position on the BSE Board would be recommended by the BOXR
Nominating Committee for election thereto.
    Proposed Section 22 of the BOXR LLC Agreement, which otherwise
generally provides that the provisions of the BOXR LLC Agreement
would not be deemed to create any right in any person not a party to
the BOXR LLC Agreement, would make clear that the limitations of
Section 22 would not apply to BOX Participants to the extent
provided in Section 14 of the BOXR By-Laws.
    \211\ Id.
    \212\ See proposed Section 4.14, BSE By-Laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the BSE By-Laws require only due consideration of the
recommendation made by the BSE Nominating Committee, BSE states in its
proposed rule change that, in nominating the BOX Participant Director
to the BSE Board, the BSE Nominating Committee would adopt the
recommendation of the BOXR Nominating Committee, and NASDAQ OMX, as the
sole stockholder of BSE, would elect such candidate.\213\ To reconcile
the BSE By-Laws and this representation, BSE states that immediately
following the closing of the BSE Acquisition, BSE would propose to the
BSE Board an amendment to the BSE By-Laws to make it clear that the
candidate nominated by the BOXR Nominating Committee to serve as the
BOX Participant Director on the BSE Board would also be nominated by
the BSE Nominating Committee and elected by NASDAQ OMX, unless such
nominee is not otherwise eligible for service pursuant to BSE By-Laws
Section 4.3.\214\ The Commission believes that the proposed petition
process, coupled with the right to vote for their representatives,
should help to ensure that BOX Participants have the opportunity to be
involved in the selection of their representatives for the BOXR Board
and the BSE Board. The Commission notes that this proposed process is
consistent with the current process for electing BOX Participant
Directors previously approved by the Commission.\215\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \213\ See BSE Governance Proposal Notice, supra note 3, 73 FR at
26159, n.16, and accompanying text.
    \214\ In Amendment No. 1 to the BSE Governance Proposal, BSE
states that, after such proposal to the BSE Board: ``[BSE] shall
promptly file the amendment as a proposed rule change for approval
by the Commission. This clarifying change could not be included in
this filing because Article XX of [BSE's] current Constitution,
which is being replaced by the proposed [BSE] By-Laws, provides that
[BSE's] members must approve amendments to the [BSE] Constitution.
The [BSE] members voted to approve the [BSE] By-Laws as submitted in
this filing on December 4, 2007, prior to the submission of this
filing to the Commission, and it would have been impracticable and
unduly expensive to seek a second member vote for approval of this
clarifying change. Following adoption of the new [BSE] By-Laws, the
[BSE] Board will have authority to approve [BSE] By-Law
amendments.'' See Amendment No. 1 to the BSE Governance Proposal,
supra note 4.
    \215\ See BOXR Order, supra note 124, 69 FR at 2771.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed changes are consistent with
Sections 6(b)(3) of the Act,\216\ which requires BSE to assure a fair
representation of its members in the selection of its directors and
administration of its affairs because the proposal is designed to
ensure that BOX Participants continue to participate in the selection
of their representatives to the BOXR and BSE Boards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \216\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Disciplining of Affiliated Members
    In the BSE Governance Proposal, BSE proposes to amend the BOXR By-
Laws to provide that neither the BSE Board nor the BOXR Board would
consider appeals of disciplinary actions involving BOX Participants
that are affiliates of NASDAQ OMX.\217\ Currently, any BOX Participant
``adjudged guilty in any disciplinary proceeding'' by the BOXR Hearing
Committee \218\ or any panel thereof may appeal such decision to the
BOXR Board and subsequently to the BSE Board. Any initial decision that
is rendered by the BOXR Hearing Committee regarding the affiliated BOX
Participant would instead constitute final disciplinary action of BSE
under Rule 19d-1(c)(1) under the Act.\219\ This proposed change is
consistent with the process for appeals by affiliated members of Nasdaq
under Nasdaq's rules, which previously was approved by the
Commission.\220\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \217\ See proposed Section 14(f)(i), BOXR By-laws.
    \218\ See BOXR By-Laws, Section 14(f).The ``BOXR Hearing
Committee'' is appointed by the Chairman of the BOXR Board and must
include one BOX Participant, but may not include members of the BOXR
Board or BSE Board. The BOXR Hearing Committee has exclusive
jurisdiction to conduct disciplinary proceedings brought by BOXR
against any BOX Participant for violation of the Act, the rules and
regulations thereunder, the BSE By-Laws, BOX Rules, the BOXR LLC
Agreement or By-Laws, or the interpretations and stated policies of
either the BSE or BOXR Boards. Id. The BOX Committee would hear
appeals from regulatory decisions of the BOXR Board. See supra note
167 and accompanying text.
    \219\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(1).
    \220\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54170, supra note
113, 71 FR at 42151.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that this proposed change is consistent
with the Act, including Section 6(b)(7) thereunder,\221\ which requires
that the rules of an exchange must provide a fair procedure for
disciplining members. Specifically, this proposal, which specifies that
the BSE Board and the BOXR Board may not be involved in review of
disciplinary actions involving affiliated BOX Participants, would
mitigate a conflict of interest that could occur as a result of Nasdaq
OMX's ownership of BSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \221\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. BSX

1. NASDAQ OMX Ownership of BSX
    In addition to the BSE Acquisition, NASDAQ OMX would acquire all of
the outstanding limited liability company interests in BSX held by
investors other than BSE.\222\ As a result, NASDAQ OMX would own 46.79%
of BSX directly and would own indirectly through BSE the remaining
53.21% of BSX. Following the BSE Acquisition, BSE would remain the SRO
and would provide the regulatory framework for BSX,\223\ and BSE
expects to operate in the future a facility for the trading of cash
equity securities through BSX. BSE would not resume trading of cash
equity securities until it has filed a proposed rule change under
Section 19(b) of the Act proposing amendments to BSE Rules,

and the Commission has approved the new BSE Rules.\224\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \222\ BSX was formed in 2004 as a joint venture between BSE and
several investors to operate an electronic trading facility, BeX,
for the trading of cash equity securities. BeX ceased its operations
in September 2007. See BSE Governance Proposal Notice, supra note 3,
73 FR at 26166.
    \223\ See proposed Section 3.2, BSX Operating Agreement.
    \224\ See BSE Governance Proposal Notice, supra note 3, 73 FR at
26167.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current BSX Operating Agreement requires that any transfer that
results in the acquisition and holding by any person, alone or together
with any affiliate of such person, of an aggregate percentage interest
level that meets or crosses the threshold of 20% be subject to a rule
filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.\225\ In accordance with
this requirement, BSE proposes in the BSE Governance Proposal that the
Commission approve the transfer of ownership interests in BSX to NASDAQ
OMX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \225\ See current Section 18.1, BSX Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that following the transfer of ownership
interests in BSX to NASDAQ OMX, BSE and NASDAQ OMX would be the sole
members of BSX. In accordance with proposed Section 18.1 of the BSX
Operating Agreement, any amendment to the BSX Operating Agreement,
including to permit the admission of additional or substitute members,
would have to be submitted to the BSE Board for review, and, if any
such amendment would be required under Section 19 of the Act and the
rules promulgated thereunder, to be filed with, or filed with and
approved by, the Commission before such amendment may be effective,
then such amendment would not be effective until filed with, or filed
with and approved by the Commission.\226\ As the operator of a facility
of BSE, BSX must continue to be operated in a manner consistent with
the regulatory and oversight responsibilities of BSE and with the Act
and rules and regulations thereunder. The Commission believes that,
because BSE would remain the SRO and would provide the regulatory
framework for BSX, the transfer of ownership interests in BSX to NASDAQ
OMX would not impair the continued ability of BSE or the Commission to
discharge their respective regulatory and oversight responsibilities.
The Commission therefore finds that the transfer of ownership interests
in BSX to NASDAQ OMX is consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \226\ See proposed Section 8.2(e), BSX Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. BSX Operating Agreement
    In conjunction with the BSE Acquisition, BSE also proposes in the
BSE Governance Proposal to amend the BSX Operating Agreement to reflect
the sole ownership of BSX by BSE and NASDAQ OMX.
a. Transfer, Ownership and Voting Restrictions
    The amended BSX Operating Agreement would continue to state that
BSX must provide the Commission with written notice ten days prior to
the closing date of any acquisition that results in a BSX Member's
percentage ownership interest in BSX, alone or with any affiliate,
meeting or crossing the 5%, 10%, or 15% thresholds.\227\ In addition,
the amended BSX Operating Agreement would continue to provide that any
transfer of BSX units that results in the acquisition and holding by
any person, alone or together with an affiliate, of an interest that
meets or crosses the 20% threshold or any successive 5% threshold
(i.e., 25%, 30%, etc.) would trigger the requirement to file an
amendment to the BSX Operating Agreement with the Commission under
Section 19(b) of the Act.\228\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \227\ See proposed Section 8.2(d), BSX Operating Agreement.
    \228\ See supra note 225. In addition, the amended BSX Operating
Agreement would provide that any transfer of BSX units that would
reduce BSE's ownership in BSX below the 20% threshold would require
a proposed rule change under Section 19(b) of the Act. Moreover,
Commission approval would be required to permit any person, alone or
together with any affiliate, to control 20% of the Total Votes. See
current Section 8.4(e), BSX Operating Agreement, and proposed
Section 8.2(e), BSX Operating Agreement. The Commission notes that
proposed Section 18.1 of the BSX Operating Agreement requires the
submission of any proposed amendment thereto to the BSE Board for
review. If such amendment is required under Section 19 of the Act to
be filed with, or filed with and approved by, the Commission, it
could not take effect until filed with, or filed with and approved
by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the amended BSX Operating Agreement would continue to
provide that any person that acquires a controlling interest (i.e., an
interest of 25% or greater) in a BSX Member that holds 20% or more of
BSX units would be required to become a party to the BSX Operating
Agreement and abide by its terms.\229\ The addition of any such
indirect controlling party would also require a filing with the
Commission pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act.\230\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \229\ See proposed Section 8.2(f), BSX Operating Agreement.
    \230\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the BSE Governance Proposal, BSE proposes to amend the BSX
Operating Agreement to remove provisions that allow BSX Members to
exercise rights of first refusal in the event that one member proposes
to transfer its ownership interests in BSX to another member or BSX
proposes to issue additional units of ownership.\231\ Because BSX would
be 100% owned, directly and indirectly, by NASDAQ OMX, this provision
is no longer relevant. In addition, BSE proposes to expand those
provisions of the BSX Operating Agreement that currently prohibit BSX
Participants and their affiliates from owning or voting more than 20%
of BSX to include all BSE members and their affiliates. To make the BSX
Operating Agreement consistent with the exception from BSE Rules to
permit NES and NOS to become affiliates of BSE,\232\ the proposed
amendment to the BSX Operating Agreement would state that these
ownership and voting restrictions do not limit NASDAQ OMX's or BSE's
ownership interests in BSX.\233\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \231\ See current Sections 8.2 and 8.3, BSX Operating Agreement.
    \232\ See supra notes 117-123 and accompanying text.
    \233\ See proposed Sections 8.3 and 8.4, BSX Operating
Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed changes to provisions in
the BSX Operating Agreement on transfer, ownership, and voting
restrictions would not affect the ability of BSE to carry out its self-
regulatory responsibilities or the ability of the Commission to fulfill
its responsibilities under the Act. In particular, the proposal would
not change the current percentage thresholds in the transfer,
ownership, and voting provisions. The Commission finds that the
proposed revisions to the BSX Operating Agreement discussed above are
consistent with the Act.
b. BSE's Authority Over BSX
    Although NASDAQ OMX would own directly 46.79% of BSX, BSE would be
entitled to designate all of the directors of the BSX board of
directors (``BSX Board'').\234\ In addition, in the BSE Governance
Proposal, BSE proposes to delete a provision in the BSX Operating
Agreement that currently requires a super-majority of BSX directors'
votes, including the affirmative votes of all directors designated by
BSE, before BSX could take certain significant actions, such as
entering into a new line of business or replacing BSE as BSX's
regulatory service provider.\235\ Instead, BSE would have the authority
to veto or mandate actions that relate to regulatory requirements.\236\
Specifically, the proposal sets forth that BSE's affirmative vote would
be required with respect to any action, transaction, or aspect of an
action or transaction that

BSE, in its sole discretion, determines is necessary or appropriate
for, or interferes with, the performance or fulfillment of BSE's
regulatory functions, its responsibilities under the Act or as
specifically required by the Commission.\237\ In addition, BSE would
have the sole and exclusive right to direct that any required,
necessary, or appropriate act be undertaken without regard to the vote,
act, or failure to vote or act by any other party in any capacity.\238\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \234\ See proposed Section 4.1(b), BSX Operating Agreement. In
addition, BSE proposes to reduce the number of BSX directors from
six to five. See proposed Section 4.1(a), BSX Operating Agreement.
    \235\ See current Section 4.4, BSX Operating Agreement.
    \236\ See proposed Section 4.4, BSX Operating Agreement.
    \237\ Id.
    \238\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the amended BSX Operating Agreement would state that any
amendment thereto must be submitted to the BSE Board for review and, if
such amendment is required under Section 19(b) of the Act and the rules
thereunder to be filed with, or filed with and approved by the
Commission, then such amendment would not be effective until filed
with, or filed with and approved by the Commission, as the case may
be.\239\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \239\ See proposed Section 18.1, BSX Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that these proposals are designed to
preserve BSE's regulatory authority over BSX, and any proposed facility
for the trading of cash equity securities that BSX may operate, and are
consistent with the Act because they would grant BSE the ability to
direct BSX to perform any required, necessary, or appropriate act and
would allow BSE to veto or mandate actions that relate to regulatory
requirements. The Commission notes that BSE could not operate a
facility for the trading of cash equity securities until it has filed
under Section 19(b) of the Act, and the Commission has approved, the
new BSE Rules. In particular, the Commission believes these changes are
consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,\240\ which requires, among
other things, that the national securities exchange be so organized and
have the capacity to carry out the purposes of the Act, and to comply
and enforce compliance by its members and persons associated with its
members, with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations
thereunder, and the rules of the exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \240\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Confidentiality Provisions
    In the BSE Governance Proposal, BSE proposes to amend the BSX
Operating Agreement to provide that all confidential information
pertaining to the self-regulatory function of BSE or the business of
BSE relating to the trading of cash equity securities (including
disciplinary matters, trading data, trading practices and audit
information) in the books and records of BSX would not be made
available to any persons. The proposal would allow such information to
be made available to officers, directors, employees and agents of BSX
who have a reasonable need to know the contents thereof. However, such
confidential information would be required to be retained in confidence
by BSX and its officers, directors, employees and agents and not be
used for any commercial purposes.\241\ The Commission believes that the
revised confidentiality provisions would not impair BSE's self-
regulatory obligations with respect to BSX and finds that this
provision is consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \241\ See proposed Section 16.7, BSX Operating Agreement. BSE
also proposes that the provision would not be interpreted to limit
or impede the ability of any officers, directors, employees or
agents of the Company to disclose confidential information to the
Commission or the BSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Jurisdiction
    The current BSX Operating Agreement provides that BSX and each BSX
Member as well as the officers, directors, agents, and employees of BSX
and each BSX Member must submit to the jurisdiction of the federal
courts, the Commission, and BSE for the purposes of any suit, action,
or proceeding pursuant to the U.S. federal securities laws or the rules
or regulations thereunder, arising out of, or relating to BSX's
activities.
    In the BSE Governance Proposal, BSE proposes to amend Section
18.6(b) of the BSX Operating Agreement to: (1) clarify that the
jurisdiction of the U.S. federal courts, the Commission, and BSE over
BSX, its members, and their respective officers, directors, agents, and
employees is exclusive; (2) require BSX and its members and their
respective officers, directors, agents, and employees to agree not to
assert lack of personal jurisdiction by the U.S. federal courts or BSE;
\242\ and (3) include a provision regarding the waiver of the defense
or application of any foreign secrecy or blocking statutes by BSX and
its members and their respective officers, directors, agents, and
employees, with respect to BSX's activities or their participation
therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \242\ Section 18.6(b) of the BSX Operating Agreement currently
requires BSX and its members and their respective officers,
directors, agents, and employees, to agree not to assert lack of
personal jurisdiction by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that these changes, in conjunction with
other provisions of the BSX Operating Agreement that would remain
unchanged, would enhance BSE's ability to fulfill its self-regulatory
obligations and assist in administering and complying with the
requirements of the Act. Moreover, BSE is required to enforce
compliance with these provisions because they are ``rules of the
exchange'' within the meaning of Section 3(a)(27) of the Act.\243\ A
failure on the part of BSE to enforce its rules could result in a
Commission enforcement action pursuant to Section 19(h)(1) of the
Act.\244\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \243\ 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(27).
    \244\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(h)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. BSECC

    As a result of the BSE Acquisition, BSECC, BSE's wholly-owned
subsidiary and a registered clearing agency, would become a wholly-
owned indirect subsidiary of NASDAQ OMX. As noted above, BSECC ceased
processing trades in 2007. In connection with the transaction, BSECC
proposes, in the BSECC Governance Proposal, to amend its Articles of
Organization (``BSECC Articles of Organization''). BSECC also proposes
to update the BSECC Articles of Organization and By-Laws (``BSECC By-
Laws'') in certain other respects, including, according to BSE, to
reflect modern corporate practice for Massachusetts corporations. In
addition, BSECC has filed the NASDAQ OMX Certificate and By-Laws as
proposed rules.\245\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \245\ See supra note 10 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the BSE Acquisition, BSECC proposes to amend the
BSECC Articles of Organization such that the total number of shares of
each class of stock that BSECC would be authorized to issue is 150
shares of common stock. This amendment would reflect a reduction in the
total authorized share capital of BSECC from 1000 shares of common
stock to the 150 shares of common stock currently held by BSE. Thus,
following the amendment, all of the authorized shares of common stock
of BSECC would be outstanding and would be owned by BSE.\246\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \246\ See proposed BSECC Articles of Organization, Article III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BSECC also proposes to amend the BSECC Articles of Organization to
provide that BSE may not transfer or assign any shares of stock of
BSECC unless such transfer or assignment has been filed with and
approved by the Commission under Section 19 of the Act.\247\ These
proposed changes are designed to ensure that, absent Commission
approval, BSECC would remain a wholly-owned subsidiary of BSE. Further,
BSECC proposes to amend

the BSECC By-Laws to expressly state that the BSECC By-Laws may be
amended only upon approval by the Commission and in accordance with the
rules of BSECC.\248\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \247\ See proposed BSECC Articles of Organization, Article V.
    \248\ See proposed BSECC By-Laws Article VI.7. BSECC Rule XII
requires notice to clearing members of amendments to the BSECC By-
Laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BSECC also proposes several other changes to the BSECC Articles of
Organization and BSECC By-Laws, which BSECC states are primarily for
the purpose of updating those documents in accordance with modern
corporate practice for Massachusetts corporations.\249\ Specifically,
BSECC proposes to adopt what it terms ``modern provisions'' stipulating
the conditions under which BSECC may indemnify its officers and
directors and the scope of that indemnification. Such provisions
provide that directors of BSECC are not personally liable to it for
breaches of fiduciary duty, except for breaches involving (1) A breach
of the duty of loyalty, (2) acts or omissions not in good faith or that
involve intentional misconduct or knowing violation of law, (3)
distributions of assets that would render BSECC insolvent, or (4) any
transaction from which the director derived an improper personal
benefit.\250\ BSECC also proposes to amend the BSECC By-Laws to clarify
the time periods allowed or required for notice to stockholders of
meetings, the permissible duration of stockholder proxies, and the
setting of a record date, which BSECC states are consistent with
Massachusetts law.\251\ BSECC further proposes to remove a provision
from its By-Laws allowing close of the transfer books of BSECC, which
BSECC states is no longer consistent with Massachusetts law.\252\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \249\ See BSECC Governance Proposal Notice, supra note 9, 73 FR
at 27584.
    \250\ See proposed BSECC By-Laws Article VI.
    \251\ See proposed BSECC By-Laws Article I.4, Article I.6, and
Article V.3.
    \252\ See BSECC By-Laws Article V.3. BSECC represents that this
change would not limit the effectiveness of the change to the
Articles of Organization requiring Commission approval of transfers
of BSECC's stock. See BSECC Governance Proposal Notice, supra note
9, 73 FR 27583, n.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, BSECC states that its proposed changes would allow
stockholders, as well as directors, to fill vacancies on the BSECC
Board of Directors (``BSECC Board'') in accordance with Massachusetts
law \253\ and to clarify that directors of BSECC, if such directors
also serve on the BSE Board, must tender resignations from the BSECC
Board if they cease to be BSE Directors.\254\ The proposed changes also
would clarify the requirements for action by the BSECC Board and the
stockholders to be taken without a meeting.\255\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \253\ See proposed BSECC By-Laws Article II.4.
    \254\ See proposed BSECC By-Laws Article II.7.
    \255\ BSECC also proposes changes to eliminate the offices of
``clerk'' and ``vice-chairman'' from BSECC and to delete references
to those offices from the By-Laws and to establish that the officers
of BSECC are all appointed by and subject to removal by the BSECC
Board. See proposed BSECC By-Laws Article III.1 and III.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed changes to the BSECC
Articles of Organization and BSECC By-Laws are consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder and
particularly with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(C) of the
Act.\256\ The Commission notes that the proposed rule change does not
amend BSECC's rules or procedures with respect to the clearance and
settlement of securities transactions or the safeguarding of securities
and funds which are in BSECC's control or for which it is responsible.
Section 17A(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that a clearing agency's rules
assure the fair representation of its shareholders (or members) and
participants in the selection of its directors and administration of
its affairs. BSECC would remain a wholly-owned subsidiary of BSE
following the acquisition by NASDAQ OMX and the BSECC By-Laws relating
to the selection, composition, powers, and duties of the BSECC Board,
committees, and officers, except as discussed above, would remain
unchanged. Accordingly, the Commission finds that BSECC's rules would
continue to assure the fair representation of its shareholders and
participants in the selection of BSECC's directors and the
administration of BSECC's affairs as required by Section 17A(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \256\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, as discussed above with respect to BSE, BSECC also has
filed the Certificate and By-Laws of NASDAQ OMX as proposed rules.\257\
As noted above, although NASDAQ OMX is not itself an SRO, its
activities with respect to the operation of BSECC must be consistent
with, and must not interfere with, the self-regulatory obligations of
BSECC. NASDAQ OMX's By-Laws would make applicable to all of NASDAQ
OMX's SRO subsidiaries, including BSECC (after the BSE Acquisition),
certain provisions of NASDAQ OMX's Certificate and NASDAQ OMX's By-Laws
that are designed to maintain the independence of each of its SRO
subsidiaries' self-regulatory functions, enable each SRO subsidiary to
operate in a manner that complies with the federal securities laws, and
facilitate the ability of each SRO subsidiary and the Commission to
fulfill their regulatory and oversight obligations under the Act.\258\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \257\ See supra note 38.
    \258\ See Amendment No. 1 to the BSECC Governance Proposal,
supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Commission notes that the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws
would provide that the NASDAQ OMX Board, as well as its officers,
employees, and agents, may not take any action that would interfere
with the decisions of the board of directors of any SRO subsidiary
relating to its regulatory functions or the market structures or the
clearing systems which it regulates or that would interfere with the
ability of any SRO subsidiary to carry out its responsibilities under
the Act.\259\ Also, the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws would specifically require
the NASDAQ OMX Board to consider BSECC's regulatory obligations as a
clearing agency when evaluating any issue,\260\ including granting any
exemption from the NASDAQ OMX voting limitations discussed above.\261\
The Commission believes that the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws, as amended to
accommodate the BSE Acquisition, are designed to facilitate BSECC's
ability to fulfill its self-regulatory obligations and, accordingly,
are consistent with Section 17A of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \259\ See proposed Section 12.1(a), NASDAQ OMX By-Laws.
    \260\ The NASDAQ OMX Board would be required to consider, to the
extent deemed relevant, when evaluating any issue, whether such
would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions (and to the extent applicable, derivative
agreements, contracts and transactions), would assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody or control of
the SRO subsidiaries that are clearing agencies or securities and
funds for which they are responsible, would foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in the clearance and settlement of
securities transactions, and would remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a national system for the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions. See proposed
Section 12.7, NASDAQ OMX By-Laws.
    \261\ Specifically, the NASDAQ OMX Board would be required to
determine that granting any such exemption would promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
(and to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts and
transactions), would assure the safeguarding of securities and funds
in the custody or control of the SRO subsidiaries that are clearing
agencies or securities and funds for which they are responsible,
would foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
the clearance and settlement of securities transactions, and would
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a national system
for the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions. See proposed Section 12.5, NASDAQ OMX By-Laws; and
Article Fourth.C.6, NASDAQ OMX Certificate. See also notes 100-104
and accompanying text.

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

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning: (1) Amendment No. 1 to File No. SR-BSE-2008-23
(the BSE Governance Proposal), including whether Amendment No. 1 is
consistent with the Act; (2) Amendment No. 1 to File No. SR-BSECC-2008-
01 (the BSECC Governance Proposal), including whether Amendment No. 1
is consistent with the Act; and (3) Amendment No. 1 to File No. SR-BSE-
2008-25 (the BOX Transfer Proposal), including whether Amendment No. 1
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-BSE-2008-23, SR-BSECC-2008-01, or SR-BSE-2008-25 as
applicable, 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 Amendment No. 1 to File No. SR-BSE-
2008-23, Amendment No. 1 to File No. SR-BSECC-2008-01, or Amendment No.
1 to File No. SR-BSE-2008-25, as applicable. This file number should be
included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission
process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one
method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with
respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission,
and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change
between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be
withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's
Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on
official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies
of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of BSE or BSECC, as applicable. 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 Amendment No. 1 to File No. SR-BSE-2008-23, Amendment
No. 1 to File No. SR-BSECC-2008-01, or Amendment No. 1 to File No. SR-
BSE-2008-25, as applicable, and should be submitted on or before
September 2, 2008.

IV. Accelerated Approval of the BSE Governance Proposal, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, the BSECC Governance Proposal, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, and the BOX Transfer Proposal, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause for approving: (1) The BSE
Governance Proposal, as modified by Amendment No. 1, (2) the BSECC
Governance Proposal, as modified by Amendment No. 1, and (3) the BOX
Transfer Proposal, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the
thirtieth day after the date of publication of notice of filing of such
amendments in the Federal Register.\262\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \262\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act, the Commission may not approve any proposed rule change, or
amendment thereto, prior to the thirtieth day after the date of
publication of the notice thereof, unless the Commission finds good
cause for so doing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Amendment No. 1 to the BSE Governance Proposal and Amendment No.
1 to the BSECC Governance Proposal, BSE and BSECC each propose to adopt
as rules the NASDAQ OMX Certificate and NASDAQ OMX By-Laws. The NASDAQ
OMX Certificate, as filed by BSE and BSECC, was previously approved by
the Commission as rules of Nasdaq.\263\ The NASDAQ OMX By-Laws were
similarly approved previously by the Commission.\264\ As filed by BSE
and BSECC, the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws include certain new terminology to
reflect the acquisition of BSE and BSECC by NASDAQ OMX. These changes
were filed by Nasdaq as a proposed rule change, were published for
comment, and were approved by the Commission.\265\ The changes were
also filed by Phlx, and were approved by the Commission, in connection
with the Phlx Acquisition.\266\ The Commission received no comments on
the proposed changes to the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws in either instance.\267\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \263\ See Nasdaq Exchange Approval Order, supra note 63, 73 FR
at 3552-3553.
    \264\ See NASDAQ OMX By-Laws Proposal Notice, supra note 18, 73
FR 26182, and NASDAQ OMX By-Laws Approval Order, supra note 31, 73
FR 42850.
    \265\ Id.
    \266\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58179, supra note
27.
    \267\ In addition, Amendment No. 1 to the BSE Governance
Proposal and Amendment No. 1 to the BSECC Governance Proposal
incorporate a change to the Nasdaq OMX By-Laws to clarify the
definition of Non-Industry Director with respect to issuer
representation on the Nasdaq OMX Board of Directors that recently
was approved by the Commission. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 58201 (July 21, 2008), 73 FR 43812 (July 28, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-
2008-043).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed more fully above in Sections II.A.1. and II.A.6., and
in the NASDAQ OMX By-Law Proposal Notice, certain provisions of NASDAQ
OMX's Certificate and By-Laws are designed to facilitate the ability of
NASDAQ OMX's SRO subsidiaries, including BSE and BSECC, to maintain the
independence of each of the SRO subsidiaries' self-regulatory function,
enable each SRO subsidiary to operate in a manner that complies with
the federal securities laws, and facilitate the ability of each SRO
subsidiary and the Commission to fulfill their regulatory and oversight
obligations under the Act.\268\ As stated above, the Commission finds
that such provisions are consistent with the Act.\269\ Notably, the
NASDAQ OMX Certificate and By-Laws are rules of Nasdaq that have been
approved previously by the Commission, as noted above, and the changes
to the NASDAQ OMX By-Laws were published for notice and comment, as
noted above, and the Commission did not receive any comments thereon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \268\ See supra notes 38-47, 100-104 and accompanying text.
    \269\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, in Amendment No. 1 to the BSE Governance Proposal,
BSE proposes to amend Section 8.2(f) of the BSX Operating Agreement.
Section 8.2(f) currently requires that any person who, alone or
together with any affiliate of such person, has 25 percent or greater
interest in a BSX Member who, alone or together with any affiliate of
such BSX Member, holds 20 percent or greater interest in BSX become
party to, and abide by all the provisions of, the BSX Operating
Agreement. In Amendment No. 1, BSE proposes to clarify that for the
Section 8.2(f) requirement to apply, a person, alone or together with
any affiliate of such person, must have direct or indirect ownership of
25 percent or more of the total voting power of all equity securities
of a BSX Member, other than voting rights solely with respect to
matters affecting the rights, preferences, or privileges of a
particular class of equity securities. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
BSE proposes to clarify that a person with zero percent direct or
indirect interest in a BSX Member would not be required to

become party to the BSX Operating Agreement pursuant to the revised
Section 8.2(f).
    The Commission finds these changes to the BSX Operating Agreement
consistent with the Act. Section 8.2(f) of the BSX Operating Agreement
is designed to minimize the potential that a person could improperly
interfere with or restrict the ability of the Commission and BSE to
effectively carry out their regulatory oversight responsibilities under
the Act. The clarifications proposed by BSE do not hinder the intent of
Section 8.2(f), because the Commission believes that a person without
voting power in the equity securities of a BSX Member, or a person with
no direct or indirect interest in a BSX Member, could not interfere
with or restrict the Commission's or the BSE's ability to carry out its
regulatory responsibilities.
    In Amendment No. 1 to the BOX Transfer Proposal, BSE proposes to
amend Section 8.4(g) of the BOX LLC Agreement. Section 8.4(g) currently
requires that any person who, alone or together with any affiliate of
such person, has 25 percent or greater interest in a BOX Member who,
alone or together with any affiliate of such BOX Member, holds 20
percent or greater interest in BOX become party to, and abide by all
the provisions of, the BOX LLC Agreement. In Amendment No. 1, BSE
proposes to clarify that for the Section 8.4(g) requirement to apply, a
person, alone or together with any affiliate of such person, must have
direct or indirect ownership of 25 percent or more of the total voting
power of all equity securities of a BOX Member, other than voting
rights solely with respect to matters affecting the rights,
preferences, or privileges of a particular class of equity securities.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, BSE proposes to clarify that a person
with zero percent direct or indirect interest in a BOX Member would not
be required to become party to the BOX LLC Agreement pursuant to the
revised Section 8.4(g).
    The Commission finds these changes to the BOX LLC Agreement
consistent with the Act. Section 8.4(g) of the BOX LLC Agreement is
designed to minimize the potential that a person could improperly
interfere with or restrict the ability of the Commission and BSE to
effectively carry out their regulatory oversight responsibilities under
the Act. The clarifications proposed by BSE do not hinder the intent of
Section 8.4(g) because the Commission believes that a person without
voting power in the equity securities of a BOX Member, or a person with
no direct or indirect interest in a BOX Member, could not interfere
with or restrict the Commission's or the BSE's ability to carry out its
regulatory responsibilities.
    For the reasons described above, the Commission finds good cause
for approving each of the following on an accelerated basis, pursuant
to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act: (1) The BSE Governance Proposal, as
modified by Amendment No. 1; (2) the BSECC Governance Proposal, as
modified by Amendment No. 1; and (3) the BOX transfer Proposal, as
modified by Amendment No. 1.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\270\ that the BSE Interim Certificate Proposal (SR-BSE-2008-02),
as modified by Amendment No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved; that the
BSE Governance Proposal (SR-BSE-2008-23), as modified by Amendment
No.1, be, and hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis; that the BOX
Transfer Proposal (SR-BSE-2008-25), as modified by Amendment No. 1, be,
and hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis; and that the BSECC
Governance Proposal (SR-BSECC-2008-01), as modified by Amendment No.1
be, and hereby is approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \270\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    By the Commission.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-18577 Filed 8-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 224 (Monday, November 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 83331]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27925]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

National Advisory Committee on Travel and Tourism Infrastructure;
Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the first meeting of the National
Advisory Committee on Travel and Tourism Infrastructure (NACTTI). At
the meeting, members will be sworn-in and begin a discussion of the
work they will undertake during their appointment term. The agenda and
any additional information for the meeting will be posted, at least one
week in advance of the meeting, on the Department of Transportation Web
site at https://www.transportation.gov/NACTTI.

DATES: The meeting will be held on December 8, 2016, from 1:00 p.m. to
5:00 p.m., and December 9, 2016, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., EDT.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591. Individuals wishing
for audio participation and any person requiring accessibility
accommodations should contact the Official listed in the for further
information contact section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Robinson, Special Advisor,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the Secretary, at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>. Also visit the NACTTI Internet Web
site at http://www.transportation.gov/NACTTI.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    NACTTI was created in accordance with Section 1431 of the Fixing
America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. 114-94: Dec. 4,
2015; Stat 1312) to provide information, advice, and recommendations to
the Secretary of Transportation on matters related to the role of
intermodal transportation in facilitating mobility related to travel
and tourism activities.

II. Public Participation

    The meeting will be open to the public on a first-come, first
served basis, as space is limited. Members of the public who wish to
attend in-person are asked to register, including name and affiliation,
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by December 1, 2016. Individuals requesting
accessibility accommodations, such as sign language, interpretation, or
other ancillary aids, may do so via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by
December 1, 2016.
    There will be 30 minutes allotted for oral comments from members of
the public joining the meeting. To accommodate as many speakers as
possible, the time for public comments may be limited to 5 minutes per
person. Individuals wishing to reserve speaking time during the meeting
must submit a request at the time of registration, as well as the name,
address, and organizational affiliation of the proposed speaker. If the
number of registrants requesting to make statements is greater than can
be reasonably accommodated during the meeting, the Office of the
Secretary may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers. Speakers are
requested to submit a written copy of their prepared remarks by 5:00
p.m. EDT on December 1, 2016, for inclusion in the meeting records and
for circulation to NACTTI members.
    Persons who wish to submit written comments for consideration by
NACTTI must send them via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>any time before or
after the meeting. To be considered during the meeting, comments must
be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on December 1, 2016, to ensure
transmission to NACTTI prior to the meeting. Comments received after
that date and time will be distributed to the members but may not be
reviewed prior to the meeting.
    Copies of the meeting minutes will be available within 90 days of
the meeting on the NACTTI Internet Web site at http://www.transportation.gov/NACTTI.

Jenny T. Rosenberg,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-27925 Filed 11-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 17, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70258-70259]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28969]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1145; FRL-9227-7]

Review of the Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Oxides of Nitrogen and Oxides of Sulfur

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) of
EPA recently made available a draft report, Policy Assessment for the
Review of the Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Oxides of Nitrogen and Oxides of Sulfur: Second External Review Draft
(75 FR 57463, September 21, 2010). The EPA released this preliminary
draft document to seek early consultation with the Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee (CASAC) and to solicit public comment on the overall
structure, framing of key issues and conclusions regarding options for
key elements of the standards. Four supplementary materials were
released at a later date (75 FR 61486, October 5, 2010). The
supplementary materials were: an errata sheet for Chapter 5; an
addendum for Chapter 5; an additional Table 7-1 (summary of key
uncertainties); and an additional table for Chapter 9 (summary of
options for elements of the nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur
oxides (SOX) standard). Comments were originally scheduled
to be submitted on or before November 12, 2010. A request for an
extension to the comment period has been received. The EPA is granting
this extension to allow stakeholders and the public with adequate time
to conduct appropriate analysis and meaningful comments. Therefore, the
comment period is being moved from November 12, 2010, to November 26,
2010.

DATES: Comments should be submitted on or before November 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-1145, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail)
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-
1145.
     Fax: Fax your comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention Docket
ID. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1145.
     Mail: Send your comments to: Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1145.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: EPA
Docket Center, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-1145. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket in the
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. This Docket Facility is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 202-566-
9744.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Bryan Hubbell, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards (Mail code C504-02), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

General Information

A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    Under section 108(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Administrator
identifies and lists certain pollutants which ``cause or contribute to
air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public
health or welfare.'' The EPA then issues air quality criteria for
listed pollutants, which are commonly referred to as ``criteria
pollutants.'' The air quality criteria are to ``accurately reflect the
latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of
all identifiable effects on public health or welfare which may be
expected from the presence of [a] pollutant in the ambient air, in
varying quantities.'' Under section 109 of the CAA, EPA establishes
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for each listed
pollutant, with the NAAQS based on the air quality criteria. Section
109(d) of the CAA requires periodic review and, if appropriate,
revision of existing air quality criteria. The revised air quality
criteria reflect advances in scientific knowledge on the effects of the
pollutant on public health or welfare. The EPA is also required to
periodically review and revise the NAAQS, if appropriate, based on the
revised criteria.
    The EPA is currently conducting a joint review of the existing
secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for NOX and SOX.
Because NOX, SOX, and their associated
transformation products are linked from an atmospheric chemistry
perspective as well as from an environmental effects perspective, and
because of the National Research Council's 2004 recommendations to
consider multiple pollutants in forming the scientific basis for the
NAAQS, EPA has decided to jointly assess the science, risks, and
policies relevant to protecting the public welfare associated with
NOX and SOX. This is the first time since NAAQS
were established in 1971 that a joint review of these two pollutants
has been conducted. Since both the CASAC and EPA have recognized these
interactions historically, and the science related to these
interactions has continued to evolve and grow to the present day, there
is a strong basis for considering them together.
    As part of this review of the current secondary (welfare-based)
NAAQS for NOX and SOX, EPA's OAQPS staff prepared
a second draft Policy Assessment. The objective of this assessment is
to evaluate the policy implications of the key scientific information
contained in the document Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of
Nitrogen and Sulfur-Ecological Criteria (http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=201485), prepared by EPA's National Center for
Environmental Assessment (NCEA) and the results from the analyses
contained in the Risk and Exposure Assessment for Review of the
Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Oxides of Nitrogen
and Oxides of Sulfur (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/no2so2sec/cr_rea.html). The second draft Policy Assessment plus the
supplementary materials are available online at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/no2so2sec/index.html. This second draft Policy
Assessment was reviewed by the CASAC during a public meeting which was
held on October 6 and 7, 2010.

    Dated: November 8, 2010.
Jennifer Noonan Edmonds,
Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2010-28969 Filed 11-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P