[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 8640]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03295]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0037; FRL-9922-15-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions
From Basic Oxygen Furnaces (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NSPS for Primary and Secondary
Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR part 60, subparts N and
Na) (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1069.11, OMB Control No. 2060-0029) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through February 28, 2015. Public comments were previously requested
via the Federal Register (79 FR 30117) on May 27, 2014 during a 60-day
comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. 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.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 20,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2014-0037, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: This rule applies to Basic Oxygen Process Furnaces
(BOPFs) in iron and steel plants commencing construction, modification
or reconstruction after June 11, 1973, and top-blown BOPFs and hot
metal transfer stations and skimming stations used with bottom-blown or
top-blown BOPF's for which construction, reconstruction, or
modification commenced after January 20, 1983. Respondents are required
to submit initial notifications, conduct performance tests and report
test results for the primary emission control devices, and submit
periodic reports. Sources also must develop and implement a startup,
shutdown, and malfunction plan (SSMP) and submit semiannual reports of
any event where the procedures in the plan were not followed. These
notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining
compliance, and are required of all sources subject to NSPS.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of basic oxygen
process furnaces at iron and steel plants.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart N and Na).
    Estimated number of respondents: 18 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 6,263 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $642,826 (per year), includes $29,700
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change of hours in the total
estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR previously approved
by OMB.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-03295 Filed 2-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 62 (Monday, April 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12308-12310]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06177]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Release No. 34-85419; File No. SR-CBOE-2019-016]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Cboe Options Rule 6.2

March 26, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 14, 2019, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend Cboe Options Rule 6.2. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to update Interpretation and Policy .06 of
Rule 6.2 (Hybrid Opening (and Sometimes Closing) System (``HOSS'')). By
way of background, Interpretation and Policy .06(a) of Rule 6.2
provides that on the last business day of each month, the

Exchange will conduct special end-of-month non-trading rotations for
each series of SPX options in order to determine the theoretical ``fair
value'' of such series as of [sic] SPX as of the time of close of
trading in the underlying cash market.\5\ Rule 6.2(.06)(a) also
provides during such special non-trading closing rotation (``closing
rotation''), a Lead Market-Maker (``LMM'') in the SPX options
designated by the Exchange in each series of SPX options will provide
bid and offer quotations. The Exchange notes that in connection with
recently retiring the Hybrid 3.0 platform and transitioning trading of
SPX options onto the Hybrid trading platform, the Exchange determined
to no longer appoint LMMs in SPX.\6\ In lieu of LMMs, the Exchange
established a financial incentive program for SPX Select Market-Makers
(``SMMs''), which provides that any appointed SPX SMM will receive a
monthly waiver of the cost of one Market-Maker Trading Permit and one
SPX Tier Appointment provided that the SMM satisfies the standard set
forth in Footnote 49 of the Exchange's Fees Schedule. While SMMs must
still comply with continuous quoting obligations of Market-Makers, they
are not otherwise obligated from a regulatory standpoint to satisfy any
heightened quoting standard or meet additional obligations. Rather, SPX
SMMs only receive a financial benefit (i.e., waiver of fees otherwise
assessed for one Market-Maker Trading Permit and one SPX Tier
Appointment) if they satisfy the standard set forth in Footnote 49.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to add references to SMMs in Rule
6.2(.06)(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.2, Interpretation and Policy .06.(a)
[sic]
    \6\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 83089 (April 23,
2018), 83 FR 18605 (April 27, 2018) (SR-CBOE-2018-029).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to clarify that SMMs (and LMMs)
\7\ ``may'', and not ``must'', participate in the closing rotation.
Indeed, the Exchange notes that it recently submitted a rule change to
amend the Fees Schedule to no longer require SMMs to meet the fourth
prong of the standard set forth in Footnote 49 which provided that a
designated SMM must provide quotes for the closing rotation on a
rotating basis in order for SMMs to satisfy the fourth prong.\8\ In its
place, the Exchange now requires that within 30 minutes from the
initiation of the closing rotation, the Exchange must disseminate end-
of-month closing quotations pursuant to Cboe Options Rule 6.2(.06)(a).
The Exchange proposed the amendment to encourage all SMMs to provide
end-of-month non-trading settlement pricing quotations in SPX and SPXW,
which would increase the probability that the Exchange would be able to
disseminate fair value quotes pursuant to Rule 6.2(.06)(a).\9\ The
Exchange believes the proposed changes to Rule 6.2(.06)(a) will make
the rule text consistent with the current standard set forth in
Footnote 49 of the Fees Schedule. The Exchange lastly notes that
although it currently does not appoint LMMs in SPX, it proposes to
leave references to LMMs in Rule 6.2(.06)(a) in the event it determines
to appoint LMMs in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As noted above, as there are no LMMs currently appointed in
SPX during Regular Trading Hours, there is no requirement for LMMs
to participate in the closing rotation. To the extent the Exchange
determines to appoint LMMs in the future, it notes that LMMs would
no longer be obligated to participate in the closing rotation.
    \8\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 85018 (January
31, 2019), 84 FR 1810 (February 5, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2018-075).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\10\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \11\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes updating Rule 6.2(.06)(a) with respect to
references to SMMs and eliminating the language which provides the
Exchange will designate a particular LMM each month, alleviates
potential confusion as it more accurately describes the Exchange's
current end-of-month fair value closing rotation procedures. The
proposed changes also make Rule 6.2(.06)(a) consistent with Footnote 49
of the Fees Schedule, which as described above, governs the financial
incentive program relating to SMMs. The alleviation of potential
confusion removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protects
investors and the public interest.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition that are not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it merely updates
outdated rule text and applies to all SPX SMMs (and potential LMMs).
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because SPX
options are proprietary products that will only be traded on Cboe
Options. To the extent that the proposed changes make Cboe Options a
more attractive marketplace for market participants at other exchanges,
such market participants are welcome to become Cboe Options market
participants.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, 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, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the

Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2019-016 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-CBOE-2019-016. 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-CBOE-2019-016, and should be submitted
on or before April 16, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-06177 Filed 3-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Subject:	Meeting with Holcim Cement to Discuss Portland Cement NESHAP

Location:	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC

Date: 		November 3, 2009

Participants:

Holcim

Hector Ybanez, Holcim

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Keith Barnett, SPPD, OAQPS

Elineth Torres

Representatives of Holcim Cement met with EPA to discuss industry comments on the the ISIS Model.


[Federal Register: June 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 113)]
[Notices]
[Page 28322]
[DOCID:fr15jn09-154]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2009-21]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before July 6, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2009-
0320 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria G. Delgado, ANM-113, (425) 227-
2775, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Ave., SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; or Ralen Gao, ARM-200,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAA,
Office of Rulemaking, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 9, 2009.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2009-0320.
    Petitioner: The Boeing Company.
    Sections of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  25.301, 25.303, 25.305,
25.307, 25.601, 25.603, 25.613, 25.901(b)(2), 25.901(c), 25.1103(d),
25.1191, and 25.1301(d).
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner requests an exemption
from the requirements for the thrust reverser inner wall structure and
operating temperatures, and from the requirements for addressing a
pneumatic duct failure condition. The exemption would apply to certain
Boeing Model 777-200 and -300 series airplanes equipped with Rolls-
Royce RB211 Trent 800 series turbofan engines. The exemption, if
granted, would be time-limited to permit the incorporation of
incremental design improvements to the thrust reverser and engine as
they become available, in order to reduce the risk of a hazardous
thrust reverser inner wall failure.

[FR Doc. E9-13930 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 176)]
[Notices]
[Page 52097]
[DOCID:fr12se07-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL07-94-000]

Montana Consumer Counsel, Complainant, v. PPL Montana, LLC, PPL
Energy Plus, LLC, PPL Colstrip I, LLC, PPL Colstrip II, LLC,
Respondent.; Notice of Complaint

September 6, 2007.
    Take notice that on September 5, 2007, the Montanan Consumer
Counsel (Montana Consumer), filed a complaint against PPL Montana LLC,
PPL Energy Plus, LLC, PPL Colstrip I, LLC, and PPL Colstrip II, LLC
(collectively, PPL-M), pursuant to Federal Power Act (FPA) section 206.
The Complaint states in part:

    Because PPL-M has market power and its rates reflect that fact,
the Montana Consumer requests that the Commission institute an
investigation into the justness and reasonableness of PPL-M's rates
and set a refund effective date for those rates. The refund
effective date should be the earliest permissible under the FPA
section 206(b), 16 U.S.C. 824e(b). Montana Consumer recognizes that
the Commission has ruled that PPL-M is entitled to market rate
authority. Montana Consumer files this complaint as a protective
matter so that if the Court of Appeals reverses the Commission's
orders, the consumers of Montana will be protected against
unnecessary impediments to the granting of effective relief.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 5, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-17967 Filed 9-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 233)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 70476-70477]
[DOCID:fr05de06-11]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 70

[EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0900; FRL-8250-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Operating
Permits Program; State of Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
and operating permits program revision submitted by the State of
Missouri to update the ambient air quality standards, sampling methods,
definitions, and common reference methods and tables. The update also
includes references to implement the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality Standards that were finalized on July 18,
1997.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
January 4, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2006-0900 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Amy Algoe-
Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas

66101. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's
normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
legal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Algoe-Eakin at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of the Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state's SIP and operating permits
program revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial revision amendment and
anticipates no relevant adverse comments to this action. A detailed
rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no
relevant adverse comments are received in response to this action, no
further activity is contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA
receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be
withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this proposed action. EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule
and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule
which is located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: November 21, 2006.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
 [FR Doc. E6-20445 Filed 12-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES October 26, 2005 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Coppers: HED's Response to Comments Received During Phase 1. Case Numbers 0636, 0649, 4025, and 4026. DP Barcode D319172.

PC Codes: 023401, 022901, 022702, 022703, 008001, 024405, 023503, 023501, 008101, 024401, 022501, 042401, 025601, 024403, 023104, 024407, 023306, 024409.

Regulatory Action: Phase 1 Reregistration Action. Risk Assessment Type: Multiple chemical/ no aggregate FROM: Christina Jarvis, Risk Assessor Reregistration Branch 2 Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

THROUGH: Alan Nielsen, Branch Senior Scientist Reregistration Branch 2 Health Effects Division ( 7509C)

TO: Rosanna Louie, Chemical Review Manager Special Review and Reregistration Division ( 7508C)

Summary:

This document represents the Health Effects Division's response to comments received during Phase 1 of the reregistration process for copper ( case numbers 0636, 0649, 4025, and 4026). A total of 36 comments were submitted by the Copper Sulfate Task Force ( CSTF) on the preliminary copper risk assessment ( C. Jarvis memo, D319174). These comments consisted entirely of editorial changes. HED has carefully reviewed the comments provided by CSTF on the preliminary copper risk assessment and has made the appropriate changes to the revised copper risk assessment.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 20 (Monday, January 31, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5420-5423]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1987]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63767; File No. SR-BYX-2011-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend BYX Rules in Connection With the
Implementation of Amendments to Regulation SHO

January 25, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on January 14, 2011, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposal to amend BYX
Rules 11.9, 11.13 and 11.19 to make certain changes consistent with the
upcoming implementation of amendments to Regulation SHO.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 242.200(g); 17 CFR 242.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On February 26, 2010, the Commission adopted amendments to
Regulation SHO under the Act in the form of Rule 201,\4\ pursuant to
which, among other things, short sale orders in covered securities \5\
generally cannot be executed or displayed by a trading center \6\ such
as BYX at a price that is at or below the current national best bid
(``NBB'') when a short sale circuit breaker is in effect for the
covered security (the ``short sale price test restriction'').\7\ In
anticipation of the upcoming February 28, 2011 compliance date for Rule
201, the Exchange is proposing to amend certain BYX rules to describe
the manner in which the System \8\ will handle short sell orders when a
short sale price test restriction is triggered under Rule 201 of
Regulation SHO. These changes include establishing a definition for
``short sale price sliding,'' which is a new form of price sliding the
Exchange proposes to offer when the amendments to Regulation SHO become
operative, modifying certain BYX rules regarding order execution and
routing when a short sale price test restriction is in effect, and
modifying BYX rules related to order marking requirements.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to modify the definition of the
current ``displayed price sliding process'' offered by BYX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61595 (February 26,
2010), 75 FR 11232 (March 10, 2010). In connection with the adoption
of Rule 201, Rule 200(g) of Regulation SHO was also amended to
include a ``short exempt'' marking requirement. The amendments to
Rule 201 and Rule 200(g) have a compliance date of February 28,
2011. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63247 (Nov. 4, 2010),
75 FR 68702 (Nov. 9, 2010). See also Division of Trading & Markets,
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Rule 201 of
Regulation SHO.
    \5\ Rule 201(a)(1) defines the term ``covered security'' to mean
any ``NMS stock'' as defined under Rule 600(b)(47) of Regulation
NMS. Rule 600(b)(47) of Regulation NMS defines an ``NMS stock'' as
``any NMS security other than an option.'' Rule 600(b)(46) of
Regulation NMS defines an ``NMS security'' as ``any security or
class of securities for which transaction reports are collected,
processed, and made available pursuant to an effective transaction
reporting plan, or an effective national market system plan for
reporting transactions in listed options.'' 17 CFR 242.201(a)(1); 17
CFR 242.600(b)(46); and 17 CFR 242.600(b)(47).
    \6\ Rule 201(a)(9) states that the term ``trading center'' shall
have the same meaning as in Rule 600(b)(78) of Regulation NMS. Rule
600(b)(78) defines a ``trading center'' as ``a national securities
exchange or national securities association that operates an SRO
trading facility, an alternative trading system, an exchange market
maker, an OTC market maker, or any other broker or dealer that
executes orders internally by trading as principal or crossing
orders as agent.'' 17 CFR 242.600(b)(78).
    \7\ 17 CFR 242.201(b)(1). See also Division of Trading &
Markets, Responses to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Rule 201
of Regulation SHO, Q&A Nos. 2.1 and 2.2 (concerning the duration of
a short sale price test restriction).
    \8\ The ``System'' is defined in BYX Rule 1.5(aa) as ``the
electronic communications and trading facility designated by the
Board through which securities orders of Users are consolidated for
ranking, execution and, when applicable, routing away.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to comply with the short sale price test restriction of
Regulation SHO, as amended, the Exchange proposes to offer short sale
price sliding, which will be defined in BYX Rule 11.9(g). As a default,
the Exchange will subject a User's \9\ orders to the short sale price
sliding unless they affirmatively choose to opt-out of the process. As
proposed, when a User opts out of the price sliding process, any short
sale order that could not be executed or displayed due to a short sale
price test restriction would be rejected or cancelled by the Exchange
upon entry or while resting on the order book, respectively. When a
User's order is subject to the price sliding process, as proposed,
orders subject to short sale price sliding that, at the time of entry,
could not be executed or displayed due to a short sale price test
restriction will be repriced by the System at one minimum price
variation above the current NBB to comply with Rule 201(b)(1)(i).\10\
An order subject to short sale price sliding will not be readjusted
downward even if it could be displayed at a lower price without
violation of Rule 201 of Regulation SHO. In the event the NBB changes
such that the price of a non-displayed order subject to short sale
price sliding would lock or cross the NBB, the order will receive a new
timestamp, and will be repriced by the System at one minimum price
variation above the current NBB, again in compliance with Rule
201(b)(1)(i).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A ``User'' is defined in BYX Rule 1.5(cc) as any member or
sponsored participant of the Exchange who is authorized to obtain
access to the System.
    \10\ Any execution or display will also need to be in compliance
with applicable rules regarding minimum pricing increments. 17 CFR
242.612.
    \11\ See Division of Trading & Markets, Responses to Frequently
Asked Questions Concerning Rule 201 of Regulation SHO, Q&A No. 4.1
(concerning un-displayed orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, neither orders marked ``short exempt'' nor orders
displayed by the System at a price above the then current NBB at the
time of initial display when a short sale price test restriction is in
effect for a covered security will be subject to short sale price
sliding. Certain displayed short sale orders will not be repriced by
the System after entry because under Rule 201(b)(1)(iii)(A) a trading
center's policies and procedures must be reasonably designed to permit
the execution of short sale orders of covered securities that were
displayed at a price above the current NBB at the time of initial
display. ``Short exempt'' orders will not be repriced by the System,
but instead, the Exchange will execute, display and/or route such
orders without regard to the NBB or any short sale price test
restriction in effect under Regulation SHO, as described below.
    The Exchange currently offers a process called ``displayed price
sliding process,'' as defined in current Rule 11.9(c)(4), which re-
prices and/or displays orders at permissible prices when such orders
would lock or cross Protected Quotations \12\ in a manner inconsistent
with Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS.\13\ The Exchange proposes to rename
the ``displayed price sliding process'' as ``NMS price sliding,'' to be
included in new paragraph (g) of Rule 11.9, and to define the ``price
sliding process'' as inclusive of both NMS price sliding and short sale
price sliding.\14\ Also, consistent with the changes described above,
the Exchange proposes to replace the term ``displayed price sliding
process'' throughout its trading rules with the term ``price sliding
process.'' As is true for displayed price sliding today and short sale
price sliding as proposed, if a User chooses to opt-out of the price
sliding process, the order will not be subject to NMS price sliding,
and thus, the Exchange will

cancel back their orders when display or execution of such orders
contradict the provisions of Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ As defined in BYX Rule 1.5(t), the term ``Protected
Quotation'' means a quotation that is a Protected Bid or Protected
Offer. In turn, a ``Protected Bid'' or ``Protected Offer'' shall
mean a bid or offer in a stock that is (i) displayed by an automated
trading center; (ii) disseminated pursuant to an effective national
market system plan; and (iii) an automated quotation that is the
best bid or best offer of a national securities exchange or
association.
    \13\ 17 CFR 242.610(d).
    \14\ The Exchange acknowledges that potential differences can
exist between Protected Bids, as defined above (see supra note 12),
and the NBB, upon which the requirements of Regulation SHO, as
amended, are based.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes a substantive change to NMS price
sliding (today known as the displayed price sliding process). Under
current System behavior, the Exchange cancels all non-displayed orders
when the national best bid or offer (``NBBO'') changes such that the
non-displayed order would cross a Protected Quotation, regardless of
whether the order is subject to the displayed price sliding process.
Under the proposed amendment, instead of cancelling such orders, unless
a User has opted out of the price sliding process, the Exchange
proposes to allow a resting non-displayed order to receive a new
timestamp and be repriced at the locking price in the event that the
NBBO changes such that the order would cross a Protected Quotation.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend its Rule 11.13 to make clear
that it will execute, display and route an order consistent with Rule
201 of Regulation SHO, and that if it cannot do so, orders will be
cancelled back to the applicable Exchange User. In addition, the
Exchange proposes to make clear that it will not route orders away from
the Exchange that are marked ``short'' if a short sale price test
restriction is in effect. Instead, such orders, if immediate-or-cancel
(``IOC'') or market orders, will be cancelled, and if limit orders,
will be posted to the BATS Book,\15\ subject to the price sliding
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ As defined in BYX Rule 1.5(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, current Rule 11.19 requires Exchange Users to identify
short sale orders as ``short'' when entered into the Exchange's System.
The Exchange proposes to add the term ``short exempt'' to Rule 11.19
because pursuant to amended Rule 200(g) of Regulation SHO, a broker-
dealer can mark a short sale order as either ``short'' or ``short
exempt.''\16\ The Exchange also proposes to make clear in Rule 11.19
that if an order it received is marked ``short exempt,'' the Exchange
will execute, display and/or route the order without regard to the NBB
or any short sale price test restriction in effect under Regulation
SHO.\17\ The Exchange also proposes to make clear, as it does in Rule
11.9(d)(1) with respect to intermarket sweep orders, that it relies on
a Member's \18\ marking of an order, in this case the ``short exempt''
marking, when handling such order. Accordingly, proposed Rule 11.19
states that it is the entering Member's responsibility, not the
Exchange's responsibility, to comply with the requirements of
Regulation SHO relating to marking of orders as ``short exempt.'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 242.200(g). Rule 200(g)(2) provides that a sale
order shall be marked ``short exempt'' only if the provisions of
paragraphs (c) or (d) of Rule 201 of Regulation SHO are met. See
also Division of Trading and Markets: Responses to Frequently Asked
Questions Concerning Rule 201 of Regulation SHO, Q&A Nos. 5.4 and
5.5.
    \17\ 17 CFR 242. 201(b)(1)(iii)(B).
    \18\ A ``Member'' is defined in BYX Rule 1.5(n) as any
registered broker or dealer that has been admitted to membership in
the Exchange.
    \19\ 17 CFR 242.200(g)(2). See also 17 CFR 242.201(c); 17 CFR
242.201(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\20\ In particular,
the proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\21\
because it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, and,
in general, protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange
believes that the proposed changes will provide clarity on the short
sale order handling procedures employed by the Exchange and certain
obligations of Members when sending short sale orders to the Exchange
consistent with Regulation SHO, as amended. The Exchange also believes
that the proposed short sale price sliding functionality and amendments
to the existing displayed price sliding process will assist Users in
executing or displaying their orders consistent with Regulation SHO and
Regulation NMS, especially under fast moving conditions where the NBBO
is quickly updating. In addition, as is currently the case, the amended
price sliding process is optional to Users. Specifically, Users can
choose to opt-out of the price sliding process, and if they choose to
do so, the Exchange will cancel back their orders when such orders
contradict the provisions of Regulation SHO or Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change imposes
any burden on competition.

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

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

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 up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate 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 proposal 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-BYX-2011-002 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BYX-2011-002. 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 changes 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. Copies of such filing will also 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 No. SR-BYX-2011-002 and should be
submitted on or before February 22, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-1987 Filed 1-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 155)]
[Notices]
[Page 45290-45293]
[DOCID:fr13au07-112]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56209; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-65]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Rule 79A.30 (Miscellaneous Requirements on Stock Market
Procedures)

August 6, 2007.
    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 July 24, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange filed the proposed rule change as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) \3\ of the Act and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective
upon filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is proposing to amend NYSE Rule 79A.30 to remove the
requirement to obtain Floor Official approval before trading more than
one or two dollars away from the last sale. The proposed amendment
would preserve the requirement in situations: (i) Where such trades are
initiated by a specialist in connection with certain manual
transactions when the NYSE market is ``slow''; and (ii) where such
trades are initiated by the specialist when reaching across the market
when the market is ``fast.'' The filing also makes certain non-
substantive changes to the language of the rule in order to clarify
existing provisions and procedures, and conforms the rule to changes in
Exchange rules made subsequent to the last time NYSE Rule 79A.30 was
amended.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange,
the Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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. NYSE has substantially prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend NYSE Rule 79A.30 to remove the
requirement that members obtain prior approval from an Exchange Floor
Official for trades that are more than $1.00 from the last sale when
such previous sale is under $20.00 per share, or more than $2.00 from
the last sale when such previous sale is $20.00 per share or more. The
requirement to obtain approval would continue to apply in situations
where: (i) The market is ``slow'' \5\ and a proposed trade results from
a pricing decision by the specialist in connection with such market
events as, for example, the opening or reopening of trading, the
resumption of trading after a gapped quotation has been published, the

resumption of trading in the security following the triggering of a
Liquidity Replenishment Point[reg] (``LRP''), or when the specialist is
arranging the closing transaction in a stock; or (ii) the market is
``fast'' and the specialist as dealer is manually reaching across the
market.\6\ The Exchange states that the amendment addresses changes in
the marketplace that have resulted from the implementation of the
NYSE's Hybrid Market[reg].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For purposes of the rule, the NYSE will be considered to be
a slow market when displaying a bid or offer (or both) that is not
entitled to protection of Rule 611 under Regulation NMS.
    \6\ When reaching across the market to hit the bid or take the
offer, the specialist must engage the report template in the Display
Book, ensure that the bid/offer price is correct, enter the amount
of the specialist interest, and hit the done key.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Rule 79A.30, in its original form, predates the federal
securities laws. It was initially aimed at preventing undue price
dislocation by the specialist at the opening but gradually was extended
to all trades significantly away from the last sale.\7\ This
requirement had merit in the manual auction market, particularly when
the market was both more centralized and less transparent than it is
today, but as the market has evolved toward decentralized and
transparent trading, the rule has lost some of its original purpose and
utility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The rule was extended in 1945 to all transactions more than
$2.00 from the last sale, and, in 1970, to groups of related
transactions that would move the stock price more than $2.00. The
$1.00 parameter for stocks trading under $20.00 per share was added
in 1979.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, the rule functioned in part as a safeguard against
market manipulation by specialists and brokers, and also controlled
price volatility, by requiring a Floor Official who was not party to
the transaction to review and approve all proposed transactions that
exceeded the rule's parameters before they were published to the
consolidated tape. This ensured that specialists were maintaining
appropriate price continuity and depth, and that Floor brokers were not
transacting in the Crowd at unduly wide variations from the last sale.
    As a result of changes in the market in recent years, particularly
the decentralization of control of pricing decisions away from the
specialist and Floor broker, and the greater availability to all market
participants of timely trade and quote information, the Exchange
believes that NYSE Rule 79A.30 is no longer either necessary or viable
in its present form. In particular, since the implementation of Phase
III of the NYSE Hybrid Market[supreg], the Exchange has observed that
the process of obtaining prior Floor Official approval for transactions
one or two points away from the last sale does not add meaningful value
in the context of electronic trading, for two reasons: (i) Automated
quoting and the entry of orders for automatic execution do not permit
time for the involvement of Floor Officials before automated executions
occur; and (ii) the greater availability of information in the market
obviates much of the protection that such approval was designed to
provide, in any event.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Notwithstanding this, NYSE Regulation has continued
conducting Rule 79A.30 surveillance, identifying situations where
the one or two point parameter was exceeded without Floor Official
approval. The NYSE has observed that many of the exceptions
generated relate to the automated execution of electronic interest
where it would not have been possible for the individual violating
the rule to have sought approval for the transaction because either
they entered their order from off the floor, or from on the floor
but at a distance from the point of sale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the time required to obtain approval, the Exchange notes
that requiring Floor Official approval for automated trades would, in
effect, turn fast markets slow while a specialist or Floor broker
requested approval and a Floor Official considered the request. This
delay could impact the ability of a market participant to receive the
best execution possible.
    At the same time, the Exchange believes that there is less need for
such approval in the modern market because of the wide commercial
availability of real-time trading data, through such products as NYSE
Open Book[supreg] \9\ and similar products provided by other market
centers that trade NYSE-listed securities (e.g., NYSE Arca, the Nasdaq
Market Center, and BATS). Before such tools existed, a party entering
an order that might trade outside the one or two point parameter had
little or no direct way to evaluate the likely price impact of such an
order. Consequently, the rule provided for a Floor Official to certify
that the price movement was warranted from his or her neutral
perspective (that is, based upon information available to the Floor
Official but not necessarily to the party entering or representing the
order in question). In contrast, in electronic markets there is
significantly more information available in near real-time, and so
customers engaging in electronic trading can more readily assess the
impact of their actions before they enter an order for automatic
execution or representation on the Floor, and can adjust their actions
as necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ NYSE Open Book is provided by the NYSE to vendors in two
modes. The first displays the depth of the market refreshed every
five seconds. The second displays the depth of the market in real
time. The monthly subscription price of the former is $50, and the
monthly subscription price of the latter is $60. NYSE Open Book
discloses limit order interest at the price at the best bid and
offer and at prices below the best bid and above the best offer. It
does not include broker reserve interest, convert and parity orders
(``CAP orders''), or stop orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange reaches the same conclusion with respect to manual
auction market trading in the Crowd between brokers or between the
specialist and a broker. This is both because of the improved, widely-
available real-time market information noted above and because in such
situations, the transactions are ultimately subject to the business
scrutiny of the upstairs trader who entered the order and who generally
has access to the same information as the broker or specialist and
therefore can determine the appropriateness (or inappropriateness) of
the pricing decision. The Exchange believes that this business scrutiny
has added teeth as well, since the upstairs customer who believes the
price variation was unreasonable could demand price adjustment in the
form of a difference check \10\ or, where the specialist is the agent,
could refuse the execution altogether.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Exchange Rule 134(d).20.
    \11\ See Exchange Rule 91 and Supplementary Materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notwithstanding this general conclusion, the Exchange believes that
the restrictions in NYSE Rule 79A.30 continue to be useful in certain
situations including: (i) Where the market is slow and the specialist
is making a unilateral pricing decision not on an agency basis (e.g.,
at openings, reopenings and the close; when the quotation has been
gapped; and when an LRP has been reached and the market is locked or
crossed and the specialist trades out of the situation); and (ii) when
the market is fast and the specialist as dealer is reaching across the
market. The Exchange believes that in these situations, there is
continuing merit in requiring Floor Official approval for trades that
are more than $1.00 from the last sale when such previous sale is under
$20.00 per share, or more than $2.00 from the last sale when such
previous sale is $20.00 per share or more, since independent evaluation
and prior approval by a Floor Official of such pricing decisions will
ensure that specialists continue to make fair and orderly markets in
situations where a significant imbalance between supply and demand is
being addressed.
    The Exchange notes in addition that the proposed rule change would
shift the timing of the approval. Whereas currently Floor Official
approval may be obtained after the trade takes place but before it is
published to the consolidated tape, the proposed rule change would
require that the specialist

obtain approval prior to transactions. The Exchange believes this shift
is consistent with the underlying concern in the rule of ensuring that
there are not undue price dislocations in a stock.
    The Exchange also notes that its proposal to remove the requirement
of prior Floor Official approval for most trading as specified under
Rule 79A.30 would remove a restriction on the Exchange that does not
exist for other automated market centers, thus removing the current
undue competitive restraint that application of the rule to automated
trading on the Exchange implies, but would retain certain benefits of
the existing rule.
    In connection with the substantive amendment, the Exchange is
proposing to make certain additional conforming amendments to Rule
79A.30. Among other things, the Exchange is proposing to delete the
last two paragraphs in the rule, which address situations where a Floor
broker is driving the price change in an effort to execute block size
interest. Since the proposed amendment would permit such trading
without Floor Official approval, the Exchange believes that the
language in the two paragraphs is no longer necessary.
    The Exchange further proposes to amend Rule 79A.30 to clarify that
prior Floor Official for one- and two-point sales as required under the
proposed amendment would continue not to apply to inactively traded
stocks.\12\ The current text of Rule 79A.30 on its face applies only to
``stocks at the active Posts,'' which is an anachronistic reference to
inactively-traded stocks. It derived from the fact that stocks that
were very inactively traded used to be handled at the Exchange Floor's
Post 30, often referred to as the ``inactive Post.'' Some years ago,
these very thinly traded securities were moved to a Panel at one of the
active Posts, and so the reference in the rule to ``active Posts''
became unclear. Accordingly, the proposed amendment would delete the
reference to ``active posts'' and would insert language that clearly
states that neither paragraph (a) nor (b) of the proposed amendment
applies to inactively traded securities. The Exchange states that this
would not effect a substantive change to the current rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For the period January 1 through May 31, 2007, 181 thinly
traded or inactive securities traded at Post 4 Panels L, M, and N
and include 96 nonconvertible preferred stocks (61 one hundred-share
units and 35 ten-share units) and 85 structured products. As to
their trading characteristics, these 181 inactive securities had an
average of six and a half million shares outstanding (the minimum
was 1,600 shares, the median was 11.4 million shares, and the
maximum was 81 million shares) and an average daily trading volume
of 4,000 shares (the minimum was 3 shares, the median was 4,000
shares, and the maximum was 44,100 shares).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further proposes to delete the reference to NYSE Rule
123A.40 in paragraph (a) of the rule. Rule 123A.40, which governs the
handling of stop orders, was amended in relation to the Hybrid Market.
In the Hybrid Market, specialists no longer see accumulating stop order
volume and the related electing process and are, therefore, not
responsible for manually processing elected stop orders. Instead, an
elected stop order becomes a market order upon election and is eligible
for automated execution without Floor Official approval. Accordingly,
the Exchange believes that the reference to Rule 123A.40 in Rule 79A.30
is outdated and should be deleted.
    Finally, with respect to paragraph (c) of the rule, which governs
the requirements for reporting a one or two point sale to the
consolidated tape, the Exchange believes that the requirement to report
a one or two point sale as ``sold'' would be rendered moot by the
proposed amendment. Those markers are intended to signal to the market
that a trade was reported to the consolidated tape late and out of
sequence with subsequent trades. Since, as proposed for amendment, the
rule would require that Floor Official approval be obtained before a
trade outside the parameters of the rule is effected, there would no
longer be a lag time between the execution of a one and two point sale
and the related report to the consolidated tape. Accordingly, one and
two point sales that occur after the Opening would no longer need to be
reported to the consolidated tape as late to the consolidated tape and
out of sequence, unless the report to the consolidated tape was
accidentally not made at the time of execution. The NYSE notes that one
and two point sales which occur on the Opening would continue to be
marked ``OPD,'' which means ``opened.''
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular, because 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is 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

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

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

    Because the Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one
that does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or
the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition;
or (iii) become operative for 30 days after the date of filing (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
\15\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\17\
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to designate a
shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has satisfied the five-
day pre-filing requirement of Rule 19b-4(f)6)(iii). In addition, the
Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative
delay and designate the proposed rule change operative upon filing. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because it would allow the Exchange to remove an impediment to Hybrid
Market trading without delay. Therefore, the Commission designates the
proposal operative upon filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay of this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 the
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2007-65 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-65. 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 available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-65 and should be
submitted on or before September 4, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-15724 Filed 8-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P