[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 90 (Friday, May 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27413-27414]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09860]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0122; FRL-10006-27]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Notice of Arrival of Pesticides and Devices Under Section 17(c) of
FIFRA; Comment Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this
document announces that EPA is planning to submit an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The ICR, entitled: ``Notice of Arrival of Pesticides and Devices under
section 17(c) of FIFRA'' and identified by EPA ICR No. 0152.13 and OMB
Control No. 2070-0020, represents the renewal of an existing ICR that
is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2020. Before submitting the ICR
to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information collection that is summarized in
this document. The ICR and accompanying material are available in the
docket for public review and comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 7, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0122, by the following method:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
    Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our
staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room was closed to public
visitors on March 31, 2020, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-
19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to
submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov, as there is a
temporary suspension of mail delivery to EPA, and no hand deliveries
are currently accepted. For further information on EPA Docket Center
services and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Connie Hernandez, FEAD (7506P), Office
of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 305-5190; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)),
EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used.
    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply
to?

    Title: Notice of Arrival of Pesticides and Devices under section
17(c) of FIFRA.
    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 0152.13.
    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-0020.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on December
31, 2020. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after
appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or
by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers
for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Customs)
regulations at 19 CFR 12.112 require that an importer desiring to
import a pesticide or device into the United States shall, prior to the
shipment's arrival in the United States, submit a Notice of Arrival
(NOA) of Pesticides and Devices (EPA Form 3540-1 or its Customs-
authorized electronic equivalent) to EPA. Once EPA receives the NOA,
EPA will determine the disposition of the shipment upon its arrival in
the United States. Upon completing its review, the EPA response is sent
to the importer of record or licensed customs broker, who must present
the NOA to Customs upon arrival of the shipment at the port of entry.
This is necessary to ensure that EPA is notified of the arrival of
pesticides and pesticidal devices as required under FIFRA section
17(c), and that EPA has the ability to examine such

shipments to determine compliance with FIFRA. Customs compares entry
documents for the shipment with the NOA and notifies the EPA regional
office of any discrepancies. Alternatively, importers may submit NOA
information electronically through Customs' Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE). Most of the electronic filings are automatically
processed, and an early indication is provided to the filer if the
initial reporting requirements have been met and if the shipment can be
released upon arrival at the port of entry. For those filings that do
not meet the reporting requirements, automatic checks will be performed
to notify the filer of errors. For filings that require non-automated
checks, EPA staff can review and provide feedback notifications through
ACE to the filer on what information is needed that has not been
provided.
    Burden statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average
40,880 (per year) hours per response. Burden is defined in 5 CFR
1320.3(b).
    The ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related
materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities
and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized here:
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by
this ICR are pesticide importers, which includes many types of business
entities ranging from Commercial and Institutional Building
Construction (NAICS 236220) to Pesticide and Other Agricultural
Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 325300) and even Public Administration:
Executive Offices (NAICS 921110). Other business and institutions that
import pesticides include Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
(Sector 11), Wholesale Trade, (Sector 42).
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 92,100.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
One per application.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 40,880 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $2,753,522. There is no capital or
operation & maintenance costs.

III. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    There is an increase of 24,540 hours in the total estimated
respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase reflects an increase in the annual
number of NOAs submitted. The new electronic system for submitting NOA
filings, ACE, has contributed to the increase in the number of NOAs.
The annual number of NOAs submitted to EPA increased from 38,000 for
the previous ICR renewal to 92,100 for this ICR renewal. The average
burden hours per response increased slightly from the previous ICR
renewal of 0.43 hours to the current 0.44 per response. This change is
an adjustment.

IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another
Federal Register document pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or
the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: April 28, 2020.
Alexandra Dapolito Dunn,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2020-09860 Filed 5-7-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20178-20181]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09372]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85763; File No. SR-LCH SA-2019-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; LCH SA; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Extension of the Onboarding Fee Waiver and Introduction of a Fee Rebate
Scheme for CDSClear Index Swaptions Clearing Activities

May 2, 2019.
    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 April 29, 2019, Banque Centrale de Compensation, which conducts
business under the name LCH SA (``LCH SA''), filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change
described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared
primarily by LCH SA. LCH SA filed the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \4\ thereunder, so that
the proposal was 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)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice

    The proposed rule change will extend the onboarding fee waiver and
introduce a fee rebate scheme for CDSClear Index Swaptions clearing
activities to be effective upon filing with the Commission.

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, LCH SA 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. LCH SA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice

1. Purpose
    As specified in the table below, the current CDSClear Index
Swaptions fee grid includes an onboarding fee and offers both General
Members and Select Members a choice between the Introductory Tariff and
the Unlimited Tariff.
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to:
    (1) Extend the waiver period for the onboarding fee for both
General Members and Select Members that register to the CDSClear Index
Swaptions clearing service, and
    (2) introduce a clearing fee rebate applicable to the Index
Swaptions Unlimited Tariff for both General Members and Select Members.
    As a reminder, under the Unlimited Tariff, Clearing Members pay a
fixed amount annually that covers all clearing fees for their Index
Swaptions House activity for the activity of all the Affiliates of
their Clearing Member group.

    Current LCH SA CDSClear Index Swaptions Clearing Service Fee Grid
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Member:.........................................................
    Introductory Tariff.................................................
    Cover only one Clearing Member legal entity (no Affiliate coverage).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Clearing fees..............             $15  per million of Index
                                                  Swaptions notional on
                                                  U.S. Indices.*
                                       [euro]15  per million of Index
                                                  Swaptions notional on
                                                  European Indices.
    Floor on clearing fees.....      [euro]150k  Per calendar year (no
                                                  pro-rating).
    Cap on clearing fees.......      [euro]600k  Per calendar year (no
                                                  pro-rating).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unlimited Tariff....................................................
    Cover all the Affiliates of a given Clearing Member group...........
    Cover all clearing fees for Index Swaptions House activity for both
     iTraxx and CDX.NA underlying index families..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fixed fee (annual).........      [euro]375k  Per calendar year (no
                                                  pro-rating).
    Onboarding Fees (both             [euro]30k  One-off fee per
     Introductory Tariff &                        Clearing Member legal
     Unlimited Tariff).                           entity under the
                                                  Introductory Tariff or
                                                  per Clearing Member
                                                  group under the
                                                  Unlimited Tariff
                                                  waived until 31-Mar-
                                                  19.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Select Member:..........................................................
    Introductory Tariff.................................................
    Cover only one Clearing Member legal entity (no Affiliate coverage).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Clearing fees..............             $18  per million of Index
                                                  Swaptions notional on
                                                  U.S. Indices.*
                                       [euro]18  per million of Index
                                                  Swaptions notional on
                                                  European Indices.
    Cap on Clearing fees.......      [euro]600k  Per calendar year (no
                                                  pro-rating).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unlimited Tariff....................................................
    Cover all Affiliates of a given Clearing Member group...............
    Cover all clearing fees for Index Swaptions House activity for both
     iTraxx and CDX.NA underlying index families..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fixed fee (annual).........      [euro]400k  Per calendar year (no
                                                  pro-rating).
    Onboarding Fees (both             [euro]30k  One-off fee per
     Introductory Tariff &                        Clearing Member legal
     Unlimited Tariff).                           entity under the
                                                  Introductory Tariff or
                                                  per Clearing Member
                                                  group under the
                                                  Unlimited Tariff
                                                  waived until 31-Mar-
                                                  19.
Client:
    Clearing fees..............             $20  per million of Index
                                                  Swaptions notional on
                                                  U.S. Indices.
                                       [euro]20  per million of Index
                                                  Swaptions notional on
                                                  European Indices.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to incentivize the Clearing Members to build liquidity in
the CDSClear Index Swaptions clearing service, LCH SA has decided to
make the following changes to its Index Swaptions fee grid:
    (1) Extend the waiver period for the onboarding fee from 31 March
2019 to 20 December 2019 for both General Members and Select Members
that register to the CDSClear Index Swaptions clearing service, and
    (2) implement a fee rebate scheme, applicable to the Unlimited
Tariff for both General Members and Select Members, in which discounts
to the fixed fee will apply depending on the Index Swaptions notional
cleared by each Clearing Member group as detailed hereinafter.
    The fee rebate scheme will be valid for 2019 only and apply equally
to all Clearing Members that register to the CDSClear Index Swaptions
clearing service.
    In order to determine the relevant discount rate to apply, LCH SA
will consider the total Index Swaptions notional cleared in 2019
starting from the date on which the fee rebate is deemed effective in
accordance with any relevant regulatory review and approval process.

    Revised LCH SA CDSClear Index Swaptions Clearing Service Fee Grid
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Index Swaptions clearing service fee rebate scheme *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Member:
    Unlimited Tariff
    Fixed fee (annual).........      [euro]375k  Per calendar year.
    Discounted Rates...........       [euro]50k  After discount rate of
                                                  86.67% applied to the
                                                  Fixed fee amount if
                                                  Index Swaptions
                                                  notional cleared per
                                                  Clearing Member group
                                                  strictly above
                                                  [euro]12 billion.
                                      [euro]75k  After discount rate of
                                                  80.00% applied to the
                                                  Fixed fee amount if
                                                  Index Swaptions
                                                  notional cleared per
                                                  Clearing Member group
                                                  strictly above [euro]6
                                                  billion but equal or
                                                  below [euro]12
                                                  billion.
                                     [euro]125k  After discount rate of
                                                  67.00% applied to the
                                                  Fixed fee amount if
                                                  Index Swaptions
                                                  notional cleared per
                                                  Clearing Member group
                                                  strictly above [euro]0
                                                  but equal or below
                                                  [euro]6 billion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Select Member:
    Unlimited Tariff
    Fixed fee (annual).........      [euro]400k  Per calendar year.
    Discounted Rates...........       [euro]50k  After discount rate of
                                                  87.50% applied to the
                                                  Fixed fee amount if
                                                  Index Swaptions
                                                  notional cleared per
                                                  Clearing Member group
                                                  strictly above
                                                  [euro]12 billion.
                                      [euro]75k  After discount rate of
                                                  81.25% applied to the
                                                  Fixed fee amount if
                                                  Index Swaptions
                                                  notional cleared per
                                                  Clearing Member group
                                                  strictly above [euro]6
                                                  billion but equal or
                                                  below [euro]12
                                                  billion.
                                     [euro]125k  After discount rate of
                                                  68.75% applied to the
                                                  Fixed fee amount if
                                                  Index Swaptions
                                                  notional cleared per
                                                  Clearing Member group
                                                  per year strictly
                                                  above [euro]0 but
                                                  equal or below [euro]6
                                                  billion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative conditions for the Fee rebate:
    (i) application to the Unlimited Tariff only;.......................
    (ii) application to all Clearing Members registering to the Index
     Swaptions clearing service (registration letter or application file
     signature date);.
    (iii) Valid for 2019 only; and......................................

    (iv) Index Swaptions notional cleared for the determination of the
     discount rate to be observed from the regulatory effective date of
     the rebate..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onboarding fee (for both              [euro]30k  One-off fee per
 General Members and Select                       Clearing Member group
 Members).                                        waived until 20
                                                  December 2019 under
                                                  the Unlimited Tariff.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Subject to regulatory review/approval process.

2. Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LCH SA has determined that the proposed fees are reasonable and
appropriate to offer and grow CDSClear Index Swaptions clearing
services.
    Regarding the CDClear Index Swaptions service, LCH SA has already
rule filed with the SEC the relevant fee grid and believes that the
proposed discounts for CDSClear Index Swaptions clearing activities
have been set up at an appropriate level given the costs, expenses and
revenues to be generated to LCH SA in providing such services.
    All clearing members will have the same opportunity to equally
benefit from the proposed incentive rebate according to the specified
conditions.
    LCH SA believes that proposing such clearing fees and rebate are
consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \6\ and the
regulations thereunder applicable to it, and in particular provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable fees, dues, and other charges
among Clearing Members and market participants by ensuring that
Clearing Members pay reasonable fees and dues for the services provided
by LCH SA, within the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\7\ LCH SA does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, LCH SA believes that the fees amount and related
discounts have been set up at an appropriate level given the costs and
expenses to LCH SA in offering and maintaining the relevant CDSClear
Index Swaptions clearing services.
    Additionally, the fee waiver and rebate will apply equally to all
CDSClear Clearing Members and their Affiliates.
    Further, LCH SA does not believe that the proposed rule change
would have a burden on competition because it does not adversely affect
the ability of such Clearing Members or other market participants
generally to engage in cleared transactions or to access clearing
services as the clearing of Index Swaptions remains not mandatory.

C. Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. LCH SA will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by LCH SA.

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective upon filing
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \8\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \9\
thereunder because it establishes a fee or other charge imposed by LCH
SA on its Clearing Members. At any time within 60 days of the filing of
the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily
suspend such proposed 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 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:
     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-LCH SA-2019-002 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-LCH SA-2019-002. 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 such filings will also be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of LCH SA and on LCH SA's website
at https://www.lch.com/resources/rules-and-regulations/proposed-rule-changes-0. 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-LCH SA-2019-002 and should
be submitted on or before May 29, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-09372 Filed 5-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 156)]
[Notices]
[Page 46956-46958]
[DOCID:fr12au08-92]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58300; File No. SR-NSCC-2008-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Enhance the Equity Options Service To Include Bond
Options

August 4, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on July 25, 2008, the
National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been
prepared primarily by NSCC. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NSCC proposes to amend its rules in order to enhance the NSCC
Equity Options Service by extending similar processing to bond options
transactions. The enhanced service will be called the ``NSCC Equity
Options and Bond Options Service.''\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Changes are to the rule text that appears in the electronic
manual of NSCC found at http://www.nscc.com/legal/.

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

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NSCC 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. NSCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by the NSCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change amends Addendum M to NSCC's Rules and
Procedures (``Addendum M''). Addendum M currently relates to a
confirmation and matching service for over-the-counter (``OTC'') U.S.
equity options transactions and their associated cash flows called the
NSCC Equity Options Service. The proposed rule change enhances the NSCC
Equity Options Service by extending similar processing to bond options
transactions. The enhanced service will be called the ``NSCC Equity
Options and Bond Options Service.''
    The Commission approved NSCC's filing on Form 19b-4, File No. SR-
NSCC-2005-04, which proposed adding, on a permanent basis, Addendum M
to NSCC's Rules and Procedures to establish the NSCC Equity Options
Service.\4\ This filing proposes a rule change to amend Addendum M to
enhance the NSCC Equity Options Service by extending processing to bond
option transactions. Because the bond options service to be provided by
NSCC would be largely identical to the existing NSCC Equity Options
Service, this filing substantially restates the information contained
in the previous filings regarding equity options transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission approved NSCC's original filing on Form 19b-
4, File No. SR-NSCC-2004-04 (the ``Original Filing'') on a temporary
basis through May 31, 2005, pending evaluation of the service. A
subsequent filing, File No. SR-NSCC-2005-04 (the ``Subsequent
Filing''), provided information regarding findings related to the
evaluation of the service, restated the Original Filing, as amended,
and sought permanent approval of the service. The Subsequent Filing
was approved May 26, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the need for automation of the trade confirmation
process in the derivatives industry, the corporate parent of NSCC, The
Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (``DTCC''), in 2003 created a
subsidiary, DTCC Deriv/SERV LLC (``Deriv/SERV''). Deriv/SERV currently
offers a confirmation and matching service for OTC credit default swaps
transactions, interest rate swap transactions and equity derivative
transactions and their associated cash flows. This service is widely
used, including by all of the largest OTC credit default swaps dealers.
    Deriv/SERV has developed a confirmation and matching service for
OTC bond options transactions and their associated cash flows (the
``Deriv/SERV Bond Options Service''). The Deriv/SERV Bond Options
Service provides for confirmation and matching either between two OTC
bond options dealers or between an OTC bond options dealer and its buy-
side customer. Where either the buyer or the seller of an equity option
or a bond option is a U.S. person and the equity option or bond option
is issued by a U.S. issuer (a ``U.S. Equity Option Transaction'' or
``U.S. Bond Option Transaction''), NSCC will provide the NSCC Equity
Options and Bond Options Service to Deriv/SERV pursuant to the NSCC/
DTCC Deriv/SERV Service Agreement (``Service Agreement'').\5\ Deriv/
SERV is a Data Services Only Member of NSCC.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The host computer and other automated facilities associated
with the NSCC Equity Options and Bond Options Service are provided
by DTC pursuant to service agreements between NSCC and DTCC and
between DTCC and DTC.
    \6\ NSCC Rules and Procedures, Rule 31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Deriv/SERV Bond Options Service is operated pursuant to the
operating procedures of Deriv/SERV (the ``Deriv/SERV Operating
Procedures''). U.S. Bond Option Transactions are also subject to NSCC's
Addendum M. Therefore, each user of the Deriv/SERV Bond Options Service
enters into an agreement with Deriv/SERV obligating the user to abide
by the terms of the Deriv/SERV Operating Procedures and obligating it
to abide by Addendum M for any U.S. Bond Option Transactions. Pursuant
to the Service Agreement, NSCC has the right to require Deriv/SERV to
cause Deriv/SERV's users to abide by the terms of Addendum M. In
addition, pursuant to the Service Agreement, NSCC and Deriv/SERV have
agreed that should the Commission request that NSCC provide to the
Commission any information relating to the NSCC Equity Options and Bond
Options Service, Deriv/SERV will provide any such information in its
possession to NSCC so that NSCC may provide such information to the
Commission.
    NSCC will neither be responsible for the content of the messages
transmitted through the NSCC Equity Options and Bond Options Service
nor be responsible for any errors, omissions, or delays that may occur
relating to the NSCC Equity Options and Bond Options Service in the
absence of gross negligence on NSCC's part. Both the Service Agreement
and the Deriv/SERV Operating Procedures provide that NSCC has no
liability in connection with the NSCC Equity Options and Bond Options
Service in the absence of gross negligence on NSCC's part. Because the
NSCC Equity Options and Bond Options Service does not involve money
settlement, securities clearance, or netting through the facilities of
NSCC, it is a nonguaranteed service of NSCC.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ NSCC offers certain ``guaranteed'' services through its CNS
system, in which NSCC as a central counterparty provides settlement-
related guarantees regarding certain trades cleared and netted at
NSCC. NSCC also offers ``nonguaranteed'' services, such as NSCC's
Mutual Fund and Insurance Processing Services, in which members do
not receive the protections of the NSCC guarantee. Some of NSCC's
nonguaranteed services entail settlement of funds through NSCC on a
nonguaranteed basis (e.g., NSCC's FundSERV(r) service); other
nonguaranteed services involve the communication of information only
without settlement of transactions or funds through the facilities
of NSCC (e.g., NSCC's Profile service in NSCC's Mutual Fund
Services). The NSCC Equity Options and Bond Options Service is of
this latter type; i.e., a nonguaranteed service limited to the
communication of information only, which does not involve settlement
of securities transactions or funds through the facilities of NSCC.
In its Matching Release, the Commission concluded that matching
constitutes a clearing agency function, specifically the
``comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of
securities transactions,'' within the meaning of Section 3(a)(23)(A)
of the Act. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39829 (April 6,
1998), 63 FR 17943 (File No. S7-10-98).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Deriv/SERV will charge its users fees in connection with the Deriv/
Serv Bond Options Service and pursuant to the Service Agreement will
make payments to NSCC for the services that NSCC is providing. NSCC
will file proposed rule changes under Section 19(b) of the Act for fees
that NSCC charges to Deriv/SERV for the NSCC Equity Options and Bond
Options Service and for any changes made by NSCC to the NSCC Equity
Options and Bond Options Service.
    NSCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder because the implementation of the proposal will provide for
the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of U.S. OTC equity
option transactions processed through the NSCC Equity Options and Bond
Options Service by facilitating the transmission

of standardized information on a centralized communications platform.
This will reduce processing errors, delays, and risks that are
typically associated with manual processes.

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

    NSCC 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.

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

    No written comments relating to the proposed rule change have been
solicited or received. NSCC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by NSCC.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4) \9\
thereunder in that it: (i) Does not adversely affect the safeguarding
of securities or funds in the custody or control of the clearing agency
or for which it is responsible and (ii) does not significantly affect
the respective rights or obligations of the clearing agency or persons
using the service. At any time within sixty days of the filing of such
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NSCC-2008-06 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-NSCC-2008-06. 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 filings also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on NSCC's
Web site, http://www.nscc.com/legal/. 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-NSCC-2008-06 and should be submitted on
or before September 2, 2008.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-18548 Filed 8-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 98 (Monday, May 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30040-30043]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12197]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66994; File No. SR-NYSE-2012-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Sections 102.01C and 103.01B of the Exchange's Listed Company
Manual To Permit the Listing of Emerging Growth Companies on the Basis
of Two Years of Reported Financial Data

May 15, 2012.
    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 4, 2012, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' 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 Sections 102.01C and 103.01B of the
Exchange's Listed Company Manual (the ``Manual'') to permit the listing
of companies on the basis of two years of reported financial data as
permitted under the JOBS Act.\4\ The text of the proposed rule change
is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room,
and www.nyse.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission notes that the JOBS Act permits companies
that meet the definition of an ``emerging growth company'' to
include two years of audited financial data in their registration
statement rather than the normally required three years and does not
specifically address exchange listings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    On April 5, 2012, President Obama signed into law the Jumpstart Our
Business Startups Act (the ``JOBS Act''),\5\ which amends the
Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities Act'') and the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''). Among other things, the JOBS Act amends
the Securities Act by adding Section 7(a)(2) and amends Section 13(a)
of the Exchange Act. These amendments provide that a company which
qualifies as an emerging growth company (``EGC''), as defined in
Section 2(a)(19) of the Securities Act and Section 3(a)(80) of the
Exchange Act,\6\ may choose to include only two years of audited
financial data in the registration statement used in connection with
the ``first sale of common equity securities of the issuer pursuant to
an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933''
(the date of such first sale is defined in Section 101(c) of the JOBS
Act as the company's ``initial public offering date''), rather than the
three years of audited financial data that had previously been
required. In addition, for as long as a company remains an EGC, it is
not required to file selected financial data for any period prior to
the earliest period for which it had included audited financial
statements in its initial public offering registration statement in (i)
any subsequent registration statement filed under the Securities Act or
(ii) any Exchange Act registration statement. An issuer that is an EGC
will continue to be considered an EGC until the earliest of: (i) The
last day of the fiscal year during which it had total annual gross
revenues of at least $1 billion; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year
following the fifth anniversary of its initial public offering date;
(iii) the date on which it has, during the previous three-year period,
issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt; or (iv) the date
on which it is considered to be a ``large accelerated filer'' under the
Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Public Law 112-106.
    \6\ An EGC is defined as an issuer that had total annual gross
revenues of less than $1 billion during its most recently completed
fiscal year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Certain of the NYSE's financial initial listing standards set forth
in Sections 102.01C and 103.01B of the Manual require listing
applicants to meet the applicable financial criteria over a period of
three fiscal years. As the staff of NYSE Regulation, Inc. bases its
determination as to a company's compliance with the financial initial
listing standards only on publicly available audited financial data, an
EGC which availed itself of the right to file only two years of audited
financial data as part of its initial public offering registration
statement or subsequent registration statements would be unable to
qualify for listing under those particular financial listing standards.
The NYSE proposes to amend the initial financial listing standards in
Sections 102.01C and 103.01B to permit an EGC to meet the applicable
standard on the basis of the two years of audited financial data
actually reported, rather than the three years of financial data that
would otherwise be required. The proposed amendment would only be
applicable to EGCs that actually avail themselves of their ability to
report only two years of audited financial information. Under the
proposed amendments, EGCs would still be required to meet the same
aggregate financial requirements, but would be required to do so over a
two-year period rather than a three-year period, if they have availed
themselves of the JOBS Act provision allowing EGCs to file only two
years of audited financial statements. The Exchange notes that this
approach is similar to that taken by Nasdaq with respect to the initial
listing standards for its Nasdaq Global Select Market in Nasdaq
Marketplace Rules 5310(g) and (h) and that the proposed amended listing
standards would not establish lower initial listing requirements than
all other national securities exchanges, as the amended standards would
still be significantly more stringent than those applied by the Nasdaq
Capital Market.
    As a result of the changes to the financial reporting requirements
applicable to EGCs, the Exchange has decided to amend certain of its
initial listing standards to facilitate the listing of EGCs that avail
themselves of the ability to report only two years of audited financial
data. There are two separate financial listing standards in Section
102.01C which the NYSE proposes to amend, the Domestic Earnings Test
and the Domestic Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow Test. In addition,
there are two separate financial listing standards in Section 103.01B
which the NYSE proposes to amend, the International Earnings Test and
the International Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow Test.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Foreign companies are also permitted to list under the
initial listing standards in Section 102.01B applicable to domestic
companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Domestic Earnings Test requires that an applicant's earnings
must total (x) at least $10 million in the aggregate in the three most
recent fiscal years together with a minimum of $2 million in the two
most recent years and positive amounts in all three years or (y) at
least $12 million in aggregate in the last three years with a minimum
of $5 million in the most recent fiscal year and a minimum of $2
million in the next most recent fiscal year. The proposed amendment to
the Domestic Earnings Test applicable to EGCs which elect to report
only two years of audited financial data would require that the EGC's
earnings must total at least $10 million in the aggregate in the two
most recent fiscal years together with a minimum of $2 million in each
of the two years.
    Under the Domestic Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow Test, the
applicant must have (1) At least $500 million in global market
capitalization; (2) at least $100 million in revenues during the most
recent twelve month period; and (3) an aggregate of at least $25
million in cash flows for the last three fiscal years with positive
amounts in all three years. Under the proposed amended Domestic
Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow Test applicable to EGCs that have
availed themselves of the JOBS Act provision allowing EGCs to file only
two years of audited financial statements, the market capitalization
and revenue requirements in (1) and (2) would remain unchanged, but the
cash flow requirement in (3) would be amended to require an aggregate
of at least $25 million in cash flows for the two most recent fiscal
years with positive amounts in both years.
    The International Earnings Test requires that an applicant's
earnings must total at least $100 million in the aggregate in the three
most recent fiscal years together with a minimum of $25 million in the
two most recent years. The proposed amendment to the International
Earnings Test applicable to EGCs which report only two years of audited
financial data would require that the EGC's earnings must total at
least $100 million in the aggregate in the two most recent fiscal years
together with a minimum of $25 million in each of the two years.
    Under the International Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow Test, the
applicant must have (1) At least $500 million in global market
capitalization;

(2) at least $100 million in revenues during the most recent twelve
month period; and (3) an aggregate of at least $100 million in cash
flows for the last three fiscal years with a minimum of $25 million in
each of the two most recent fiscal years. Under the proposed amended
International Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow Test applicable to EGCs
that have availed themselves of the JOBS Act provision allowing EGCs to
file only two years of audited financial statements, the market
capitalization and revenue requirements in (1) and (2) would remain
unchanged, but the cash flow requirement in (3) would be amended to
require an aggregate of at least $100 million in cash flows for the two
most recent two fiscal years with a minimum of $25 million in each of
the two years.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) \8\ of the Exchange Act in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act,\9\ in particular in
that it is designed 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. The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments are
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because: (i) The financial requirements for initial listing under the
proposed amendments would be the same as those under the Exchange's
existing standards, except that companies would need to meet the
aggregate financial requirements over a two-year rather than a three-
year period; (ii) the proposed amended listing standards are similar to
listing standards already applied by the Nasdaq Global Select Market;
and (iii) the proposed amended listing standards would not establish
lower initial listing requirements than all other national securities
exchanges, as the amended standards would still be significantly more
stringent than those applied by the Nasdaq Capital Market. In addition,
the Exchange notes that the proposed amendments would facilitate the
listing of EGCs by the Exchange on the basis of two years of audited
financial data, which is the level of financial disclosure permissible
for an EGC under the JOBS Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    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 \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
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.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ Id. In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 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 Exchange has
satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \13\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
and, therefore, designates the proposal operative upon filing.\15\ The
Commission notes that the proposed amendments are similar to rules
currently in effect for the Nasdaq Global Select Market and therefore
do not raise any novel regulatory issues and would allow the Exchange
to list such companies immediately. Furthermore, the Commission notes
that the amended listing standards are higher than the initial listing
requirements of other national securities exchanges.\16\ Finally, the
Commission notes that although companies will be allowed to meet
certain financial listing standards over a two-year period as opposed
to a three-year period as currently required, the aggregate dollar
amounts of the financial requirements are remaining the same. Based on
the above, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \16\ See e.g. NASDAQ Stock Market Rules 5000 Series (detailing
listing requirements for the NASDAQ Global Market and NASDAQ Capital
Market) and NYSE Amex LLC Company Guide Section 101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

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-NYSE-2012-12 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2012-12. This file

number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2012-12 and should be
submitted on or before June 11, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-12197 Filed 5-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 223 (Wednesday, November 18, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 73476]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25439]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IN13-15-000]

BP America Inc., BP Corporation North America Inc., BP America
Production Company, and BP Energy Company; Updated Notice of
Designation of Commission Staff as Non-Decisional

    With respect to orders issued by the Commission in the above-
captioned docket, with the exceptions noted below, the staff of the
Office of Enforcement are designated as non-decisional in deliberations
by the Commission in this docket. Accordingly, pursuant to 18 CFR
385.2202 (2020), they will not serve as advisors to the Commission or
take part in the Commission's review of any offer of settlement.
Likewise, as non-decisional staff, pursuant to 18 CFR 385.2201 (2020),
they are prohibited from communicating with advisory staff concerning
any deliberations in this docket.
    Exceptions to this designation as non-decisional are:

Jeffrey Phillips
Grace Kwon
Phil Haxel
Sebastian Krynski
Carol Clayton
Laura Vallance

    Dated: November 12, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-25439 Filed 11-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74127-74128]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29449]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2013-0737, FRL-9903-95-OSWER]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Land Disposal Restrictions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), Land Disposal Restrictions (EPA
ICR No. 1442.22, OMB Control No. 2050-0085) 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.). Before doing so, EPA
is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed
information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension
of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2014. 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: Comments must be submitted on or before February 10, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2013-0737, 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.
    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: Peggy Vyas, 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, EPA 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.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: Section 3004 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), as amended, requires that EPA develop standards for
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal as may be necessary to
protect human health and the environment. Subsections 3004(d), (e), and
(g) require EPA to promulgate regulations that prohibit the land
disposal of hazardous waste unless it meets specified treatment
standards described in subsection 3004(m).
    The regulations implementing these requirements are codified in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 268. EPA requires that
facilities maintain the data outlined in this ICR so that the Agency
can ensure that land disposed waste meets the treatment standards. EPA
strongly believes that the recordkeeping requirements are necessary for
the agency to fulfill its congressional mandate to protect human health
and the environment.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Private sector and State, Local, or
Tribal governments.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 268).
    Estimated number of respondents: 194,560.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 1,208,382 hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.03(b)
    Total estimated cost: $161,734,819 includes $64,195,885 annualized
labor costs and $97,538,934 annualized capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The burden hours are likely to stay
substantially the same.

    Dated: November 26, 2013.
Barnes Johnson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2013-29449 Filed 12-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


TITLE 13. CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNIA EXHAUST STANDARDS FOR ON ROAD MOTORCYCLES The Air Resources Board ( the Board or ARB) will conduct a public hearing at the time and place noted below to consider amendments to the California on road motorcycle regulation, including lower tailpipe emission standards for hydrocarbons plus oxides of nitrogen ( HC+ NOx), corporate averaging on an HC+ NOx basis, and other technical modifications. The amendments are designed to help meet the ARB's commitment to achieve emission reductions from motor vehicles under the State Implementation Plan ( SIP) for ozone attainment.

DATE: December 10, 1998 TIME: 8: 30 a. m.

PLACE: Air Resources Board Hearing Room Northern California Headquarters 2020 L Street Sacramento, California This item will be considered at a two day meeting of the Board, which will commence at 8: 30 a. m., December 10, 1998, and may continue at 8: 30 a. m., December 11, 1998. This item may not be considered until December 11, 1998. Please consult the agenda for the meeting, which will be available at least 10 days before December 10, 1998, to determine the day on which this item will be considered.

This facility is accessible to persons with disabilities. If accommodation is needed, please contact the Clerk of the Board by November 25, 1998, at ( 916) 322 5594, or Telecommunications Device for the Deaf ( TDD) at ( 916) 324 9531, or ( 800) 700 8326 for TDD calls from outside the Sacramento area, to ensure accommodation.

To obtain this document in an alternative format, please contact the ARB Coordinator for the Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA) at ( 916) 322 4505, TDD ( 916) 324 9531 or ( 800) 700 8326 for TDD calls outside the Sacramento area.

INFORMATIVE DIGEST/ PLAIN ENGLISH POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED ACTION Sections Affected:

Amendments to title 13, California Code of Regulations ( CCR), section 1958 and the incorporated " Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures  Motorcycles Manufactured on or After January 1, 1978." The Existing California On Road Motorcycle Regulation The ARB adopted the first on road motorcycle regulation in 1975 to reduce ozone forming emissions from this mobile source category. The regulation established exhaust and evaporative emission standards for HC beginning with the 1978 model year. Depending on the motorcycle engine size, the original HC exhaust standards ranged from 5.0 grams per kilometer ( g/ km) to 14.0 g/ km.

The regulation established standards for motorcycles with engines as small as 50 cubic centimeters ( cc). Because in this rulemaking staff proposes to amend the standards only for Class III motorcycles ( 280 cc or greater), the remainder of this discussion will focus on the standards that currently apply to this class of on road motorcycles.

In 1984, the ARB amended the model year 1985 HC standard to give manufacturers more flexibility. The new standards for model year 1985 and beyond focused on the Class III category ( 280 cc and above): 280 to 699 cc engines were limited to 1.0 g/ km for model years, while 700 cc and larger motorcycles were limited to 1.4 g/ km HC. The ARB established provisions to allow manufacturers to meet these limits on a " corporate average" basis, with no individual engine family allowed to exceed 2.5 g/ km HC.

Additionally, in 1984 the Board directed the ARB staff to revisit the regulation when catalytic and other emissions control technologies had matured to the point that it would be feasible to apply these technologies to on road motorcycles. Significant strides in controlling emissions from internal combustion engines have taken place since then, with developments in the automotive sector gradually being applied to motorcycles. This is particularly true in Europe and Asia, where engine modifications, fuel injection, secondary pulse air injection, and catalytic converters are used in significant numbers of on road motorcycles. On the other hand, the ARB emission standards for motorcycles have not kept pace with the rate at which emission control technologies have developed. Therefore, ARB staff believe it is appropriate to amend the existing standards to the proposed levels, which reflect the use of reasonably available technologies.

The Proposed Amendments The primary impetus for the proposed amendments comes from the ARB's obligations under the State Implementation Plan for Ozone adopted by the Board in 1994. The ozone SIP, which represents California's commitment to attain and maintain the federal ambient air quality standard for ozone in greater Los Angeles and the rest of the state, was approved by U. S. EPA in 1995. The ozone SIP includes measures to reduce emissions from mobile sources under State control ( including cars, heavy duty trucks, off road equipment), as well as federal assignments to control emissions from sources under exclusive or practical federal control ( such as airplanes, marine vessels, and locomotives). The ozone SIP also relies upon the development of additional technology measures ( the mobile source " black box") to provide additional emission reductions needed for attainment in the South Coast Air Basin. 3 Although on road motorcycles have been regulated since the 1978 model year, the ozone SIP does not specifically plan for emission reductions from on road motorcycles. The staff's proposal for on road motorcycles is a new emission reduction effort reflecting reasonably available technologies. The staff's proposal offers additional, cost effective emission reductions needed to continue progress towards attainment of the federal ambient ozone standard. The additional emission reductions will also ensure continued progress toward meeting State and new federal air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter.

The ARB staff proposal maintains the regulatory approach used in the existing regulation. The proposal will maintain the current standards until model year 2004, when the first of the new standards becomes effective. The proposed Tier 1 standard for model year 2004 is 1.4 g/ km HC+ NOx. Beginning in model year 2008, the proposed Tier 2 standard of 0.8 g/ km HC+ NOx becomes effective. Manufacturers would be allowed to meet these proposed standards on a corporate average basis, with all engine families limited to no more than 2.5 g/ km HC+ NOx. For small volume manufacturers, staff is proposing that the Tier 1 standard of 1.4 g/ km HC+ NOx become effective starting in model year 2008. In the staff's proposal, small volume manufacturers are those which have combined California Class I ( 50 cc to 169 cc), Class II ( 170 cc to 279 cc) and Class III ( 280 cc and greater) sales of no greater than 1000 units in a model year.

To provide incentives for early compliance with the Tier 2 standard, staff is also proposing a set of multiplier factors that provide extra credit to manufacturers that introduce motorcycles which meet the Tier 2 standard earlier than the 2008 model year. Use of these credits will make it easier for a manufacturer to comply with the corporate emissions average standard in 2008.

Comparable Federal Regulations Under Title II of the federal Clean Air Act ( CAA), the U. S. EPA has adopted comprehensive regulations to control emissions from new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines, including on road motorcycles ( see Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 86 ( 40 CFR 86)). However, both state law and CAA section 209( b) authorize California to establish its own standards that differ from the federal standards.

While similar in purpose and scope, the California exhaust emission standards are more stringent than the comparable federal requirements. The current federal exhaust emission standard applicable to the engine size class ( Class III) affected by the proposed amendments is 5.0 g/ km ( HC only). The federal standard for carbon monoxide ( CO) is identical to California's existing standard ( 12 g/ km). The more stringent California on road motorcycle program is necessary to help attain the national and state ambient ozone standards.

AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS AND CONTACT PERSON/ PLAIN ENGLISH POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW The Board staff has prepared a staff report that includes the initial statement of reasons for the 4 proposed action and a summary of the environmental impacts of the proposal, if any. Copies of the staff report and the full text of the proposed regulatory language may be obtained from the Board's Public Information Office, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, ( 916) 322 2990 at least 45 days prior to the scheduled hearing. The ARB has determined the proposed action will affect small business. The ARB has also determined that it is not feasible to draft the regulations in plain English due to the technical nature of the regulations; however, a plain English summary of the regulations is available from the agency contact person named in this notice, and/ or is also contained in the staff report for this regulatory action. The Board staff has compiled a record that includes all information upon which the proposal is based. This material is available for inspection upon request from the contact person identified immediately below.

Further inquiries regarding this matter should be directed to Mr. Floyd Vergara, P. E., On Road Control Regulation Branch, Mobile Source Control Division, at ( 916) 327 1503 or by e mail at fvergara@ arb. ca. gov.

COSTS TO PUBLIC AGENCIES AND TO BUSINESSES AND PERSONS AFFECTED The determinations of the Board's Executive Officer concerning the costs or savings necessarily incurred in reasonable compliance with the proposed regulations are presented below.

The Executive Officer has determined that the proposed regulatory action will not create costs or savings, as defined in Government Code § 11346.5( a)( 6), to any state agency or in federal funding to the state, costs or a mandate to any local agency or school district whether or not reimbursable by the state pursuant to part ( commencing with § 17500), Division 4, Title 2 of the Government Code, or other nondiscretionary savings to local agencies.

The affected businesses that would be required to comply with the proposed amendments are manufacturers of on road motorcycles sold in California. Six companies worldwide manufacture the vast majority ( over 95%) of California certified, on road motorcycles. Other affected companies are smaller manufacturers generally located in Europe, as well as numerous very small manufacturers located throughout the United States, including several located in California. Also affected would be businesses that supply parts for these California certified, on road motorcycles. California businesses account for only a small share of total nationwide manufacturing of on road motorcycle parts because most new parts suppliers also tend to locate in areas close to vehicle assembly plants to minimize shipping costs and delivery time. In addition, on road motorcycle dealerships may be affected by the proposed amendments.

The proposed amendments may result in increased costs to on road motorcycle manufacturers and dealers. The complete cost analysis concerning the proposed exhaust emission standards is contained in the Staff Report. When the proposed amendments are fully phased in, the total annual manufacturers' cost is estimated at up to $ 3.6 million. The overall cost increases are not expected to have a noticeable impact on the profitability or sales of affected manufacturers and dealers. Most manufacturers are expected to pass on the bulk of the cost increase to motorcycle 5 purchasers in the form of higher prices.

The proposed amendments are expected to affect the retail price of new on road motorcycles purchased by California consumers to the extent manufacturers are able to pass on their cost increases to purchasers. If the entire costs of compliance are passed on to the consumer, we estimate a retail price increase from the proposed amendments of up to approximately $ 200 per motorcycle, with an average of about $ 100 per motorcycle. As the average retail price of an onroad motorcycle is currently about $ 7,600, the cost increase on average represents less than a two percent increase in the price of new on road motorcycles. The magnitude of this increase is generally not expected to significantly dampen consumer demand for new on road motorcycles in California.

While no significant dampening of sales is expected, the projected higher prices resulting from staff's proposal may cause a slight decrease in new motorcycle sales. This could have a small negative effect on motorcycle dealers. However, the overall net effect, if any, is expected to be minor since motorcycle dealers also sell other products such as accessories, apparel, and other types of vehicles unaffected by staff's proposal.

The Executive Officer has determined that the proposed amendments would have no adverse economic impact on businesses including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states, as the proposed standards are anticipated to have only a minor impact on retail prices of new, on road motorcycles. In addition, no impacts on competitiveness are expected since all manufacturers selling new, on road motorcycles in California must meet the proposed standards, regardless of the manufacturers' location.

The proposed amendments are not expected to cause a noticeable change in California employment because California accounts for only a small share of on road motorcycle and parts manufacturing employment. There could be a slight increase in California employment, as suppliers of parts that will be used to help meet the standards increase their production of such parts or their workforce to meet the demand. Also, to the extent manufacturers use contract laboratories located in California for bench testing or other research and development efforts, there could potentially be an increase in employment in California.

Other than the possible increase in the use of contract laboratories to conduct in use testing, the proposed amendments are not expected to affect business creation, elimination or expansion.

The estimated statewide benefits of the proposal would be approximately 1.3 tpd HC and NOx by 2010, and 2.9 tpd HC and NOx by 2020. The estimated California cost effectiveness of the staff's proposal would range from about $ 3.00 to $ 5.60 per pound of ROG + NOx reduced, depending on the production and distribution strategy chosen by the manufacturers. This costeffectiveness is within the range of other emission control measure costs. 6 Before taking final action on the proposed regulatory action, the Board must determine that no alternative considered by the agency would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action.

SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS The public may present comments relating to this matter orally or in writing. To be considered by the Board, written submissions must be addressed to and received by the Clerk of the Board, Air Resources Board, P. O. Box 2815, Sacramento, CA 95812, no later than 12: 00 noon, December 9, 1998, or received by the Clerk of the Board at the hearing.

The Board requests, but does not require, that 20 copies of any written statement be submitted and that all written statements be filed at least 10 days prior to the hearing. The Board encourages members of the public to bring to the attention of staff in advance of the hearing any suggestions for modification of the proposed regulatory action.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND HEARING PROCEDURES This regulatory action is proposed under that authority granted in California Health and Safety Code sections 39600, 39601, 43013, 43101, 43104, and 43107. This action is proposed to implement, interpret and make specific California Health and Safety Code sections 39002, 39003, 43000, 43013, 43100, 43101, 43104, 43107.

The public hearing will be conducted in accordance with the California Administrative Procedure Act, Title 2, Division 3, Part 1, Chapter 3.5 ( commencing with section 11340) of the Government Code. 7 Following the public hearing, the Board may adopt the regulatory language as originally proposed, or with nonsubstantial or grammatical modifications. The Board may also adopt the proposed regulatory language with other modifications, including changes to proposed emission standards, if the text as modified is sufficiently related to the originally proposed text that the public was adequately placed on notice that the regulatory language as modified could result from the proposed regulatory action; in such event the full regulatory text, with the modifications clearly indicated, will be made available to the public, for written comment, at least 15 days before it is adopted. The public may request a copy of the modified regulatory text from the Board's Public Information office, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, ( 916) 322 2990.

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD Michael P. Kenny Executive Officer Date: October 13, 1998


                                 Docket Index
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; South Coast; Contingency Measures for 1997 PM2.5 Standard
                      (Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0384)
                                 June 12, 2013

A.  Rulemaking Documents
  A-1.	Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; South Coast; Contingency Measures for 1997 PM2.5 Standard; Proposed rule, signed June 12, 2013 (pre-publication version).
  A-2.	Interim Final Determination to Defer Sanctions; California; South Coast Air Quality Management District; Interim final rule, signed June 12, 2013 (pre-publication version).
B.  SIP Submittals
   B-1.   Letter, James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency Region 9, November 14, 2011 (submitting Contingency Measure SIP revision) with attachments including:
         a. Transmittal letter from the South Coast Air Quality Management District to ARB requesting submittal of 2011 PM2.5 Contingency Measure SIP Revision, including all attachments:
                 1. Approved Board Letter regarding the adoption of Revisions to the 2007 PM2.5 State Implementation Plan for South Coast Air Basin (Attachment A)
                 2. Governing Board Adoption Resolution 11-24 certifying the Notice of Exemption for the 2007 AQMP for a Revision to the Final 2007 AQMP (Attachment B)
                 3. Notice of Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act:  Revisions to the PM2.5 SIP for the South Coast Air Basin (Attachment C)
                 4. South Coast Air Quality Management District Proposed Contingency Measures for the 2007 PM2.5 State Implementation Plan (Attachment D)
                 5. Proof of Publication for Notices of Public Hearing
                 6. Audio tape of the October 7, 2011 AQMD Governing Board proceedings (AVAILABLE ON CASSETTE TAPES AT REGION 9 OFFICE)
         b. State of California, Air Resources Board Executive Order S-11-023, Adoption and Submittal of Revisions to 2007 State Implementation Plan for South Coast Air Basin (November 14, 2011)
         c. SIP Completeness Checklist
   B-2.    Letter, Elaine Chang, DrPH, Deputy Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District to Deborah Jordan, Director, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, April 24, 2013 (updating the 2012 RFP Emissions and 2015 Reductions from Contingency Measures for the 2007 Annual PM2.5 AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin) with attachments including:
         a. Attachment 1, Update Table C-2, South Coast Air Basin PM2.5 Reasonable Further Progress (Annual Average Tons Per Day)
         b. Attachment 2, 2015 Emissions Reductions Beyond 2007 AQMP SIP Commitment Available for Contingency
C. Supporting Documents
  C-1.   EPA Guidance, Federal Register Notices, and case law
        a. "National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter," Final rule.  62 FR 36852 (July 18, 1997) (1997 PM2.5 NAAQS)
        b. "Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards," Final rule.  70 FR 944 (January 5, 2005)
        c. "Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards," Final rule. 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009)
        d. "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; 2007 South Coast PM2.5 Plan and 2007 State Strategy," Final rule. 76 FR 69928 (November 9, 2011)
        e. "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; 2007 South Coast PM2.5 Plan and 2007 State Strategy," Proposed rule. 76 FR 41562 (July 14, 2011)
        f. "State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990," Proposed rule.  57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) ("General Preamble")
        g. "State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990," Addendum to General Preamble for future proposed rulemakings.  59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994) ("PM-10 Addendum")
        h. "Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule," Final rule. 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007)
        i. Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir., Jan. 4, 2013)
        j. LEAN v. EPA, 382 F.3d 575 (5[th] Circuit. 2004) (upholding contingency measures that were previously required and implemented and which provided emissions reductions in excess of those in the attainment demonstration and RFP SIP)
        k. 62 FR 15844 (April 3, 1997) (direct final rule approving Indiana ozone SIP revision)
        l. 62 FR 66279 (December 18, 1997) (final rule approving Illinois ozone SIP revision)
        m. 66 FR 30811 (June 8, 2001) (direct final rule approving Rhode Island ozone SIP revision)
        n. 66 FR 586 (January 3, 2001) (final rule approving District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia ozone SIP revisions)
        o. 66 FR 634 (January 3, 2001) (final rule approving Connecticut ozone SIP revision)
        p. South Coast SOx RECLAIM Shave approval. 76 FR 50128 (August 12, 2011)
        q. South Coast Rule 1113 approval. 78 FR 18244 (March 26, 2013)
        r. Memorandum dated October 24, 1997 from Richard D. Wilson, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, to EPA Regional Administrators, Regions 1-10, entitled "Guidance on Incorporating Voluntary Mobile Source Emission Reduction Programs in State Implementation Plans (SIPs)" (hereinafter "1997 VMEP")
        s.  "Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze," April 2007, EPA -454/B-07-002, at p. 21 (referencing EPA's rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N for calculation of annual average PM2.5 values)
        t. "Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District," pre-publication proposed rule signed June 12, 2013 (proposed approval of South Coast rules 444 and 445)
  C-2.   Other supporting documents
        a. Memorandum from Meredith Kurpius, EPA Region IX, Air Quality Analysis Office, to File, May 10, 2013, South Coast PM2.5 Ambient Air Monitoring Data Completeness
        b. Memorandum from Wienke Tax to File, May 30, 2013, EPA Proposed Rule to Approve South Coast Contingency Measure SIP Revision, Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
        c. Memorandum from Carol Bohnenkamp, Regional Modeling Contact, to Rulemaking docket # EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0384, May 30, 2013, Assessment of projected vs. observed ambient PM2.5 levels for 2012 RFP year
        d. "Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan" (South Coast 2007 AQMP), submitted November 28, 2007
        e. South Coast 2007 AQMD Board Resolution No. 07-9, dated June 1, 2007 (adopting South Coast 2007 AQMP) ("2007 Resolution")
        f. South Coast 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-B-3, "District Implementation of the Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program," available electronically at https://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/07aqmp/aqmp/Appendix_IV-B-3_section1.pdf
        g. "State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan" (2007 State Strategy), submitted November 16, 2007
        h. 2009 State Strategy SIP revision, submitted August 12, 2009 ("2009 State Strategy")
        i. 2011 State Strategy SIP revision, submitted May 18, 2011 ("2011 Progress Report")
        j. "Final Technical Support Document and Response to Comments, Final Rulemaking Action on the South Coast 2007 AQMP for PM2.5 and the South Coast Portions of the Revised 2007 State Strategy," Air Division, U.S. EPA Region 9, September 30, 2011 ("Final TSD for South Coast PM2.5 SIP")
        k. "Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan," Letter dated February 13, 2013, from James Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, transmitting 2012 AQMP
        l. "The Carl Moyer Program Guidelines, Approved Revisions 2011," Release Date:  February 8, 2013, at Chapter 1 (available electronically at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/moyer.htm)
        m. SCAQMD, Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan (July 2012), at 7-9 and 21, Table 5
        n. Letter dated April 18, 2013, from Matthew Lakin, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region 9, to Dr. Matt Miyasato, Deputy Executive Officer, Science and Technology Advancement, SCAQMD
        o. U.S. EPA, Air Quality System, Preliminary Design Value Report, PM2.5, 2002-2012 (Report Date: May 10, 2013)
        p. U.S. EPA, Data Quality Indicator Report, SCAQMD, California, PM2.5 (April 26, 2012)
        q. Letter dated May 1, 2012, from Chung Liu, Deputy Executive Officer, Science and Technology Advancement, SCAQMD, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 9 (certifying air quality data submitted to AQS)
        r. Letter dated July 18, 2008, from Michael Scheible, Deputy Executive Officer, CARB, to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 9 (transmitting several California regulations, including SOON program (Rule 2449), to EPA).