[Federal Register: October 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61341-61343]
[DOCID:fr05oc10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0449; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-38-AD;
Amendment 39-16456; AD 2010-20-21]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. (Agusta) Model A109E
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Agusta Model A109E helicopters. This AD results from a mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) AD issued by the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the
Member States of the European Community. The MCAI AD states that after
a report of an electrical failure, an investigation revealed inadequate
functioning of the 35 amperes (Amps) battery bus (BATT BUS) circuit
breaker that was not within design requirements. The actions specified
in this AD are intended to replace the 35 Amps circuit breaker with a
50 Amps circuit breaker and replace the wires with oversized ones to
prevent an electrical failure, loss of electrical power, and subsequent
loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD becomes effective on November 9, 2010.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of November 9, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may get the service information identified in this AD
from Agusta, Via Giovanni Agusta, 520 21017 Cascina Costa di Samarate
(VA), Italy, telephone 39 0331-229111, fax 39 0331-229605/222595, or at
http://customersupport.agusta.com/technical_advice.php.
    Examining the Docket: You may examine the docket that contains this
AD, any comments, and other information on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is stated in the ADDRESSES section of this
AD. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DOT/FAA Southwest Region, Mark Wiley,
ASW-111, Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations
and Policy Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the Agusta Model A109E
helicopters on April 7, 2010. That NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on April 27, 2010 (75 FR 22043). That NPRM proposed to require
modifying the fuselage electrical installation and the overhead panel
electrical installation.
    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Community, has issued EASA AD 2009-0137, dated June 23, 2009,
to correct an

unsafe condition for the Agusta Model A109E helicopters.
    Following a report of an electrical failure, Agusta investigated
the electrical power generation system and identified inadequate
functioning of the 35 Amps BATT BUS circuit breaker. To prevent an
electrical failure, the manufacturer has developed a BATT BUS circuit
breaker modification kit for replacing the 35 Amps circuit breaker with
a 50 Amps circuit breaker and replacing the wires with oversized ones.
You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI AD and any
related service information in the AD docket.

Comments

    By publishing the NPRM, we gave the public an opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. However, we received no comment on
the NPRM or on our determination of the cost to the public. Therefore,
based on our review and evaluation of the available data, we have
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed.

Related Service Information

    Agusta has issued Mandatory Bollettino Tecnico No. 109EP-98, dated
June 22, 2009, that specifies modifying the BATT BUS circuit breaker
installation. The service information specifies modifying the fuselage
electrical installation, part number (P/N) 109-0741-49, and the
overhead panel electrical installation, P/N 109-0741-55, with a BATT
BUS circuit breaker modification kit, P/N 109-0824-73-101. The actions
described in the MCAI AD are intended to correct the same unsafe
condition as that identified in the service information.

FAA's Evaluation and Unsafe Condition Determination

    This model helicopter has been approved by the aviation authority
of Italy and is approved for operation in the United States Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Italy, EASA, their Technical Agent, has
notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI AD. We are
issuing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by EASA
and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other helicopters of the same type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    We refer to flight hours as hours time-in-service. Also, we do not
refer to a calendar compliance date of December 31, 2009, because the
effective date of this AD would be later than that date.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 73 helicopters of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 5 work-hours per
helicopter to modify the BAT BUS circuit breaker installation. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about
$700 for the BAT BUS circuit breaker kit. Based on these figures, we
estimate that the cost of this AD on U.S. operators is $82,125,
assuming the entire fleet is modified.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD. See the AD docket to examine the economic evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2020-20-21 Agusta S.p.A.: Amendment 39-16456; Docket No. FAA-2010-
0449; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-38-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective on
November 9, 2010.

Other Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Agusta Model A109E helicopters, all
serial numbers up to and including serial number (S/N) 11758 (except
S/N 11741, 11754, and 11757) modified with a circuit breaker
modification kit, part number (P/N) 109-0812-04-101, -103, -107, or
-109; certificated in any category.

Reason

    (d) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) AD
states after a report of an electrical failure, an investigation
revealed inadequate functioning of the 35 amperes (Amps) battery bus
(BATT BUS) circuit breaker.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) Within 50 hours time-in-service, unless already done, modify
the fuselage electrical installation, P/N 109-0741-49, and the
overhead panel electrical installation, P/N 109-0741-55 with a BATT
BUS circuit breaker modification kit, P/N 109-0824-73-101, as
depicted in Figures 1 and 2 and by following the Compliance
Instructions, paragraphs 2 through 20.7, of Agusta Mandatory
Bollettino Tecnico No. 109EP-98, dated June 22, 2009.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    (f) We refer to flight hours as hours time-in-service. Also, we
do not refer to a calendar compliance date of December 31, 2009,
because the effective date of this AD would be later than that date.

Other Information

    (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Safety Management

Group, ATTN: DOT/FAA Southwest Region, Mark Wiley, ASW-111, Aviation
Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy
Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817)
222-5114, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, has the authority to approve AMOCs for
this AD, if requested, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (h) EASA MCAI AD No. 2009-0137, dated June 23, 2009, contains
related information.

Joint Aircraft System/Component (JASC) Code

    (i) The JASC Code is 2460: Electrical Power Systems.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use the specified portions of Agusta Mandatory
Bollettino Tecnico No. 109EP-98, dated June 22, 2009, to do the
actions required.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Agusta, Via Giovanni Agusta, 520 21017 Cascina Costa di Samarate
(VA), Italy, telephone 39 0331-229111, fax 39 0331-229605/222595, or
at http://customersupport.agusta.com/technical_advice.php.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas
76137; or at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/
federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 22, 2010.
Mark R. Schilling,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-24723 Filed 10-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: February 10, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 26)]
[Notices]
[Page 6677-6678]
[DOCID:fr10fe09-124]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59355; File No. SR-CBOE-2009-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Relating to the Options Regulatory Fee

February 3, 2009.
    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 30, 2009, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by CBOE. 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

    Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE'' or
``Exchange'') proposes to amend its Fees Schedule relating to the
Options Regulatory Fee. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at
the Exchange's Office of the Secretary and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CBOE 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. CBOE 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

(a) Purpose
    In October 2008, the Exchange filed a proposed rule change to
eliminate Registered Representative Fees and establish a transaction-
based ``Options Regulatory Fee'' to become effective on January 1, 2009
(``ORF'').\3\ In December 2008, the Exchange filed a proposed rule
change to waive the fee until February 1, 2009, to allow additional
time for the Exchange and OCC to implement the procedures to be used by
OCC to bill and collect the ORF.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58817 (October 20,
2008), 73 FR 63744 (October 27, 2008). The ORF is $.0045 per
contract and is assessed to each member for all options transactions
executed by the member that are cleared by The Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC'') in the customer range (i.e., that clear in a
customer account at OCC), excluding Options Intermarket Linkage Plan
(``Linkage'') orders. The ORF is imposed upon all such transactions
executed by a member, even if such transactions do not take place on
the Exchange. The ORF is collected indirectly from members through
their clearing firms by OCC on behalf of the Exchange.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59182 (December 30,
2008),
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to again waive the ORF until March 1, 2009.
The Exchange is waiving the ORF to provide firms time to put in place
appropriate procedures to implement the fee.
    The Exchange notes that it is also in the process of evaluating the
amount of the ORF to ensure that it does not experience a regulatory
revenue shortfall as the result of the waiver of the ORF for the first
two months of 2009. If the Exchange determines to change the ORF rate,
it will file a proposed rule change and provide members with notice of
the rate change as far in advance of March 1, 2009 as possible.
(b) Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\5\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \6\ of the Act
in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and other persons using its facilities. The Exchange believes
it is appropriate to waive the ORF for February 2009 to allow firms
additional time to put in place appropriate procedures to implement the
fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of 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 solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \8\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2009-004 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-CBOE-2009-004. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will

post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying 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 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 publicly available. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-CBOE-2009-004 and should be submitted on or before March
3, 2009.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-2657 Filed 2-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Overall, the data suggest that HANs can directly damage DNA as evaluated by a wide array of assays ( summarized in Table V 12). The weight of the evidence varies for the each compound. BCAN has yielded positive results in all assays tested. DBAN yielded negative results in S. typhimurium mutation assays and failed to form DNA adducts in vivo. DBAN appears to induce DNA strand breaks and yield positive results in assays that reflect responses to DNA damage ( i. e. SCE, gene conversion, and SOS assays). The results for DCAN and TCAN are less consistent. DCAN yielded positive results in S. typhimurium mutation assays and assays reflecting DNA recombination, but the reason for absence of significant effects in the DNA strand break assay is not clear. For TCAN, the weak responses in S. typhimurium mutation assays did not correspond well with the observed in vivo formation of DNA adducts, although the positive results in the DNA strand break assays and SCE assay were consistent.

The evidence for the induction of chromosome damage by HANs is less compelling, due to the limited number of studies available for evaluation and the inconsistent results. In the single study that used a standard assay protocol to evaluate induction of micronuclei, no effect was observed for any of the HANs, although is was not clear that sufficiently high doses were tested.

In contrast, positive results for micronuclei formation were reported for all four compounds in a less well characterized newt larvae system. DCAN, but not DBAN induced aneuploidy in Drosophila melanogaster assay system. Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles V  69 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft The existing data provide at best only marginal support for the conclusion that HANs are carcinogenic. The evidence is stronger for BCAN, which increased tumor yields in both lung tumor and dermal screening assays ( Bull and Robinson, 1985; Bull et al., 1985). DBAN was positive at non ulcerative doses in the dermal screening assay. TCAN was positive only in the lung assay, and DCAN treatment did not increase either lung or skin tumors. Opposing these positive findings are the negative results for DBAN, DCAN, and TCAN in the GGT foci assay ( Herren Freund and Pereira, 1986). Overall, the data are insufficient to qualitatively or quantitatively assess the carcinogenic potential of any of the HANs. The positive results in two tumor screening assays, together with positive bacterial gene mutation results, suggest that it would be worthwhile to conduct a full 2 year bioassay for BCAN. DBAN is currently on test for a full cancer bioassay ( NTP, 2002). Results for the other HANs are more mixed, with inconsistencies between the genotoxicity and tumor screening data. Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles V  70 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft Table V 15. Summary of Oral Studies of BCAN Toxicity.

Reference Species/ Strain Route Exposure Duration Endpoints Evaluated NOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day) LOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day)

Meier et al. ( 1985) Mouse

B6C3F1 Gavage in water 0, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg/ kg/ day 5 Days Sperm head abnormalities 50 ( Freestanding NOAEL) NDa Smith et al. ( 1987) Rat

Long Evans Hooded Gavage in tricaprylinb 55 mg/ kg/ day Days 7 to 21 of gestation Maternal weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth Maternal: ND Developmental: ND Maternal: ND ( Nonsignificant decrease maternal weight gain)

Development: 55 ( Decreased birth weight, decreased postnatal weight gain)

Christ et al. ( 1995) Rat

Long Evans Gavage in tricaprylinb 0, 5, 25, 45, 65 mg/ kg/ day Days 6 to 18 of gestation Maternal body and organ weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth, malformations Maternal: 45 Developmental: ND Maternal: 65 ( FEL for maternal death; decrease maternal weight gain)

Development: 5 ( Decreased crownrump length, increased cardiovascular malformations)

a. ND = not determined. b. Due to the demonstrated ability of tricaprylin to enhance developmental toxicity of TCAN, this study was not considered in derivation of the Health Advisories. Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles V  71 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft Table V 16. Summary of Oral Studies of DBAN Toxicity.

Reference Species/ Strain Route Exposure Duration Endpoints Evaluated NOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day) LOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day)

Hayes et al. ( 1986) Mouse

B6C3F1 Gavage in corn oil 25  3,200 mg/ kg/ day Acute Lethality NDa LD50 = 289 ( M) 303 ( F)

Rat

CD Gavage in corn oil 25  1,600 mg/ kg/ day Acute Lethality ND LD50 = 245 ( M) 361 ( F)

Eastman Kodak Co. ( 1992) Mouse Unspecified Gavage 25  1,600 mg/ kg/ day Acute Lethality ND LD50 = 50 Rat Unspecified Gavage 25  3200 mg/ kg/ day Acute Lethality ND LD50 = 50  100 Meier et al. ( 1985) Mouse

B6C3F1 Gavage in water 0, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg/ kg/ day 5 Days Sperm head abnormalities 50 ( Freestanding NOAEL) ND R. O. W Sciences ( 1997) Rat

Sprague Dawley Drinking Water 0, 0.7, 2.2, 5.8, 13.2 mg/ kg/ day ( males)

0, 0.8, 2.4, 6.8, 17.9 mg/ kg/ day ( females) 14 Days Clinical signs, body weight, food consumption 13.2 ( m); 17.9 ( f) ( Freestanding NOAEL) ND Hayes et al. ( 1986) Rat

CD Gavage in corn oil 0, 23, 45, 90, 180 mg/ kg/ day 14 Days Body weight, organ weight, serum chemistry, hematology, urinalysis, gross necropsy 23 45 ( Decreased body weight in males) Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles Reference Species/ Strain Route Exposure Duration Endpoints Evaluated NOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day) LOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day)

V  72 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft Rat

CD Gavage in corn oil 0, 6, 23, 45 mg/ kg/ day 90 Days Body weight, organ weight, serum chemistry, hematology, urinalysis, gross necropsy 23 45 ( Decreased body weight in males)

NTP ( 2002) Mice

B6C3F1 Drinking Water 0, 2.1, 4.3, 8.2, 14.7, 21.4 mg/ kg/ day ( Males)

0, 2.0, 3.3, 10.0, 13.9, 21.6 mg/ kg/ day ( Females) 14 Days Clinical signs, body weight, water consumption, organ weight and pathology, liver GST activity 21 ( Freestanding NOAEL)

Rat

Fischer 344 Drinking Water 0, 2, 3, 7, 12, 18 mg/ kg/ day ( Males)

0, 2, 4, 7, 12, 19 mg/ kg/ day ( Females) 14 Days Clinical signs, body weight, water consumption, organ weight and pathology, liver GST activity 12 ( m) 18 ( Decreased body weight, decreased testes weight and pathology in males)

Mice

B6C3F1 Drinking Water 0, 1.6, 3.2, 5.6, 10.7, 17.9 mg/ kg/ day ( Males)

0, 1.6, 3, 6.1, 11.1, 17.9 mg/ kg/ day ( Females) 13 Weeks Clinical signs, body weight, water consumption, organ weight and pathology, hematology and clinical chemistry 17.9 ( Freestanding NOAEL) Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles Reference Species/ Strain Route Exposure Duration Endpoints Evaluated NOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day) LOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day)

V  73 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft Rat

Fischer 344 Drinking Water 0, 0.9, 1.8, 3.3, 6.2, 11.3 mg/ kg/ day ( Males)

0, 1, 1.9, 3.8, 6.8, 12.6 mg/ kg/ day ( Females) 13 Weeks Clinical signs, body weight, water consumption, organ weight and pathology, hematology and clinical chemistry 11.3 ( m); 12.6 ( f) ( Freestanding NOAEL)

R. O. W Sciences ( 1997) Rat

Sprague Dawley Drinking Water 0, 1.4, 3.3, 8.2 mg/ kg/ day ( M) 30 Days, ( F) 35 days periconcep tion or 35 days gestation day 5 to PND 1 ( M) Clinical pathology, organ weight, sperm analysis, histopathology: ( F) maternal weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth Paternal: 8.2 ( M); 10.8 ( F)

Reproductive / development al: 8.2 ( M); 10.8 ( F)

( Freestanding NOAEL) ND Smith et al. ( 1987) Rat

Long Evans Hooded Gavage in tricapyrlinb 50 mg/ kg/ day Gestation days 7 to 21 Maternal weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth Maternal: ND Development al: ND Maternal: 50 ( FEL for maternal death; decrease maternal weight gain)

Development: 50 ( Decreased litter size, decreased fetal weight)

a. ND = not determined. b. Due to the demonstrated ability of tricaprylin to enhance developmental toxicity of TCAN, this study was not considered in derivation of the Health Advisories. Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles V  74 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft Table V 17. Summary of Oral Studies of DCAN Toxicity.

Reference Species/ Strain Route Exposure Duration Endpoints Evaluated NOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day) LOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day)

Hayes et al. ( 1986) Mouse

B6C3F1 Gavage in corn oil 25  3,200 mg/ kg/ day Acute Lethality NDa LD50 = 270 ( M) 279 ( F)

Rat

CD Gavage in corn oil 25  1,600 mg/ kg/ day Acute Lethality ND LD50 = 339 ( M) 330 ( F)

Rat

CD Gavage in corn oil 0, 12, 23, 45, 90 mg/ kg/ day 14 Days Body weight, organ weight, serum chemistry, hematology, urinalysis, gross necropsy ND 12 ( Increased liver weight)

Rat

CD Gavage in corn oil 0, 8, 33, 65 mg/ kg/ day 90 Days Body weight, organ weight, serum chemistry, hematology, urinalysis, gross necropsy ND 8 ( Increased liver weight)

Meier et al. ( 1985) Mouse

B6C3F1 Gavage in water 0, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg/ kg/ day 5 Days Sperm head abnormalities 50 mg/ kg ( Free standing NOAEL) ND Smith et al. ( 1987) Rat

Long Evans Hooded Gavage in tricapyrlinb 55 mg/ kg/ day Gestation days 7 to 21 Maternal weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth ND Maternal: 55 ( Decreased maternal weight)

Development: 55 ( Decreased pregnancy rate; decreased viable litters; increased litters resorbed; decreased fetal weight) Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles Reference Species/ Strain Route Exposure Duration Endpoints Evaluated NOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day) LOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day)

V  75 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft Smith et al. ( 1989) Rat

Long Evans Hooded Gavage in tricapyrlinb 0, 5, 15, 25, 45 mg/ kg/ day Gestation days 6 to 18 Maternal weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth Maternal: 15 Developmental: 15 Maternal: 25 ( increased liver weight)

Development: 25 ( Increased postimplantation loss, increased soft tissue malformations)

a. ND = not determined. b. Due to the demonstrated ability of tricaprylin to enhance developmental toxicity of TCAN, this study was considered in derivation of the Health Advisories. Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles V  76 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft Table V 18. Summary of Oral Studies of TCAN Toxicity.

Reference Species/ Strain Route Exposure Duration Endpoints Evaluated NOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day) LOAEL ( mg/ kg/ day)

Smyth et al. ( 1962) Rat

Wistar Gavage 0.19  0.32 mg/ kg/ day Acute Lethality NDa LD50 = 360 Meier et al. ( 1985) Mouse

B6C3F1 Gavage in water 0, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg/ kg/ day 5 Days Sperm head abnormalities 50 mg/ kg ( Freestanding NOAEL) ND Smith et al. ( 1987) Rat Long Evans Hooded Gavage in tricaprylinb 55 mg/ kg/ day Days 7 to 21 of gestation Maternal weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth Maternal: ND Developmental: ND Maternal: 55 ( FEL for maternal death; decrease maternal weight gain)

Development: 55 ( Decreased pregnancy rate; decreased viable litters; increased litters resorbed; decreased fetal weight)

Smith et al. ( 1988) Rat Long Evans Hooded Gavage in tricaprylinb 0, 1, 7.5, 15, 35, 55 mg/ kg/ day Days 6 to 18 of gestation Maternal weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth, malformations Maternal: 35 Developmental: 1 Maternal: 55 ( FEL for maternal death; decrease maternal weight gain)

Developmental: 7.5 ( Increased full liter resorptions; increased cardiovascular malformations)

Christ et al. ( 1996) Rat Long Evans Gavage in corn oilc 0, 15, 35, 55, 75 mg/ kg/ day Days 6 to 18 of gestation Maternal body and organ weight, reproductive success, pup viability and growth, malformations Maternal: 15 Developmental: 35 Maternal: 35 ( Decreased maternal weight gain; organ weight changes)

Development: 55 ( increased postimplantation loss, cardiovascular and cranio facial malformations; decreased live fetuses per litter, fetal body weight, crown rump length. Drinking Water Criteria Document for Haloacetonitriles V  77 EPA/ OW/ OST/ HECD Final Draft a. ND = not determined b. Due to the demonstrated ability of tricaprylin to enhance developmental toxicity of TCAN, this study was not considered in derivation of the Health Advisories. c. Only data relating to the corn oil control are reported in the table, since the developmental toxicity reported in the groups administered tricaprylin were not considered in derivation of the Health Advisories.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 105 (Monday, June 1, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33249-33252]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11652]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88947; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2020-41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 960NY to Conform the Rule to Section 3.1 of the Plan for the
Purpose of Developing and Implementing Procedures Designed To
Facilitate the Listing and Trading of Standardized Options

May 26, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on May 22, 2020, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 960NY to conform the rule to
Section 3.1 of the Plan for the Purpose of Developing and Implementing
Procedures Designed to Facilitate the Listing and Trading of
Standardized Options (the ``OLPP'') and add new Rule 960.1NY. The
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
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 those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this rule change is to amend Rule 960NY (Trading
Differentials) to align the rule with the recently approved amendment
to the OLPP.
Background
    On January 23, 2007, the Commission approved on a limited basis a
Penny Pilot in option classes in certain issues (``Penny Pilot''). The
Penny Pilot was designed to determine whether investors would benefit
from options being quoted in penny increments, and in which classes the
benefits were most significant. The Penny Pilot was expanded and
extended numerous times over the last 13 years.\4\ In each instance,
these approvals relied upon the consideration of data periodically
provided by the Exchanges that analyzed how quoting options in penny
increments affects spreads, liquidity, quote traffic, and volume.
Today, the Penny Pilot includes 363 option classes, which are among the
most actively traded, multiply listed option classes. The Penny Pilot
is scheduled to expire by its own terms on June 30, 2020.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55161 (January 24,
2007), 72 FR 4738 (February 1, 2007) (SR-Amex-2006-106); 6567
(September 27, 2007), 72 FR 56396 (October 7, 2007); 61061 (November
24, 2009), 74 FR 62857 (December 1, 2009); 61106 (December 3, 2009),
74 FR 65193 (December 9, 2009); 63393 (November 30, 2010), 75 FR
75715 (December 6, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-107); 65978 (December 15,
2011), 76 FR 79246 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEAmex-2011-107); 68427
(December 13, 2012), 77 FR 75227 (December 19, 2012) (SR-NYSEMKT-
2012-75); 67321 (June 29, 2012), 77 FR 39761 (July 5, 2012) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2012-12); 61106 (December 3, 2009), 74 FR 65193 (December 9,
2009) (SR-NYSEAmex-2009-74); 69105 (March 11, 2013), 78 FR 16554
(March 15, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-17); 69791 (June 18, 2013), 78 FR
37860 (June 24, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-48);[thinsp]71163 (December
20, 2013), 78 FR 79049 (December 27, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-104);
72190 (May 20, 2014), 79 FR 30215 (May 27, 2014) (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-
47); 73778 (December 8, 2014), 79 FR 73922 (December 12, 2014) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2014-99); 75281 (June 24, 2015), 80 FR 37338 (June 30, 2015)
(SR-NYSEMKT-2015-43); 78176 (June 28, 2016) 81 FR 43340 (July 1,
2016). (SR-NYSEMKT-2016-61); 80989 (June 21, 2017), 82 FR 29130
(June 27, 2017) (SR-NYSEMKT-2017-36); 79525 (December 12, 2016), 81
FR 91230 (December 16, 2016) (SR-NYSEMKT-2016 111); 83507 (June 25,
2018), 83 FR 30808 (June 29, 2018) (SR-NYSEAMER-2018-33); 84871
(December 19, 2018) 83 FR 66789 (December 27, 2018) (SR- NYSE AMER-
2018-57); and 86061 (June 7, 2019) 84 FR 27665 (June 13, 2019) (SR-
NYSEAMER-2019-22).
    \5\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 87633 (November
26, 2019), 84 FR 66251 (December 3, 2019) (NYSEAmex-2019-51).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the imminent expiration of the Penny Pilot on June 30,
2020, the Exchange, together with other participating exchanges, filed,
on July 18, 2019 a proposal to amend the OLPP.\6\ On April 1, 2020 the
Commission approved the amendment to the OLPP to make permanent the
Pilot Program (the ``OLPP Program'').\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87681 (December 9,
2019), 84 FR 68960 (December 17, 2019) (``Notice'').
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88532 (April 1,
2020), 85 FR 19545 (April 7, 2020) (File No. 4-443) (``Approval
Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The OLPP Program replaces the Penny Pilot by instituting a
permanent program that would permit quoting in penny increments for
certain option classes. Under the terms of the OLPP Program, designated
option classes would continue to be quoted in $0.01 and $0.05
increments according to the same parameters for the Penny Pilot. In
addition, the OLPP Program would: (i) Establish an annual review
process to add option classes to, or to remove option classes from, the
OLPP Program; (ii) to allow an option class to be added to the OLPP
Program if it is a newly listed option class and it meets certain
criteria; (iii) to allow an option class to be added to the OLPP
Program if it is an option class that has seen a significant growth in
activity; (iv) to provide that if a corporate action involves one or
more option classes in

the OLPP Program, all adjusted and unadjusted series and classes
emerging as a result of the corporate action will be included in the
OLPP Program; and (v) to provide that any series in an option class
participating in the OLPP Program that have been delisted, or are
identified by OCC as ineligible for opening Customer transactions, will
continue to trade pursuant to the OLPP Program until they expire.
    To conform its Rules to the OLPP Program, the Exchange proposes to
delete Commentary .02 to Rule 960NY (the ``Penny Pilot Rule''), which
will be ``Reserved,'' and replace it with new Rule 960.1NY
(Requirements for Penny Interval Program), which is described below,
and to replace references to ``Penny Pilot'' in the Exchange rules with
``Penny Interval Program.'' \8\ The Exchange also proposes to delete
the superfluous operational language in Commentary .01 regarding the
process for modifying trading differential by rule filing because such
requirement remains the case today, as the Exchange must submit
proposed rule changes--including for Rule 960NY--to the Commission; the
Exchange will hold this Commentary as Reserved.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ This proposed rule change will become operative on July 1,
2020, upon expiration of the current Penny Pilot on June 30, 2020.
    \9\ See Commentary .01 to Rule 960NY (providing that ``[t]he
Exchange may only change the trading differentials for option
contracts traded on the Exchange by filing a rule change proposal
with the SEC, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (effective upon filing)'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Penny Interval Program
    The Exchange proposes to codify the OLPP Program in new Rule
960.1NY (Requirements for Penny Interval Program) (the ``Penny
Program''), which will replace the Penny Pilot Rule and permanently
permit the Exchange to quote certain option classes in minimum
increments of one cents ($0.01) and five cents ($0.05) (``penny
increments''). The penny increments that currently apply under the
Penny Pilot will continue to apply for option classes included in the
Penny Program. Specifically, (i) the minimum quoting increment for all
series in the QQQ, SPY, and IWM would continue to be $0.01, regardless
of price; \10\ (ii) all series of an option class included in the Penny
Program with a price of less than $3.00 would be quoted in $0.01
increments; and (iii) all series of an option class included in the
Penny Program with a price of $3.00 or higher would be quoted in $0.05
increments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Rule 960NY(a)(3)(A)-(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Penny Program would initially apply to the 363 most actively
traded multiply listed option classes, based on National Cleared Volume
at The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') in the six full calendar
months ending in the month of approval (i.e., November 2019--April
2020) that currently quote in penny increments, or overlie securities
priced below $200, or any index at an index level below $200.
Eligibility for inclusion in the Penny Program will be determined at
the close of trading on the monthly Expiration Friday of the second
full month following April 1, 2020 (i.e., June 19, 2020).
    Once in the Penny Program, an option class will remain included
until it is no longer among the 425 most actively traded option classes
at the time the annual review is conducted (described below), at which
point it will be removed from the Penny Program. As described in more
detail below, the removed class will be replaced by the next most
actively traded multiply listed option class overlying securities
priced below $200 per share, or any index at an index level below $200,
and not yet in the Penny Program. Advanced notice regarding the option
classes included, added, or removed from the Penny Program will be
provided to the Exchange's membership via Trader Update and published
by the Exchange on its website.
Annual Review
    The Penny Program would include an annual review process that
applies objective criteria to determine option classes to be added to,
or removed from, the Penny Program. Specifically, on an annual basis
beginning in December 2020 and occurring ever December thereafter, the
Exchange will review and rank all multiply listed option classes based
on National Cleared Volume at OCC for the six full calendar months from
June 1st through November 30th for determination of the most actively
traded option classes. Any option classes not yet in the Penny Program
may be added to the Penny Program if the class is among the 300 most
actively traded multiply listed option classes and priced below $200
per share or any index at an index level below $200.
    Following the annual review, option classes to be added to the
Penny Program would begin quoting in penny increments (i.e., $0.01 if
trading at less than $3; and $0.05 if trading at $3 and above) on the
first trading day of January.\11\ In addition, following the annual
review, any option class in the Penny Program that falls outside of the
425 most actively traded option classes would be removed from the Penny
Program. After the annual review, option classes that are removed from
the Penny Program will be subject to the minimum trading increments set
forth in Rule 960NY, effective on the first trading day of April.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See id. (providing that the minimum quoting increment for
all series in the QQQ, SPY, and IWM would continue to be $0.01,
regardless of price).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes to the Composition of the Penny Program Outside of the Annual
Review
Newly Listed Option Classes and Option Classes With Significant Growth
in Activity
    The Penny Program would specify a process and parameters for
including option classes in the Program outside the annual review
process in two circumstances. These provisions are designed to provide
objective criteria to add to the Penny Program new option classes in
issues with the most demonstrated trading interest from market
participants and investors on an expedited basis prior to the annual
review, with the benefit that market participants and investors will
then be able to trade these new option classes based upon quotes
expressed in finer trading increments.
    First, the Penny Program provides for certain newly listed option
classes to be added to the Penny Program outside of the annual review
process, provided that (i) the class is among the 300 most actively
traded, multiply listed option classes, as ranked by National Cleared
Volume at OCC, in its first full calendar month of trading; and (ii)
the underlying security is priced below $200 or the underlying index is
at an index level below $200. Such newly listed option classes added to
the Penny Program pursuant to this process would remain in the Penny
Program for one full calendar year and then would be subject to the
annual review process.
    Second, the Penny Program would allow an option class to be added
to the Penny Program outside of the annual review process if it is an
option class that meets certain specific criteria. Specifically, new
option classes may be added to the Penny Program if: (i) the option
class is among the 75 most actively traded multiply listed option
classes, as ranked by National Cleared Volume at OCC, in the prior six
full calendar months of trading and (ii) the underlying security is
priced below $200 or the underlying index is at an index level below
$200. Any option class added under this provision will be added on the
first trading day of the second full month after it qualifies and will
remain in the Penny Program for

the rest of the calendar year, after which it will be subject to the
annual review process.
Corporate Actions
    The Penny Program would also specify a process to address option
classes in the Penny Program that undergo a corporate action and is
designed to ensure continuous liquidity in the affected option classes.
Specifically, if a corporate action involves one or more option classes
in the Penny Program, all adjusted and unadjusted series of an option
class would continue to be included in the Penny Program.\12\
Furthermore, neither the trading volume threshold, nor the initial
price test would apply to option classes added to the Penny Program as
a result of the corporate action. Finally, the newly added adjusted and
unadjusted series of the option class would remain in the Penny Program
for one full calendar year and then would become subject to the annual
review process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For example, if Company A acquires Company B and Company A
is not in the Penny Program but Company B is in the Penny Program,
once the merger is consummated and an options contract adjustment is
effective, then Company A would be added to the Penny Program and
remain in the Penny Program for one calendar year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Delisted or Ineligible Option Classes
    Finally, the Penny Program would provide a mechanism to address
option classes that have been delisted or those that are no longer
eligible for listing. Specifically, any series in an option class
participating in the Penny Program in which the underlying has been
delisted, or is identified by OCC as ineligible for opening customer
transactions, would continue to quote pursuant to the terms of the
Penny Program until all options series have expired.
Technical Changes
    The Exchange proposes to replace reference to the Penny Pilot with
reference to the Penny Interval Program in Rules 903, Commentary .14,
960NY(a), and 986NY(a) and Commentary .01 thereto. The Exchange
believes these technical changes would add clarity, transparency and
internal consistency to Exchange rules making them easier to navigate.
Implementation
    This proposed rule change will become operative on July 1, 2020,
upon expiration of the current Penny Pilot on June 30, 2020. The
Exchange proposes to implement the Penny Program on July 1, 2020, which
is the first trading day of the third month following the Approval
Order issued on April 1, 2020--i.e., July 1, 2020.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\13\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\
in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In particular, the proposed rule change, which conforms the
Exchange rules to the recently adopted OLPP Program, allows the
Exchange to provide market participants with a permanent Penny Program
for quoting options in penny increments, which maximizes the benefit of
quoting in a finer quoting increment to investors while minimizing the
burden that a finer quoting increment places on quote traffic.
    Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent
with the Act because, in conforming the Exchange rules to the OLPP
Program, the Penny Program would employ processes, based upon objective
criteria, that would rebalance the composition of the Penny Program,
thereby helping to ensure that the most actively traded option classes
are included in the Penny Program, which helps facilitate the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market.
Technical Changes
    The Exchange notes that the proposed change to Rules 903, 960NY and
968NY to replace references to the Penny Pilot with references to the
Penny Interval Program would provide clarity and transparency to the
Exchange rules and would promote just and equitable principles of trade
and remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and
open market and a national market system. The proposed rule changes
would also provide internal consistency within Exchange rules and
operate to protect investors and the investing public by making the
Exchange rules easier to navigate and comprehend.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed Penny Program,
which modifies the exchange's rules to align them with the Commission
approved OLPP Program, is not designed to be a competitive filing nor
does it impose an undue burden on intermarket competition as the
Exchange anticipates that the options exchanges will adopt
substantially identical rules. Moreover, the Exchange believes that by
conforming Exchange rules to the OLPP Program, the Exchange would
promote regulatory clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on
the marketplace and facilitating investor protection. To the extent
that there is a competitive burden on those option classes that do not
qualify for the Penny Program, the Exchange believes that it is
appropriate because the proposal should benefit all market participants
and investors by maximizing the benefit of a finer quoting increment in
those option classes with the most trading interest while minimizing
the burden of greater quote traffic in option classes with less trading
interest. The Exchange believes that adopting rules, which it
anticipates will likewise be adopted by all option exchanges that are
participants in the OLPP, would allow for continued competition between
Exchange market participants trading similar products as their
counterparts on other exchanges, while at the same time allowing the
Exchange to continue to compete for order flow with other exchanges.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\16\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative

prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter
time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule
19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires
a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice
of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Commission notes that the Exchange satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-41 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-41. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-41 and should be submitted
on or before June 22, 2020.

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-11652 Filed 5-29-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


52394 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 3, 2003 / Notices the Illinois Commerce Commission and Wisconsin Public Service Commission. Comment Date: August 29, 2003.

Standard Paragraph Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing 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 and385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http:// www. ferc. gov, using the eLibrary ( FERRIS) link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ ferc. gov or tollfree at ( 866) 208   3676, or for TTY, contact ( 202) 502   8659. Protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Commission's Web site under the `` e Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [ FR Doc. 03   22590 Filed 9   2   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717   01   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7552   4]

Investigator Initiated Grants for Fellowships: Request for Applications AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice of requests for applications.

SUMMARY: This notice provides information on the availability of fiscal year 2004 fellowship program announcements, in which the areas of research interest, eligibility and submission requirements, evaluation criteria, and implementation schedules are set forth. Grants will be competitively awarded following peer review. DATES: Receipt dates vary depending on the specific research areas within the solicitations.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In its Requests for Applications ( RFA) the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency invites fellowship applications in the following areas of special interest to its mission: ( 1) Fall 2004 EPA Science to Achieve Results ( STAR) Fellowships for Graduate Study, ( 2) Fall 2004 Minority Academic Institutions ( MAI) Fellowships for Graduate Study, and ( 3) Fall 2004 Minority Academic Institutions ( MAI) Undergraduate Student Fellowships. CONTACTS: ( 1) Fall 2004 EPA Science to Achieve Results ( STAR) Fellowships for Graduate Study, Virginia Broadway ( phone: 202   564   6923, e mail: broadway. virginia@ epa. gov), ( 2) Fall 2004 Minority Academic Institutions ( MAI) Fellowships for Graduate Study, Virginia Broadway ( phone: 202   564   6923, e mail: broadway. virginia@ epa. gov), and ( 3) Fall 2004 Minority Academic Institutions ( MAI) Undergraduate Student Fellowships, Georgette Boddie, ( phone: 202   564   6926, e mail: boddie. georgette@ epa. gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The complete program announcement can be accessed on the Internet at http:// www. epa. gov/ ncer, under `` announcements.'' The required forms for applications with instructions are accessible on the Internet at http:// www. epa. gov/ ncer/ fellow/. Forms may be printed from this site.

Dated: August 27, 2003. John C. Puzak, Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Research. [ FR Doc. 03   22451 Filed 9   2   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2003   0170; FRL   7320   7]

Diazinon; Product Registrations Cancellation Order AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's cancellation order for the cancellations, as requested by Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., of all of Syngenta's registrations for products containing diazinon ( O, O Diethyl O( 2 isopropyl 6 methyl 4 pyrimidinyl) phosphorothioate) and accepted by EPA, pursuant to section 6( f) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA). This order follows up a May 30, 2003 Notice of Receipt of Requests from Syngenta for cancellations of all of Syngenta's diazinon product registrations. In the May 30, 2003 Notice, EPA indicated that it would issue an order granting the voluntary product registration cancellations, unless the Agency received substantive comments within the comment period that would merit its further review of these requests. The Agency received one set of comments, which were in support of the cancellation requests. Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this notice a cancellation order granting the requested cancellations. Any distribution, sale, or use of the products subject to this cancellation order is only permitted in accordance with the terms of the existing stocks provisions of this cancellation order. DATES: The cancellations are effective immediately.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Plummer, Special Review and Reregistration Division ( 7508C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 305   0076; e mail address: plummer. stephanie@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

This action is directed to the public in general. Although this action may be of particular interest to persons who produce or use pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the information in this notice, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0170. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. EPA also VerDate jul< 14> 2003 15: 37 Sep 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03SEN1. SGM 03SEN1 52395 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 3, 2003 / Notices established two dockets containing documents in support of the diazinon IRED. They are dockets OPP   34225 and OPP   2002   0251. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking? This notice announces cancellation, as requested by Syngenta, of all of Syngenta's diazinon products registered under section 3 of FIFRA. These registrations are listed in sequence by registration number in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of this unit.

A. Background Information Diazinon is an organophosphorous insecticide and is one of the most widely used insecticides in the U. S. It is used for outdoor non agricultural, as well as agricultural, pest control. Under a December 5, 2000 Memorandum of Agreement ( MOA) between Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. and EPA, Syngenta requested, under FIFRA section 6( f), that EPA cancel, effective as of June 30, 2003, the registrations of all of Syngenta's diazinon manufacturing use products permitting formulation for outdoor nonagricultural use. In the MOA, EPA expressed that it would not contemplate permitting sale, distribution or use of existing stocks of these outdoor nonagricultural manufacturing use products, except for return to the Registrant for purposes of re labeling for export or disposal. In a letter dated April 8, 2003, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. requested a voluntary cancellation of all its remaining registrations for products containing diazinon, to be effective June 30, 2003. The request applied to outdoor non agricultural enduse products and agricultural products. The request is contingent upon EPA's granting of certain existing stocks provisions, which are set forth in Unit V. EPA announced its receipt of the above mentioned cancellation requests in a Federal Register Notice dated May 30, 2003 ( 68 FR 32501) ( FRL   7309   2). Syngenta's April 8, 2003 request for cancellations is consistent with the December 5, 2000 MOA. EPA has approved both the December 5, 2000 and the April 8, 2003 requests to terminate registrations for all of Syngenta's diazinon products and has published its cancellation order in this Notice. All of Syngenta's diazinon products subject to cancellation, which include outdoor non agricultural and agricultural product registrations, are identified in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of this unit. The Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( RED) document summarizes the findings of EPA's reregistration process for individual chemical cases, and reflects the Agency's decision on risk assessment and risk management for uses of the individual pesticides known as organophosphates ( OPs). EPA has issued an Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( IRED) document assessing the risks of exposure from agricultural uses of diazinon.

B. Requests for Voluntary Cancellations The manufacturing use product registrations for which cancellation was requested are identified below in Table 1. The end use product registrations for which cancellation was requested are identified below in Tables 2 and 3. EPA did not receive any substantive comments regarding these product registrations. Accordingly, the Agency has issued an order in this notice canceling the registrations identified in Tables 1, 2, and 3.

TABLE 1.   MANUFACTURING USE PRODUCT REGISTRATION CANCELLATION REQUESTS Registration No. Product Name Chemical Name 100   977 D · z · n diazinon MG 56% WBC AG Diazinon 100   978 D · z · n diazinon MG 22.4% WBC HG Diazinon 100   979 D · z · n diazinon MG 87% HG Diazinon 100   980 D · z · n diazinon MG 87% AG Diazinon TABLE 2.   OUTDOOR NON AGRICULTURAL END USE PRODUCT REGISTRATION CANCELLATION REQUESTS Registration No. Product Name Chemical Name 100   456 D · z · n Lawn & Garden Insect Control Diazinon 100   468 D · z · n Granular Lawn Insect Control Diazinon 100   528 D · z · n 6000 Lawn & Garden Insect Control Diazinon 100   770 D · z · n diazinon Lawn & Garden WBC Diazinon VerDate jul< 14> 2003 15: 37 Sep 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03SEN1. SGM 03SEN1 52396 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 3, 2003 / Notices TABLE 2.   OUTDOOR NON AGRICULTURAL END USE PRODUCT REGISTRATION CANCELLATION REQUESTS   Continued Registration No. Product Name Chemical Name 100   926 D · z · n diazinon Garden Insect Dust Diazinon TABLE 3.   AGRICULTURAL END USE PRODUCT REGISTRATION CANCELLATION REQUESTS Registration No. Product Name Chemical Name 100   460 D · z · n diazinon 50W Diazinon 100   461 D · z · n diazinon AG500 Diazinon 100   469 D · z · n diazinon 14G Diazinon 100   784 D · z · n diazinon AG600 WBC Diazinon Table 4 of this unit includes the name and address of record for the registrant of the products in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of this unit:

TABLE 4.   REGISTRANT REQUESTING VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION EPA Company No. Company Name and Address 100 Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc, P. O. Box 18300, Greensboro NC 27419   8300 III. Cancellation Order Pursuant to section 6( f) of FIFRA, EPA hereby approves the requested cancellations of diazinon product registrations identified in Tables 1, 2, and 3 in Unit II. Accordingly, the Agency orders that the diazinon manufacturing use product registrations identified in Table 1 in Unit II., as well as the end use product registrations listed in Tables 2 and 3 in Unit II., are hereby canceled. Any distribution, sale, or use of existing stocks of the products identified in Tables 1, 2, and 3 in Unit II. in a manner inconsistent with any of the Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks set forth below in Unit V. will be considered a violation of FIFRA.

IV. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

Section 6( f)( 1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations be canceled. FIFRA further provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the Federal Register. Thereafter, the Administrator may approve such a request.

V. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products which are currently in the United States and which have been packaged, labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the cancellation action. The cancellation order issued in this Notice includes the following existing stocks provisions.

A. Outdoor Non Agricultural Manufacturing Use Products 1. Distribution or sale. The distribution or sale of existing stocks of any outdoor non agricultural manufacturing use product identified in Table 1 in Unit II. is no longer lawful under FIFRA, except for the purposes of export consistent with FIFRA section 17 and proper disposal in accordance with applicable law. 2. Use for producing other products. The use of existing stocks of any manufacturing use product identified in Table 1 in Unit II. for formulation into any other product labeled for outdoor non agricultural use is no longer lawful under FIFRA.

B. Outdoor Non Agricultural End Use Products 1. Distribution or sale by registrant. The distribution, or sale, of existing stocks by Syngenta of any product listed in Table 2 in Unit II. will not be lawful under FIFRA after August 31, 2003, except for purposes of shipping such stocks for export consistent with the requirements of FIFRA section 17 or proper disposal in accordance with applicable law. 2. Retail and other distribution or sale. The distribution or sale of existing stocks by persons other than Syngenta will be prohibited after December 31, 2004, except for purposes of product recovery pursuant to the 2000 MOA, shipping such stocks for export consistent with the requirements of FIFRA section 17, or proper disposal in accordance with applicable law. 3. Use of existing stocks. Use of existing stocks may continue until stocks are exhausted. Any such use must be in accordance with the label.

C. Agricultural Manufacturing Use Products 1. Distribution or sale, or use by registrant. The distribution, sale, or use of existing stocks by Syngenta of any manufacturing use product identified in Table 1 in Unit II. for formulation into any other product labeled for agricultural use will not be lawful under FIFRA after August 31, 2003, except for purposes of shipping such stocks for export consistent with the requirements of section 17 of FIFRA, or proper disposal in accordance with applicable law. 2. Retail and other distribution, sale, or use. The distribution, sale, or use of existing stocks of any manufacturinguse product identified in Table 1 in Unit II. for formulation into any other product labeled for agricultural use by any person other than Syngenta may continue until stocks are exhausted. Any such use must be in accordance with the label.

D. Agricultural End Use Products 1. Distribution or sale by registrant. The distribution or sale of existing stocks by Syngenta of any product listed in Table 3 in Unit II. will not be lawful under FIFRA after August 31, 2003, except for purposes of shipping for exports consistent with the requirements of FIFRA section 17 or VerDate jul< 14> 2003 15: 37 Sep 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03SEN1. SGM 03SEN1 52397 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 3, 2003 / Notices proper disposal in accordance with the applicable law. 2. Retail and other distribution, sale, or use. The distribution, sale, or use of existing stocks by any person other than Syngenta may continue until stocks are exhausted. Any such use must be in accordance with the label.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

Dated: August 20, 2003. Betty Shackleford, Acting Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[ FR Doc. 03   22317 Filed 9   2   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7552   3]

Notice of Vacature of Specific Applicability Determinations Concerning National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Secondary Aluminum AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces that EPA has vacated two applicability determinations concerning the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAP) for Secondary Aluminum Production, 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRR, which were previously made by EPA in response to requests submitted by the U. S. Granules Corporation. EPA has determined that these two applicability determinations reflect conflicting constructions concerning the applicability of Subpart RRR to operations like those conducted at the U. S. Granules facilities, and that the retention of such conflicting constructions is inappropriate as a matter of law and policy. Now that these determinations have been vacated, EPA will commence a process to adopt a single uniform construction of Subpart RRR which will apply to all operations like those conducted at the U. S. Granules facilities. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For specific questions concerning the actions described in this notice, contact Scott Throwe at EPA by phone at: ( 202) 564   7013, or by e mail at: throwe. scott@ epa. gov. For general questions concerning the Applicability Determination Index maintained by the EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance ( OECA), contact Maria Malave at EPA by phone at: ( 202) 564   7027, or by e mail at: malave. maria@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces the vacature of two applicability determinations made concerning the NESHAP for Secondary Aluminum, 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRR. An applicability determination concerning the U. S. Granules facility in Plymouth, Indiana was made by the EPA Region 5 Air Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Branch on August 21, 2002, in response to a request for such a determination by U. S. Granules dated August 14, 2002. Notice of this applicability determination ( Control No. M020112) was published in the Federal Register on February 13, 2003. 68 FR 7373. The decision to vacate this determination was subsequently announced in a letter to U. S. Granules dated June 19, 2003. An applicability determination concerning the U. S. Granules facility in Henrietta, Missouri was made by the EPA Region 7 Air Permitting and Compliance Branch on October 22, 2002, in response to a request for such a determination by U. S. Granules dated October 11, 2002. Notice of this applicability determination ( Control No. M020117) was also published in the Federal Register on February 13, 2003. 68 FR 7373. The decision to vacate this determination was subsequently announced in a letter to U. S. Granules dated June 23, 2003. After issuance of these two applicability determinations, EPA determined that these determinations reflect conflicting constructions concerning the applicability of Subpart RRR to operations like those conducted at the U. S. Granules facilities. EPA also determined that the retention of such conflicting constructions would be inappropriate as a matter of law and policy. Accordingly, EPA decided to vacate both of these applicability determinations and to commence a process to adopt a single uniform construction of Subpart RRR which will apply to all operations like those conducted at the U. S. Granules facilities. The vacature of each of the applicability determinations concerning U. S. Granules facilities described in this notice was final and effective on the date that the letter announcing that vacature was signed. This notice is being published to assure that parties other than U. S. Granules who may be interested in these determinations are also notified that they have been vacated. In addition to this notice, EPA will update the Applicability Determination Index maintained by OECA to reflect the vacature of these determinations.

Dated: August 20, 2003. Michael S. Alushin, Director, Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance. [ FR Doc. 03   22450 Filed 9   2   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 ( 12 U. S. C. 1841 et seq.) ( BHC Act), Regulation Y ( 12 CFR Part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/ or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below. The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act ( 12 U. S. C. 1842( c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act ( 12 U. S. C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at www. ffiec. gov/ nic/. Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than September 26, 2003. A. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia ( Michael E. Collins, Senior Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105 1521: 1. KNBT Bancorp Inc., Bethlehem, Pennsylvania; to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Keystone Savings Bank, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, and VerDate jul< 14> 2003 15: 37 Sep 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03SEN1. SGM 03SEN1