and maintenance cost.

      (c) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSE

      We were able to estimate the number of regulated entities by drawing upon our experience regulating the same entities.  Respondents for this action may include refiners, importers, and distributors.  Based on submissions received over the past five years and enforcement experience, we expect that no more than five instances of non-compliance resulting in a maximum of five reports will be submitted each year.

                  Annual Respondent Burden Hours & Costs
                     (Including Non-Postage "Other Costs")

	The estimated respondent burden for reviewing each report for a noncompliant sample is 16 hours, or $1,840 per response, so the total respondent burden for submitting five reports per year would be $9,200.

	(d) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST

 	No response is required to notifications unless a potential violation is noted.  This activity will present no significant, quantifiable burden to the Agency.  We have drawn upon our experiences with the highway diesel program and estimate no more than five notifications with an annual burden of 40 burden hours per year and for three years 120 burden hours.  We have one full-time GS-13 technical worker working two hours per response and a GS-15 manager all working no hours of his/her time managing this project per response.

 	The Agency burden consists of a GS-13 technical worker costs at $81.55 an hour including overhead, for an Agency burden of $163.10 per response. With an annual total of $3,262 rounded to the nearest dollar.

       These estimates are derived from "OPM Salary Table 2010-DCB," effective January 2010.  This table may be found at http://archive.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/RUS-h.asp.  The extreme of step 10 was assumed for all categories.  All values were multiplied by 1.6 (which is a common factor utilized in ICRs to account for overhead costs). We rounded the resulting dollar value to the nearest tenth.

	We have assumed that each response will require two hours of technical staff time to review and prepare the written response.  It is estimated that a managers will be required to expend no burden hour per response.

The total annual Agency cost and burden hours are estimated as follows:

Based on historical experience, we expect to find approximately five noncompliant samples per year.  The estimated Agency burden for reviewing each report for a noncompliant sample is two hours, or $163 per response, so the total Agency burden for evaluating 20 reports per year would be $816 rounded to the nearest dollar.

      (e) BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS

The annual estimates in burden hours and costs associated with this rule are as follows:

TOTALS FROM THE TABLES:
RESPONDENTS/AFFECTED ENTITIES:	5
TOTAL NO. OF REPORTS:			5
TOTAL BURDEN HOURS:			80
TOTAL COST:					$9,200

      (f) REASON FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN

 	There is no increase of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. The respondent universe and responses decreased in this collection due to a higher than expected compliance rate.  There was in increase in cost to the industry per response of $704 due to more accurate numbers used to calculate the industry burden and to account for inflation.  There was a decrease in cost to the industry overall of $13,520 due to the reduction of expected responses from 20 to five.

      (g) BURDEN STATEMENT

       The average respondent burden in hours per response for this ICR is estimated at 16 hours.  Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

      To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1158, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov.  This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1158 and OMB Control Number 2060-0639 in any correspondence.

B.	COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

      This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used in the data collection associated with the diesel fuel regulations.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19351-19352]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8258]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-3188-000]

Stream Energy Maryland, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding
Stream Energy Maryland, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to

intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 19, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 30, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8258 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5073-5079]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2202]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66257; File No. SR-Phlx-2012-11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change Regarding Listing and Trading of PHLX
FOREX Options\TM\

January 26, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 23, 2012, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposal to

implement new Phlx Rules 1000C (Applicability of Rule 1000C Series--
PHLX FOREX Options\TM\) \3\; Rule 1001C (Definitions--PHLX FOREX
Options); Rule 1002C (Series of PHLX FOREX Options Open for Trading);
Rule 1003C (Obligations and Quote Spread Parameters Applicable to PHLX
FOREX Options Specialists and Registered Options Traders); Rule 1004C
(Bids And Offers of PHLX FOREX Options); Rule 1005C (Minimum Increments
of PHLX FOREX Options); Rule 1006C (Closing Settlement Value of PHLX
FOREX Options); Rule 1007C (FLEX--PHLX FOREX Options); \4\ Rule 1008C
(Position Limits--PHLX FOREX Options); and Rule 1009C (Exercise
Limits--PHLX FOREX Options) to: list and trade U.S. dollar-settled
foreign currency (``foreign currency'') options known as PHLX FOREX
Options on the British pound, the Swiss franc, the Canadian dollar, the
Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, and the Euro.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ PHLX FOREX Options \TM\ is a trademark of NASDAQ OMX PHLX
LLC.
    \4\ FLEX options are flexible exchange-traded options contracts
that overlie index, equity, and currency securities. FLEX options
provide investors with the ability to customize basic option
features including size, expiration date, exercise style, and
certain exercise prices. FLEX option trading is generally described
in Rule 1079, which along with proposed Rule 1007C, is applicable to
PHLX FOREX Options.
    \5\ The proposed PHLX FOREX Options would be listed on
underlying currencies that also underlie foreign currency options
(``FCOs,'' also known as World Currency Options or ``WCOs'')
currently listed on the Exchange (e.g. the British pound, the Swiss
franc, the Canadian dollar, the Australian Dollar, the New Zealand
dollar, and the Euro). The product specifications for the current
FCOs (WCOs), which are not altered by or as a result of this filing,
may be found at http://www.nasdaqomxtrader.com/wco.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend Phlx Option Floor Procedure
Advices \6\ F-6 (Option Quote Parameters) and F-15 (Minor Infractions
of Position/Exercise Limits and Hedge Exemptions) to properly harmonize
Exchange Advices and rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Options Floor Procedure Advices (``OFPAs'' or Advices''),
which may correspond to Exchange rules, contain the Exchange's minor
rule plan (``MRP'' or ``Minor Rule Plan'') in respect of options
trading. The Minor Rule Plan consists of Advices with preset fines,
pursuant to Rule 19d-1(c) under the Act. 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c). The
Exchange is not, by this filing, amending the fine schedule for any
OFPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXRulefilings,
at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to establish new Rules
1000C through 1009C that would, in conjunction with current Exchange
trading rules, allow listing and trading foreign exchange (also known
as ``Forex'' or ``FX'') options on the British Pound, the Swiss Franc,
the Canadian Dollar, the Australian Dollar, the New Zealand dollar
(``PHLX FOREX Options''). The Exchange is also amending Advices F-6 and
F-15 to harmonize Exchange Advices and rules.
    The primary difference between current WCOs or FCOs and proposed
PHLX FOREX Options will be the pricing convention of PHLX FOREX Options
based on the spot market prices for the underlying currencies. The
proposed methodology or convention for pricing PHLX FOREX Options \7\
resembles the ``spot market pricing'' in use for currency futures and
options on currency futures contracts \8\ on the same underlying
currencies.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See proposed Rule 1001C.
    \8\ A currency futures contract is a transferable futures
contract that specifies the price at which a currency can be bought
or sold at a future expiration date.
    \9\ CME Group Inc. (``CME'') lists and trades futures and
options on futures contracts on many of the PHLX FOREX Options that
are proposed to be listed and traded by the Exchange including the
Australian dollar, the British pound, the Canadian dollar, and the
Euro. Examples of settlement (closing) spot prices of futures
contracts on these currencies (e.g. 1.0565 for the Euro) can be
found at ftp://ftp.cmegroup.com/pub/settle/stlcur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Exchange listed and traded physical delivery FCOs from 1982
through early 2007 through open outcry.\10\ In 2004, the Exchange's
options trading platform, Phlx XL, was approved for options trading;
\11\ this allowed options on foreign currencies to be traded
electronically as well as manually. In January 2007, the Exchange
listed and began trading cash-settled FCOs on the British pound and the
Euro.\12\ In July 2007, the Exchange listed and began trading FCOs on
the Australian dollar, Canadian dollar, Swiss franc, and Japanese
yen.\13\ In June 2009, the Exchange received approval to list ten
additional FCOs (WCOs) and to change their pricing convention so that
it was similar to the pricing convention used for index options by
adding multipliers to spot currency prices.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The last physical delivery FCOs that were listed on the
Exchange were traded out or expired by March 2007.
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49832 (June 8,
2004), 69 FR 33442 (June 15, 2004) (SR-Phlx-2003-59) (approving Phlx
XL). See also Release No. 59995 (May 28, 2009) SR-Phlx-2009-32
(approving Phlx XL II, the Exchange's new electronic trading
platform).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54989 (December 21,
2006), 71 FR 78506 (December 29, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-34). In
approving the listing and trading of FCOs on the British pound and
the Euro, the approval order stated that the listing and trading of
additional FCOs on other foreign currencies will require the
Exchange to file additional proposed rule changes on Form 19b-4.
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56034 (July 10,
2007), 72 FR 38853 (July 16, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-34).
    \14\ The ten additional FCOs (WCOs) approved for listing and
trading were the Mexican peso, the Brazilian real, the Chinese yuan
(also known as the renminbi), the Danish krone, the New Zealand
dollar, the Norwegian krone, the Russian ruble, the South African
rand, the South Korean won, and the Swedish krona See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 60169 (June 24, 2009), 74 FR 31782 (July 2,
2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-40) (approval order). This filing also deleted
all reference to customized FCOs, which had ceased being traded on
the Exchange. See also supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently lists eleven FCOs (WCOs).\15\ These options
trade in the manual auction market as well as electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The currencies underlying these FCOs (WCOs) include: the
Australian dollar, the British pound, the Canadian dollar, the Euro,
the Japanese yen, the Mexican peso, the New Zealand dollar, the
Norwegian krone, the South African rand, the Swedish krona, and the
Swiss franc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposal allows the Exchange to list and trade PHLX FOREX
Options on six of the same foreign currencies that underlie foreign
currency options (FCOs or WCOs) that are currently traded on the
Exchange, namely the British pound, the Swiss franc, the Canadian
dollar, the Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, and the Euro.
The proposal allows PHLX FOREX Options to be listed and traded in
parallel to current FCOs (WCOs) and in a similar manner, by using the
proposed PHLX FOREX Option rules in conjunction with existing Exchange
rules and processes for foreign currency options (FCOs or WCOs). The
proposal does not affect the continued listing and trading

of FCOs or WCOs on the Exchange. Moreover, to minimize investor
confusion during such time, if any, that PHLX FOREX Options and FCOs
(WCOs) are traded on the Exchange in parallel on the same underlying
currencies, the Exchange intends to engage in an educational effort to
inform potential traders and investors about the differences in the
PHLX FOREX Options and FCO (WCO) products.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For example, as discussed in the filing the pricing of PHLX
FOREX Options and FCOs (WCOs) would be different in that the pricing
of a Euro PHLX FOREX Option would resemble spot market pricing (e.g.
1.0031) while the pricing of a Euro FCO (WCO) would resemble index
option pricing (e.g. 100.31). And, the pricing symbology would be
different in that PHLX FOREX Option prices would be reflected to
four decimal places and FCOs (WCOs) prices to two places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHLX FOREX Options listed by the Exchange would, like WCOs or FCOs,
be cleared by The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') \17\ and would
be European style.\18\ Upon exercise, holders of options contracts
would receive U.S. dollars representing the difference between the
exchange rate and the exercise price of the option,\19\ which would be
multiplied by the units of currency \20\ in each PHLX FOREX Option
contract. For example, upon exercise of an in-the-money PHLX FOREX
Options call option, the holder would receive from OCC U.S. dollars
representing the difference between the exercise price and the closing
settlement value of the cash-settled option contract multiplied by the
units of currency. Upon exercise of an in-the-money PHLX FOREX Options
put option, the holder would receive from OCC U.S. dollars representing
the excess of the exercise price over the closing settlement value of
the cash-settled option contract multiplied by the units of currency.
Additionally, PHLX FOREX Options that are in-the-money by any amount on
the expiration date would be exercised automatically by OCC, while PHLX
FOREX Options that are out-of-the-money on the expiration date would
expire worthless.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54935 (December 13,
2006), 71 FR 76417 (December 20, 2006) (SR-OCC-2006-10) (proposing
to amend OCC's by-laws and rules to accommodate the clearance and
settlement of the Exchange's WCOs or FCOs).
    \18\ Unlike American style options, European style options may
be exercised only on the day that they expire.
    \19\ Proposed Rule 1006C.
    \20\ Each PHLX FOREX Option contract for the six currencies
discussed in this filing would, like each WCO or FCO contract, have
10,000 units of currency. The product specifications for the new
PHLX FOREX Options may be found at http://www.nasdaqomxtrader.com/wco.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposal

    The changes proposed herein regarding the methodology or convention
of pricing PHLX FOREX Options would, as noted, closely resemble the
``spot market pricing'' that has been in use for decades for futures
and options on futures contracts on the currencies that underlie PHLX
FOREX Options. The Exchange receives spot market prices for currencies
underlying the FCOs (WCOs) from a data vendor, which at this time is
SIX Telekurs,\21\ and converts such spot market prices to Exchange Spot
Prices by applying an appropriate multiplier (e.g. 100 or 1000).\22\
Currently, the closing settlement value for FCO (WCO) settlement
purposes is the Exchange Spot Price at 12:00:00 Eastern Time (noon) on
the last trading day prior to expiration.\23\ The Exchange currently
generates a settlement value report for each underlying currency; and
publicly disseminates unique FCO (WCO) trading symbols and settlement
values in order to differentiate between live underlying markets and
12:00:00 noon FCO (WCO) settlement prices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ SIX Telekurs specializes in the procurement, processing and
distribution of international financial information for investment
advisory services, fund administration, portfolio management,
financial analysis and securities administration. SIX Telekurs
collects data directly from hundreds of contributors and exchanges
as well as more than thirty (30) worldwide contributing banks. This
data is, as discussed, the basis for the foreign currency spot
market prices that SIX Telekurs provides to the Exchange.
    The Exchange notes that spot market prices for currencies
underlying PHLX FOREX Options are also calculated by other entities
and available to investors from other sources such as market data
vendors Bloomberg, Reuters, and Thomson. Investors can also get spot
market prices for free from sources such as http://finance.yahoo.com/ and http://www.allstocks.com/1bigcharts.htm; as
well as from brokers with whom investors have a trading account.
    \22\ For a definition of Exchange Spot Price, see Rule
1000(b)16.
    The International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'') similarly
applies multipliers to its cash-settled rate-modified currency
options (which are not fungible with Phlx's WCOs or FCOs) so that
they tend to look like the prices of index and other options. See
Exchange Act Release No. 55575 (April 3, 2007), 72 FR 17963 (April
10, 2007) (SR-ISE-2006-59).
    \23\ See Rule 1057.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For PHLX FOREX Options, however, the Exchange will not use Exchange
Spot Prices for settlement (or any other) purpose. Instead, the
Exchange will use the spot market prices that it receives from SIX
Telekurs or another data vendor at 12:00:00 Eastern Time (noon) on the
last trading day prior to expiration to calculate settlement values--
but will not apply any multiplier as it does for FCOs (WCOs).\24\ These
PHLX FOREX Option settlement values will be, similarly to FCOs (WCOs),
publicly disseminated with unique trading symbols to differentiate
between live underlying markets and 12:00:00 Eastern Time (noon) PHLX
FOREX Option settlement prices. Except for applying multipliers for FCO
(WCO) settlement values, the settlement value methodologies will
largely be similar for PHLX FOREX Options and FCOs (WCOs). As an
example, the July 2012 settlement value of a PHLX FOREX Option on the
Euro may be $1.4338 based on the spot market price of the underlying
currency; whereas the July 2012 settlement value price of a WCO (FCO)
on the Euro may be $143.38 based on the application of a 100 multiplier
to the similar spot market price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Proposed Rule 1006C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHLX FOREX Options will, as discussed, be similar--and in many
respects identical--to FCOs (WCOs) and will trade in a like fashion. As
such, in the proposed rules the Exchange initially sets forth the
principle that its existing rules and procedures would be applicable to
PHLX FOREX Options and the proposed PHLX FOREX Options rules would
supplement existing rules. Specifically, new Rule 1000C states that
unless otherwise specified, the proposed rules in the Rule1000C series
of rules (``Rule 1000C Series'') are applicable only to PHLX FOREX
Options. Rule 1000C states that except to the extent that specific
rules in the Rule 1000C Series govern, or unless the context otherwise
requires, the provisions of the Option Rules applicable to foreign
currency options \25\ and of the By-Laws \26\ and all other Rules and
Policies of the Board of Directors \27\ are applicable to the trading
on the Exchange of PHLX FOREX Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Option Rules 1000 et seq. and 1000A et seq.
    \26\ By-Laws Articles I to VII.
    \27\ Rules of the Exchange Rule 1 et seq. and Options Floor
Procedure Advices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definitions

    PHLX FOREX Options are defined in Rule 1001C. Specifically,
Subsection (a)(1) states that the term ``PHLX FOREX Option'' means: (i)
A U.S. dollar-settled foreign currency option contract, (ii) on the
standard unit of an underlying currency (discussed below) that is the
official medium of exchange of a sovereign government including the
United States Government (e.g., the British pound, the Swiss franc, the
Canadian dollar, the Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, or the
Euro). This is identical to current WCO or FCO

options.\28\ However, subsection (iii) also states that a PHLX FOREX
Option will use the spot market price of the underlying currency for
pricing and for settlement. This third characteristic of PHLX FOREX
Options represents the crucial difference between PHLX FOREX Options
and WCOs or FCOs: The pricing of PHLX FOREX Options (whether intra-day,
end of day, or settlement pricing) will be based on the relevant
underlying currency and will therefore resemble the spot market pricing
of futures on the relevant underlying currency--without application of
a multiplier as for WCOs or FCOs. As a result, where the price for Euro
PHLX FOREX Options might read 1.4732, the Exchange Spot Market Price
for Euro WCOs or FCOs might read 147.32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Rule 1000(b)(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The term ``unit of underlying foreign currency'' in respect of PHLX
FOREX Options is defined in subsection (a)(2) of Rule 1001C to mean a
single unit of the foreign currency. This is identical to the
definition of underlying currency for WCOs or FCOs. Thus, a unit of
currency underlying a Euro PHLX FOREX Options or a British Pound PHLX
FOREX Options would be one Euro or one British pound, respectively.

Opening and Adding New PHLX FOREX Options

    The Exchange proposes Rule 1002C regarding the series of underlying
PHLX FOREX Options that may be opened for trading after a particular
class of PHLX FOREX Option has been approved for listing and trading on
the Exchange. Specifically, the Exchange proposes subsection (a)(i)
stating that at the commencement of trading on the Exchange of a
particular class of PHLX FOREX Options, the Exchange will open a
minimum of one expiration month and series for each class of options
open for trading on the Exchange.\29\ The exercise price of each series
of PHLX FOREX Options opened for trading on the Exchange will be fixed
in terms of U.S. dollars per unit of the underlying currency at a price
per unit which is reasonably close to the current spot market price of
the underlying foreign currency in the foreign exchange market at or
before the time such series of options is first opened for trading on
the Exchange. This is the same as the procedure for opening initial
months and series and fixing expiration terms of equity options and
index options on the Exchange, and continues the process of harmonizing
exchange rules in the listing area.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The Exchange notes that it currently intends to open two
quarterly and two additional near-term months.
    \30\ For recent proposals harmonizing Exchange rule provisions
regarding opening and adding equity and index options, see
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 64741 (June 24, 2011), 76 FR
38444 (June 30, 2011) (SR-Phlx-2011-65) (order approving); 63700
(January 11, 2011), 76 FR 2931 (January 18, 2011) (SR-Phlx-2011-04)
(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness; and 57478 (March 12,
2008), 73 FR 14521 (March 18, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-004 and NASDAQ-
2007-080) (order approving). The Exchange notes that the opening of
FCOs (WCOs) has not yet been harmonized to the one month one series
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding additional series of options, proposed subsection (a)(ii)
to Rule 1002C states that additional series of PHLX FOREX Options of
the same class may be opened for trading on the Exchange when the
Exchange deems it necessary to maintain an orderly market, to meet
customer demand or when the market price of the underlying stock moves
more than five strike prices from the initial exercise price or
prices.\31\ Regarding long-term options, proposed subsection (a)(iii)
states that with respect to any class of PHLX FOREX Options series the
Exchange may list options having up to thirty-nine months from the time
they are listed until expiration (with up to six additional expiration
months). Strike price interval, bid/ask differential and continuity
rules shall not apply to such options series until the time to
expiration is less than nine months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Proposed subsection (a)(ii) to Rule 1002C states further:
The opening of a new series of options shall not affect the series
of options of the same class previously opened. New series of
options on an individual stock may be added until the beginning of
the month in which the options contract will expire. Due to unusual
market conditions, the Exchange, in its discretion, may add a new
series of PHLX FOREX Options until five (5) business days prior to
expiration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pricing of PHLX FOREX Options

    Proposed subsection (b) of Rule 1002C states that for each
expiration of PHLX FOREX Options, the Exchange may initially list
exercise strike prices within a 40 percent band around the current spot
market price for an underlying currency for a PHLX FOREX Option (known
as the ``spot market''). These options could be listed at $.0050
intervals. As the spot market moves, the Exchange may list new strike
prices that, at the time of listing, do not exceed the spot market by
more than 20 percent and are not less than the spot market by more than
20 percent (commensurate with the 40 percent band). For example, if at
the time of initial listing, the spot market of the Euro is at $1.000
the strike prices the Exchange would list for the PHLX FOREX Option
will be $.800 to $1.20 in $.0050 intervals. If the spot market then
moves to $1.3050, the Exchange may list additional strikes at the
following prices in $.0050 intervals: $1.045 to $1.565. The spot market
pricing convention is reflected in other proposed rules.
    The quote spread parameters (or bid/ask differentials) with respect
to PHLX FOREX Options are noted in subsection (a) of Rule 1003C, which
is applicable to PHLX FOREX Options specialists and Registered Options
Traders (``ROTs''). In subsection (a), the Exchange proposes to use the
spot market price convention but move the decimal point two places to
the right so that a bid and/or offer differential of $.0025 would be
``expressed as'' $.25 for trading purposes.\32\ Regarding electronic
quotations, the Exchange proposes to state in subsection (b) to Rule
1003C that PHLX FOREX Options may be quoted electronically with a
difference not to exceed $.0500 (expressed as $5.00) between the bid
and offer regardless of the price of the bid.\33\ The Exchange believes
that because such proposed ``expressed as'' price demarcations are
similar to how prices are now expressed for equity options, it would be
easier for PHLX FOREX Options participants to use the expressed as
pricing for trading purposes.\34\ ``Expressed as'' pricing is used in
several other proposed PHLX FOREX Option rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Proposed subsection (a) to Rule 1003C states in full: With
respect to all PHLX FOREX Options, bidding and/or offering so as to
create differences of no more than $.0025 (expressed as $.25)
between the bid and the offer for each option contract for which the
prevailing bid is less than $.0200 (expressed as $2.00); no more
than $.0040 (expressed as $.40) where the prevailing bid is $.0200
(expressed as $2.00) or more but less than $.0500 (expressed as
$5.00); no more than $.0050 (expressed as $.50) where the prevailing
bid is $.0500 (expressed as $5.00) or more but less than $.1000
(expressed as $10.00); no more than $.0080 (expressed as $.80) where
the prevailing bid is $.1000 (expressed as $10.00) or more but less
than $.2000 (expressed as $20.00); and no more than $.0100
(expressed as $1.00) where the prevailing bid is $.2000 (expressed
as $20.00).
     Proposed OFPA F-6 is similar.
    \33\ Proposed subsection (b) to Rule 1003C states further: The
bid/ask differentials set forth in this subparagraph (b) only
applies to electronic quotations and only following the opening
rotation in each security (i.e., the bid/ask differentials specified
in sub-paragraph (a) above shall apply during opening rotation).
Quotations provided in open outcry may not be made with bid/ask
differentials set forth in this subparagraph (b) and instead must
comply with the legal bid/ask differential requirements described in
sub-paragraph (a) above and not in this sub-paragraph (b).
    \34\ As an example, it would be unwieldy for a trader in a crowd
to have to announce that he is improving a price by .0010 (one tenth
of a penny). The ``expressed as'' price would allow the trader to
announce that he is improving the price by ten cents or a dime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 1004C regarding bids and offers of PHLX FOREX Options

states that except as provided in paragraph (b) and (c) of that Rule
(contract adjustments and spread type priority),\35\ all bids or offers
made on the Exchange floor for PHLX FOREX Option contracts shall be
expressed in terms of U.S. dollars per unit of the underlying foreign
currency. The example given in the rule is that a bid of ``.0325''
(which would be expressed as ``3.25'') for a premium on a $1.70 strike
price option on the British pound would represent a bid to pay $325 per
option contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Proposed Rule 1004C subsection (b) states: All bids or
offers for an option contract for which the Options Clearing
Corporation has established an adjusted unit of trading in
accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of Section 11 of Article VI
of the by-laws of the Options Clearing Corporation shall be
expressed in terms of dollars per the appropriate fractional part of
the total securities and/or other property constituting such
adjusted unit of trading.
    Proposed Rule 1004C subsection (c) states: When a member holding
a hedge order, as defined in Rule 1066 and bidding or offering on
the basis of a total credit or debit for the order has determined
that the order may not be executed by a combination of transactions
at or within the bids and offers established in the marketplace,
then the order may be executed as a hedge order at the total credit
or debit with one other member with priority over either the bid or
the offer established in the marketplace that is not better than the
bids or offers comprising such total credit or debit, provided that,
the member executes at least one option leg at a better price than
established bid or offer for that option contract AND no option leg
is executed at a price outside of the established bid or offer for
that option contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The minimum trading increment for PHLX FOREX Options is set forth
in proposed Rule 1005C. Subsection (a) states that all PHLX FOREX
Options where the underlying foreign currency is not the U.S. dollar
(unless a PHLX FOREX Options pair) shall have a minimum increment of
$.0001 but will be expressed for trading as $.01. Subsection (b) adds
that different, higher, minimum increments may, however, be fixed by
the Exchange for option contracts of a particular series of PHLX FOREX
Options. This information will be posted on the Exchange's Web site.

Position and Exercise Limits for PHLX FOREX Options

    Proposed Rule 1008C establishes that the new PHLX FOREX Options,
namely the British pound, the Swiss franc, the Canadian dollar, the
Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, and the Euro, will each have
a position limit of 1,200,000 contracts. The proposed position limit
for PHLX FOREX Options is identical to the current position limit for
FCOs (WCOs) on Euros. The Exchange believes that it is proper to keep
the proposed position limit at 1.2 million contracts for each such FX
Option overlying a major foreign currency,\36\ as this would further
the goal of eliminating investor confusion by standardizing proposed
PHLX FOREX Options. The proposed rule also establishes that if a PHLX
FOREX Option and an FCO (WCO) are listed on the same underlying
currency (e.g. a Euro PHLX FOREX Option and a Euro FCO (WCO)), then the
position for each such option on the same underlying currency will be
aggregated for purposes of determining compliance with the position
limit established in this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ The six major foreign currencies that underlie PHLX FOREX
Options are all within the top ten most traded foreign currencies in
the world, and represent a 72.9% share of the daily market turnover
(excluding U.S. dollars). Moreover, these underlying foreign
currencies are very liquid, such that in 2010 the British pound, the
Swiss franc, the Canadian dollar, the Australian dollar, the New
Zealand dollar, and the Euro had an average daily volume, in
billions of U.S. dollars, of 360, 168, 182, 249, 4, and 1,101,
respectively. Source: Bank for International Settlements (BIS)
Triennial Central Bank Survey, Report on Global Foreign Exchange
Market Activity in 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Historically, position and exercise limits have served as a
regulatory tool designed to address manipulative schemes and adverse
market impact surrounding the use of options. Since the inception of
standardized options trading, the options exchanges have had rules
limiting the aggregate number of options contracts that a member or
customer may hold or exercise. Thus, position and exercise limits have
been established for FCOs (WCOs) trading on the Exchange; \37\ and a
1.2 million contract position and exercise limit has, in particular,
been successfully used for trading Euro FCOs (WCOs).\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Rule 1001 and 1002. These rules also establish limits for
equity and ETF options.
    \38\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60169 (June 24,
2009), 74 FR 31789 (July 2, 2009)(SR-Phlx-2009-40)(order approving).
Position limits for non-Euro foreign currency options are 600,000
contracts. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64695 (June
17, 2011), 76 FR 36942 (June 23, 2011)(SR-Phlx-2011-58)(order
approving position limit increase for options on Standard and
Poor's(R) Depositary Receipts (SPDRs(R)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Position limit rules have also, where needed, historically included
aggregation of positions among certain products. These include, as an
example, options on lower-volume proprietary indexes and the components
of such indexes, and full value and reduced value indexes.\39\
Aggregation would be applied in such circumstances because of the
potential ability to influence price by amassing large positions in
such proprietary lower-volume or clearly related products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See Rules 1001A subsection (f) (regarding proprietary Alpha
Index aggregation) and subsection (e) (regarding full and reduced-
value index aggregation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The products underlying PHLX FOREX Options, namely foreign
currencies, are traded on the global foreign exchange (FX) market that
is considered to be one of the largest, most liquid financial markets
in the world, with a $4.0 trillion average daily turnover in 2010.\40\
The huge foreign exchange trading volume represents the largest asset
class in the world and the highest liquidity among investment vehicles.
Notwithstanding, based on informal communications with Commission
staff, wherein staff expressed a general preference for aggregation, in
Rule 1008C the Exchange is proposing aggregation for PHLX FOREX Options
and FCOs (WCOs) that are listed on the same underlying currency. For
purposes of conformity, in Commentary .05 of Rule 1001 the Exchange is
proposing similar aggregation language in respect of foreign currency
options (FCOs or WCOs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ It has been observed that the average daily turnover of the
FX market is equivalent to: more than 12 times the average daily
turnover of global equity markets (about $320 billion--World
Federation of Exchanges aggregate 2009); more than 50 times the
average daily turnover of the NYSE (about $70 billion--World
Federation of Exchanges 2009); more than $500 a day for every man,
woman, and child on earth (based on world population of 6.9
billion--US Census Bureau); and an annual turnover more than 10
times world GDP (about $58 trillion--World Bank 2009). Source: Bank
for International Settlements (BIS) Triennial Central Bank Survey
2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange notes that the six current FCOs (WCOs) that
are based on the currencies that would also underlie PHLX FOREX Options
have not experienced problems attributable to position limits.
    Proposed Rule 1009C establishes that the exercise limits for
options on PHLX FOREX Options will be equivalent to the position limits
prescribed in Rule 1008C.

Closing Settlement Value of PHLX FOREX Options

    PHLX FOREX Options will use a closing settlement value methodology
that is identical to what is currently being used for FCOs (WCOs) with
one distinction. Calculating settlement value for PHLX FOREX Options
will use the spot market price, whereas WCOs or FCOs currently use the
Exchange Spot Price. This is set forth in proposed Rule 1006C, which
states that the closing settlement value for PHLX FOREX Options and for
FLEX PHLX FOREX Options on the Australian dollar, the Euro, the British
pound, the Canadian dollar, the Swiss franc, and the New Zealand dollar
shall be the spot market price at 12:00:00 Eastern Time (noon) on the
last trading day prior to expiration unless the Exchange determines to

apply an alternative closing settlement value as a result of
extraordinary circumstances.\41\ The rule states that, like with WCOs
and FCOs, PHLX FOREX Options will be settled in U.S. dollars per unit
of underlying currency; and that the Exchange will disseminate the
closing settlement value through one or more major market data vendors.
The rule also indicates that the disclaimer of liability that is
applicable to WCOs and FCOs is likewise applicable to PHLX FOREX
Options.\42\ The Exchange will disseminate PHLX FOREX Option closing
settlement values on its Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ The expiration date for PHLX FOREX Options would be the
Saturday following the third Friday of the expiration month, and the
last trading day would be the third Friday of the expiration month.
This is similar to WCOs or FCOs.
    \42\ The disclaimer of liability in proposed Rule 1006C states:
Neither the Exchange, nor any agent of the Exchange shall have any
liability for damages, claims, losses or expenses caused by any
errors, omissions, or delays in calculating or disseminating the
current settlement value or the closing settlement value resulting
from an act, condition, or cause beyond the reasonable control of
the Exchange including but not limited to, an act of God; fire;
flood; extraordinary weather conditions; war; insurrection; riot;
strike; accident; action of government; communications or power
failure; equipment or software malfunction; any error, omission, or
delay in the reports of transactions in one or more underlying
currencies or any error, omission or delay in the reports of the
current settlement value or the closing settlement value by the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FLEX--PHLX FOREX Options

    Rule 1079 deals with the process of listing and trading FLEX
equity, index, and foreign currency options (WCOs and FCOs) on the
Exchange. The rule states that FLEX options are available for foreign
currency options (FCOs and WCOs) and discusses, among other things:
Opening FLEX options trading through the Request-for-Quote (``RFQ'')
process; quotes responsive to RFQs; trading parameters and procedures;
and position and exercise limits for FLEX options. The Exchange is
adding proposed Rule 1007C stating that the FLEX procedures set forth
in Rule 1079 in respect of foreign currency options will also be
applicable to PHLX FOREX Options.

Systems Capacity and Surveillance

    The Exchange represents that it has the necessary systems capacity
to support new options series that will result from the introduction of
PHLX FOREX Options on the Exchange. The Exchange represents that it has
an adequate surveillance program in place for trading WCOs or FCOs. The
Exchange will apply the same surveillance program to PHLX FOREX Options
that it uses for WCOs or FCOs.\43\ Therefore, the Exchange represents
that it has adequate surveillance for PHLX FOREX Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ The Exchange is a member of the Intermarket Surveillance
Group (``ISG'') under the Intermarket Surveillance Group Agreement,
which was modernized in 2008, and may obtain trading information via
the ISG from other exchanges who are members or affiliates of the
ISG. The members of the ISG include all of the U.S. registered stock
and options markets. The ISG members work together to coordinate
surveillance and investigative information sharing in the stock and
options markets. In addition, the major futures exchanges are
affiliated members of the ISG, which allows for the sharing of
surveillance information for potential intermarket trading abuses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicability of Rules for Foreign Currency Options

    As noted, proposed Rule 1000C establishes the principal that except
to the extent that specific rules in the Rule 1000C Series govern, or
unless the context otherwise requires, the provisions of Exchange
Option Rules applicable to foreign currency options (WCOs or FCOs),
Exchange By-Laws, and Rules and Policies of the Board of Directors are
applicable to the trading on the Exchange of PHLX FOREX Options.\44\ An
example of the applicability of an exchange trading rule is Rule 1014,
which, among other things, generally discusses obligations and quote
spread parameters applicable to foreign currency option and other types
of specialists and ROTs. Proposed Rule 1003C supplements Rule 1014 by
stating that with respect to classes of option contracts to which a
specialist or ROT assignment extends, a specialist and an ROT, whenever
the ROT (except a Remote Streaming Quote Trader or RSQT) enters the
trading crowd in other than a floor brokerage capacity or is called
upon by an Options Exchange Official or a Floor Broker \45\ to make a
market, the specialist and ROT should exhibit certain behavior. In
particular the rule states that the assigned specialist and ROT is
expected to engage, to a reasonable degree under the existing
circumstances, in dealing for his own account when there exists, or it
is reasonably anticipated that there will exist, a lack of price
continuity, a temporary disparity between the supply of and demand for
a particular option contract, or a temporary distortion of the price
relationships between option contracts of the same class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Proposed Rule 1000C is modeled on, and essentially the same
as, current Rule 1000A. This is the primary rule in the Exchange's
1000A Series of rules for index options, and has continuously been
in use for more than twenty-five years. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 20437 (December 2, 1983), 48 FR 55229 (December 9,
1983)(SR-Phlx-83-17)(order approving the 1000A Series of rules).
Other securities markets use an analogous approach. See, for
example, CBOE Chapter XXVIII (regarding corporate debt securities);
ISE Rule 2131 (regarding portfolio depository receipts); BATS BZX
Exchange Rule 14.11 (regarding managed fund shares); NASDAQ Rule
2841 (regarding warrants); and NOM Rule 2 (regarding rules on NASDAQ
Options Market).
    \45\ For definitions of specialist, RSQT, Options Exchange
Official, and Floor Broker, see Rules 1020, 1014(b)(ii)(B), 1(w) and
1060, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHLX FOREX Options will follow the rules, some of which are
supplemented by this filing, that are currently applicable to foreign
currency options (WCOs or FCOs).\46\ These include rules that pertain
to areas such as, for example, hours of trading, quoting and market
making requirements, margin requirements, reporting options positions,
filing trade information, and FLEX trading.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See proposed Rule 1000C and infra note 45.
    \47\ Rules 101, 1014, 721, 1003, 1053, and 1079, respectively.
Other Exchange rules that are applicable to the trading of foreign
currency options products include Rules 1006 (Other Restrictions on
Exchange Options Transactions and Exercises); 1014 (Obligations and
Restrictions Applicable to Specialists and Registered Options
Traders); 1022 (Securities Accounts and Orders of Specialists and
Registered Options Traders); 1024 (Conduct of Accounts for Options
Trading); 1025 (Supervision of Accounts); 1027 (Discretionary
Accounts); 1028 (Confirmations); 1039 (Resolution Of Uncompared
Trade); 1043 (Allocation of Exercise Notices); 1044 (Delivery and
Payment); 1045 (Officers And Employees Restricted); 1047 (Trading
Rotations, Halts and Suspensions); 1049 (Communications to
Customers); 1063 (Responsibilities of Floor Brokers); 1064
(Crossing, Facilitation and Solicited Orders); 1066 (Certain Types
of Orders Defined); 1068 (Execution of Multi-Part Orders); 1080
(Phlx XL and Phlx XL II); 1083 (Order Protection; Locked and Crossed
Markets); 1089 (Dealing Directly With Specialist and Registered
Option Trader in Foreign Currency Options); and 1092 (Obvious Errors
and Catastrophic Errors).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Option Floor Procedure Advices

    The Exchange proposes to amend Advice F-6 to reflect ``expressed
as'' pricing for maximum quotes spread parameters in light of bid and
ask differentials. This is done to harmonize Advice F-6 with its
corresponding proposed rule 1003C, so that the same pricing is
reflected in the rule and the Advice.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Advice F-15, which discusses
minor infractions of position/exercise limits and hedge exemptions, to
reflect the addition of proposed Rules 1008C and 1009C. This is done to
harmonize Advice F-15 with its corresponding proposed Rules 1008C and
1009C, and thereby include minor violations of the proposed rules in
the Exchange's Minor Rule Plan as reflected in the Advices.

Conclusion

    The Exchange believes that PHLX FOREX Options using a pricing
structure that is similar to that of underlying currencies in the
interbank currency market represent a leveraged

derivative instrument that, from a competitive perspective, provides a
familiarly-priced leveraged currency product on a regulated listed
options market. PHLX FOREX Options should increase product competition,
encourage trading, and provide additional investment and hedging
opportunities for traders, market participants, and investors (to
include retail and public investors).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \48\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \49\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \49\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal should minimize or eliminate investor confusion by
aligning the pricing and trading of PHLX FOREX Options to established
methodologies. PHLX FOREX Options would use a pricing structure that is
similar to the pricing structure that has been used in the interbank
currency market for decades for currencies that underlie PHLX FOREX
Options (as well as for other currencies). Traders of PHLX FOREX
Options would have the ability, however, to express prices of such
options for trading purposes in a familiar style that is used for
trading other options on the Exchange.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ As an example, instead of a trader having to indicate that
he is improving the price of a Euro PHLX FOREX Option by .0010 (one
tenth of a penny), the trader would express that he is improving the
price by ten cents or a dime. See also supra note 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the same time, PHLX FOREX Options would be largely similar in
structure to foreign currency options listed on the Exchange (FCOs or
WCOs), and would trade in a like manner. The process for trading PHLX
FOREX Options will be similar to the process that has been used for
years, and continues being used, on the Exchange for trading foreign
currency options (FCOs and WCOs).\51\ The current foreign currency
options trading process will be enhanced by the Rule 1000C Series of
proposed PHLX FOREX Options rules,\52\ which will supplement existing
trading rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ For applicable FCO (WCO) trading rules, see supra note 47.
    \52\ Proposed Rules 1000C through 1009C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange will discuss the proposal in an OTA. In
particular, the Exchange intends to educate members about the structure
and trading procedure for PHLX FOREX Options as one of two foreign
currency products that may be traded in parallel on the Exchange with
the approval of this proposal. The Exchange believes that this will
serve to minimize investor confusion while promoting investor
protection.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed PHLX FOREX Options will
offer market participants a leveraged derivative foreign currency
product that, from a competitive perspective, should increase product
competition, encourage trading, and provide additional investment and
hedging opportunities for traders, market participants, and investors.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-Phlx-2012-11 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-11. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-11 and should be
submitted on or before February 22, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-2202 Filed 1-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P