[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10173-10175]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03810]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74301; File No. SR-MIAX-2015-10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rule 404

February 19, 2015.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 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 February 9, 2015, Miami International
Securities Exchange LLC (``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend Exchange Rule 404.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at
MIAX's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 404, Interpretations
and Policies .02, to extend current $0.50 strike price intervals in
non-index options to short term options with strike prices less than
$100. This is a competitive filing that is based on proposals recently
submitted by the International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'') and
BOX Options Exchange LLC (``BOX'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 73999 (January 6,
2015), 80 FR 1559 (January 12, 2015) (SR-ISE-2014-52); 74016
(January 8, 2015), 80 FR 1976 (January 14, 2015) (SR-BOX-2015-01).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend its rules governing the Short Term
Option Series Program to introduce finer strike price intervals for
certain Short Term Option Series. In particular, the Exchange proposes
to amend Rule 404, Interpretations and Policies .02(e), to extend $0.50
strike price intervals in non-index options to Short Term Options
Series with strike prices less than $100 instead of the current $75.
This proposed change is intended to eliminate gapped strikes between
$75 and $100 that result from conflicting strike price parameters under
the Short Term Option Series and $2.50 Strike Price Programs as
described in more detail below.
    Under the Exchange's rules, the Exchange may list Short Term Option
Series in up to fifty option classes in addition to option classes that
are selected by other securities exchanges that employ a similar
program under their respective rules.\4\ On any Thursday or Friday that
is a business day, the Exchange may list Short Term Option Series in
designated option classes that expire at the close of business on each

of the next five Fridays that are business days and are not Fridays in
which monthly or quarterly options expire.\5\ These Short Term Option
Series trade in $0.50, $1, or $2.50 strike price intervals depending on
the strike price and whether the option trades in dollar increments in
the related monthly expiration.\6\ Specifically, short term options in
non-index option classes admitted to the Short Term Options Series
Program currently trade in: (1) $0.50 or greater strike price intervals
where the strike price is less than $75, and $1 or greater where the
strike price is between $75 and $150 for all classes that participate
in the Short Term Option Series Program; (ii) $0.50 strike price
intervals for classes that trade in one dollar increments in non-Short
Term Options and that participate in the Short Term Option Series
Program; or (iii) $2.50 or higher strike price intervals where the
strike price is above $150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Rule 404, Interpretations and Policies .02(a).
    \5\ See Exchange Rule 404, Interpretations and Policies .02.
    \6\ See Exchange Rule 404, Interpretations and Policies .02(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also operates a $2.50 Strike Price Program that
permits the Exchange to select up to sixty options classes on
individual stocks to trade in $2.50 strike price intervals, in addition
to option classes selected by other securities exchanges that employ a
similar program under their respective rules.\7\ Monthly expiration
options in classes admitted to the $2.50 Strike Price Program trade in
$2.50 intervals where the strike price is (1) greater than $25 but less
than $50; or (2) between $50 and $100 if the strikes are no more than
$10 from the closing price of the underlying stock in its primary
market on the preceding day.\8\ These strike price parameters conflict
with strike prices allowed for short term options because dollar
strikes between $75 and $100 that are otherwise allowed under the Short
Term Option Series Program may be within $0.50 of strikes listed
pursuant to the $2.50 Strike Price Program. In order to remedy this
conflict, the Exchange proposes to extend the $0.50 or greater strike
price intervals currently allowed for Short Term Options Series with
strike prices less than $75 to Short Term Options Series with strike
prices less than $100. With this proposed change, Short Term Options
Series in non-index option classes will trade in: (1) $0.50 or greater
intervals for strike prices less than $100, or for option classes that
trade in one dollar increments in the related monthly expiration
option; (2) $1intervals for strike prices that are between $100 and
$150; and (3) $2.50 or greater intervals for strike prices above $150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Exchange Rule 404(f).
    \8\ Id. The term ``primary market'' means the principal market
in which an underlying security is traded. See Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act \9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \10\ in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the month prior to expiration, the Exchange is permitted to
list related monthly option contracts in the narrower strike price
intervals available for Short Term Options Series.\11\ After
transitioning to short term strike price intervals, however, monthly
options that trade in $2.50 intervals between $50 and $100 under the
$2.50 Strike Price Program, trade with dollar strikes between $75 and
$150. Due to the overlap of $1 and $2.50 intervals, the Exchange cannot
list certain dollar strikes between $75 and $100 that conflict with the
prior $2.50 strikes. For example, if the Exchange initially listed
monthly options on ABC with $75, $77.50, and $80 strikes, the Exchange
could list the $76 and $79 strikes when these transition to short term
intervals. The Exchange would not be permitted to list the $77 and $78
strikes, however, as these are $0.50 away from the $77.50 strike
already listed on the Exchange. This creates gapped strikes between $75
and $100, where investors are not able to trade otherwise allowable
dollar strikes on the Exchange. Similarly, these conflicting strike
price parameters create issues for investors who want to roll their
positions from monthly to weekly expirations. In the example above, for
instance, an investor that purchased a monthly ABC option with a $77.50
strike price would not be able to roll that position into a later short
term expiration with the same strike price as that strike is
unavailable under current Short Term Option Series Program rules.
Permitting $0.50 intervals for Short Term Options Series up to $100
would remedy both of these issues as strikes allowed under the $2.50
Strike Price Program would not conflict with the finer $0.50 strike
price interval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Exchange Rule 404, Interpretations and Policies .02(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Short Term Option Series Program has been well-received by
market participants and the Exchange believes that introducing finer
strike price intervals for Short Term Options Series with strike prices
between $75 and $100, and thereby eliminating the gapped strikes
described above, will benefit these market participants by giving them
more flexibility to closely tailor their investment and hedging
decisions.
    With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, the
Exchange has analyzed its capacity and represents that it and the
Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary systems
capacity to handle any potential additional traffic associated with
this proposed rule change. The Exchange believes that its members will
not have a capacity issue as a result of this proposal. The Exchange
also represents that it does not believe this expansion will cause
fragmentation of liquidity.

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. In this regard and as
indicated above, the Exchange notes that the rule change is being
proposed as a competitive response to filings submitted by ISE and
BOX.\12\ To the contrary, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change will result in additional investment options and opportunities
to achieve the investment objectives of market participants seeking
efficient trading and hedging vehicles, to the benefit of investors,
market participants, and the marketplace in general. Additionally, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is necessary to permit
fair competition among the options exchanges with respect to Short Term
Option Series Programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id. [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    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 for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon
filing. The Exchange stated that waiver of this requirement will allow
the Exchange to compete with other exchanges with similar provisions
without putting the Exchange at a competitive disadvantage. For this
reason, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change presents
no novel issues and that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest;
and will allow the Exchange to remain competitive with other exchanges.
Therefore, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be
operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2015-10 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-MIAX-2015-10. 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-MIAX-2015-10 and should be
submitted on or before March 18, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-03810 Filed 2-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 134 (Friday, July 12, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41836-41837]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16693]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1206; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-021-AD;
Amendment 39-17269; AD 2012-23-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
(Sikorsky) Model Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting an airworthiness directive (AD) that was
published in the Federal Register. The

AD applies to all Sikorsky Model S-70, S-70A, and S-70C helicopters,
which are restricted category helicopters derived from the military
Model UH-60 helicopter. The part number (P/N) for the No. 2 crossfeed
breakaway valve listed in the ``Required Actions'' section is
incorrect. This document corrects that error. Also, this document
contains a response to a comment received after publication of the
Final Rule. In all other respects, the original document remains the
same.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 12, 2013. The effective date
for AD 2012-23-13 (77 FR 71087, November 29, 2012) remains December 14,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Davison, Flight Test Engineer,
New England Regional Office, FAA, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Airworthiness Directive 2012-23-13,
Amendment 39-17269 (77 FR 71087, November 29, 2012), currently includes
the following under paragraph (e)(xiii) in the Required Actions
section:

    (xiii) For Number 2 crossfeed breakaway valve, P/N 70307-03600-
103, establish a life limit of 1,500 hours.

    As published, the identification of the P/N as 70307-03600-103 is
incorrect. The correct P/N is 70307-03006-103. No other part of the
regulatory information has been changed; therefore, only the changed
portion of the final rule is being published in the Federal Register.

Comments

    After we published our Final rule; request for comments (77 FR
71087; November 29, 2012), we received a comment from one commenter.

Request

    The one commenter from the manufacturer stated that the document
reduced the life limit for the main and tail rotor blades but does not
make any reference to the detailed internal life limited components of
the blades. The commenter asked whether the AD applies only to the
blade assembly P/Ns and whether the blade components were overlooked.
    We do not agree that the AD should include life limits for the
internal components of the blade assembly. The life limit of each main
and tail rotor blade reflects the life limit of its lowest component in
the Sikorsky Airworthiness Limitations technical manual. That manual
does not list life limits for individual internal components.

Correction of Regulatory Text

Sec.  39.13  [Corrected]

    In the Federal Register of November 29, 2012, on page 71089, in the
first column, paragraph (e)(xiii) of AD 2012-23-13 is corrected to read
as follows:
* * * * *
    (e)(xiii) For Number 2 crossfeed breakaway valve, P/N 70307-03006-
103, establish a life limit of 1,500 hours TIS.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 3, 2013.
Kim Smith,
Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-16693 Filed 7-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 2)]
[Notices]
[Page 377-379]
[DOCID:fr04ja06-98]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53026; File No. SR-NASD-2005-152]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Extending the Pilot Relating to Manning Price-Improvement
Standards for Decimals

December 27, 2005.
    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 December 23, 2005, the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD'') filed

with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by NASD. NASD filed this proposal pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\
therefore making the proposed rule change effective immediately upon
filing. NASD intends for this rule change to become operative on
January 1, 2006. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD is proposing to extend through June 30, 2006, the current
pilot price-improvement standards for decimalized securities contained
in NASD Interpretive Material 2110-2--Trading Ahead of Customer Limit
Order (``Manning Rule'' or ``Manning''). There are no proposed changes
to the rule text.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NASD's Manning Rule requires NASD member firms to provide a minimum
level of price improvement to incoming orders in NMS and SmallCap
securities if the firm chooses to trade as principal with those
incoming orders at prices superior to customer limit orders they
currently hold. If a firm fails to provide the minimum level of price
improvement to the incoming order, the firm must execute its held
customer limit orders. Generally, if a firm fails to provide the
requisite amount of price improvement and also fails to execute its
held customer limit orders, it is in violation of the Manning Rule.
    On April 6, 2001,\5\ the Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
price-improvement standards for decimalized securities contained in
Manning, which added the following language to IM-2110-2:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44165 (April 6,
2001), 66 FR 19268 (April 13, 2001).

    For Nasdaq securities authorized for trading in decimals
pursuant to the Decimals Implementation Plan For the Equities and
Options Markets, the minimum amount of price improvement necessary
in order for a market maker to execute an incoming order on a
proprietary basis in a security trading in decimals when holding an
unexecuted limit order in that same security, and not be required to
execute the held limit order, is as follows:
    (1) For customer limit orders priced at or inside the best
inside market displayed in Nasdaq, the minimum amount of price
improvement required is $0.01; and
    (2) For customer limit orders priced outside the best inside
market displayed in Nasdaq, the market maker must price improve the
incoming order by executing the incoming order at a price at least
equal to the next superior minimum quotation increment in Nasdaq
(currently $0.01).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Pursuant to the terms of the Decimals Implementation Plan
for the Equities and Options Markets, the minimum quotation
increment for Nasdaq securities (both National Market and SmallCap)
at the outset of decimal pricing is $0.01. As such, Nasdaq displays
priced quotations to two places beyond the decimal point (to the
penny). Quotations submitted to Nasdaq that do not meet this
standard are rounded to the nearest minimum quotation increment
(namely, $0.01), specifically, rounded down for buy orders and
rounded up for sell orders. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
43876 (January 23, 2001), 66 FR 8251 (January 30, 2001).

    Since approval, these standards continue to operate on a pilot
basis which terminates on December 31, 2005.\7\ After consultation with
Commission staff, NASD has determined to seek an extension of its
current Manning pilot until June 30, 2006. NASD believes that such an
extension provides for an appropriate continuation of the current
Manning price-improvement standard while the Commission continues to
analyze the issues related to customer limit order protection in a
decimalized environment. NASD is not proposing any other changes to the
pilot at this time. NASD proposes to make the proposed rule change
operative on January 1, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51953 (June 30,
2005), 70 FR 39839 (July 11, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A of the Act,\8\ in general, and with Section
15A(b)(6) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. NASD believes that the proposed rule
change will improve treatment of customer limit orders and enhance the
integrity of the market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    This proposal has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
of the Act \10\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder \11\
because the proposal: (1) Does not significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest, (2) does not impose any
significant burden on competition, and (3) by its terms does not become
operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter
time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest.\12\ NASD has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay and designate the proposed
rule change effective immediately. NASD intends for the rule to become
operative on January 1, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ Pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) of the Act, a proposed
rule change does not become operative for 30 days after the date of
its filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
provided that the self-regulatory organization has given the
Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule
change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule
change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. NASD complied with the five day pre-filing requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission hereby grants the request.\13\ The Commission
believes that such waiver is consistent with the

protection of investors and the public interest because it will allow
the protection of customer limit orders provided by the pilot to
continue without interruption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of the
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-NASD-2005-152 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2005-152. 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. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of NASD. 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 the File
Number SR-NASD-2005-152 and should be submitted on or before January
25, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-8229 Filed 1-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 149 (Friday, August 4, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36390-36391]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16458]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER16-372-005.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Amendment to Compliance Filing in
Docket No. ER16-372-003 to be effective 5/15/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1649-001.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Errata to the Original Point to
Point Transmission Service Agreement No. 274 to be effective 10/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2184-000.
    Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Committee.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Aug 2017 Membership Filing
to be effective 8/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5131.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2185-000.
    Applicants: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC Shared
Facilities Agreement to be effective 10/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5135
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2186-000.
    Applicants: Madison Paper Industries.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: cancellation filing to be
effective 8/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5136.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2187-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of ETCs
for Azusa, Banning & Colton to be effective 9/30/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5137.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2188-000.
    Applicants: Playa Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Playa Solar 1 Notice of
Change in Status

and Request for Notice Waiver to be effective 8/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5147.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2189-000.
    Applicants: Playa Solar 2, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Playa Solar 2 Notice of
Change in Status and Request for Notice Waiver to be effective 8/1/
2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2190-000.
    Applicants: Playa Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Playa 1 Refiling of SFA
Under New Tariff Identifier--Notice Waiver Requested to be effective 8/
1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5161.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2191-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2nd Quarter 2017 Updates to
OA-RAA Member Lists to be effective 6/30/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5166.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2192-000.
    Applicants: Playa Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Complete Cancellation of Playa
Solar 1 MBR Program Tariff Identifier to be effective 8/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5169.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2193-000.
    Applicants: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC LGIA
Co-Tenancy Agreement to be effective 10/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5170.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2194-000.
    Applicants: Playa Solar 2, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Playa 2 Refiling of SFA
Under New Tariff Identifier--Notice Waiver Request to be effective 8/1/
2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5171.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2195-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement Nos. 4518
and 4756, Queue No. W4-005 Phase I and II to be effective 6/30/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2196-000.
    Applicants: Playa Solar 2, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Complete Cancellation of Playa
Solar 2 MBR Program Tariff Identifier to be effective 8/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5174.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2197-000.
    Applicants: Nevada Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule No. 155 NPC/
CRC Agreement to be effective 10/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5176.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2198-000.
    Applicants: Central Maine Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: First Amendment to Bucksport
Generation LLC Interconnection Agreement to be effective 8/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5194.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2199-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3215R3 People's Electric
Cooperative NITSA NOA to be effective 7/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5223.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2200-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OATT
Attachments O and P re: Solar Generation Meteorological Data to be
effective 9/29/2017.
    Filed Date: 7/31/17.
    Accession Number: 20170731-5240.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 31, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-16458 Filed 8-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 196 (Thursday, October 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61120-61121]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24102]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73299; File No. SR-FINRA-2014-041]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Tier Size Pilot of FINRA Rule 6433
(Minimum Quotation Size Requirements for OTC Equity Securities)

October 3, 2014.
    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 September 30, 2014, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA.
FINRA has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-
controversial'' rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under
the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this
filing by 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 6433 (Minimum Quotation Size
Requirements for OTC Equity Securities) to extend the Tier Size Pilot,
which currently is scheduled to expire on November 14, 2014, for an
additional three months, until February 13, 2015.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    FINRA proposes to amend FINRA Rule 6433 (Minimum Quotation Size
Requirements for OTC Equity Securities) (the ``Rule'') to extend, until
February 13, 2015, the amendments set forth in File No. SR-FINRA-2011-
058 (``Tier Size Pilot'' or ``Pilot''), which currently are scheduled
to expire on November 14, 2014.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67208 (June 15,
2012), 77 FR 37458 (June 21, 2012) (Order Approving File No. SR-
FINRA-2011-058, as amended); see also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 70839 (November 8, 2013), 78 FR 68893 (November 15,
2013) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change to Extend the Tier Size Pilot of FINRA Rule 6433; File
No. SR-FINRA-2013-049).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Tier Size Pilot was filed with the SEC on October 6, 2011,\5\
to amend the minimum quotation sizes (or ``tier sizes'') for OTC Equity
Securities.\6\ FINRA believed, and continues to believe, that the
Pilot, among other things, would simplify the tier structure,
facilitate the display of customer limit orders, and expand the scope
of the Rule to apply to additional quoting participants. During the
proposal process, the SEC received a number of comments, including some
expressing concern regarding the potential impact of the proposed rule
change, and, in response, FINRA submitted an amendment to revise the
tiers and to implement the proposed revised tier sizes as a one-year
pilot to allow FINRA and the SEC to better analyze the impact of the
new tiers during the pilot period.\7\ FINRA also committed to
collecting and providing to the Commission certain pre- and post-pilot
data to assist in analyzing the impact of the Pilot.\8\ The data
provision includes the collection and submission to the SEC of monthly
information regarding:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65568 (October 14,
2011), 76 FR 65307 (October 20, 2011) (Notice of Filing of File No.
SR-FINRA-2011-058).
    \6\ ``OTC Equity Security'' means any equity security that is
not an ``NMS stock'' as that term is defined in Rule 600(b)(47) of
SEC Regulation NMS; provided, however, that the term OTC Equity
Security shall not include any Restricted Equity Security. See FINRA
Rule 6420.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66819 (April 17,
2012); 77 FR 23770 (April 20, 2012) (Notice of Filing of Amendment
No. 1 to File No. SR-FINRA-2011-058).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67208 (June 15,
2012), 77 FR 37458 (June 21, 2012) (Order Approving File No. SR-
FINRA-2011-058, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The price of the first trade of each trading day executed
at or after 9:30:00 a.m., based on execution time.
     The price of the last trade of each trading day executed
at or before 4:00:00 p.m., based on execution time.
     Daily share volume.
     Daily dollar volume.
     Number of limit orders from customers and in total.
     Percentage of the day that the size of the BBO equals the
minimum quote size.
     Number of market makers actively quoting.
     Number of executions from a limit order and number of
limit orders at the BBO or better by tier size from a customer and in
total.
     Liquidity/BBO metrics
     Time-weighted quoted spread.
     Effective spread.
     Time-weighted quoted depth (number of shares) at the
inside.
     Time-weighted quoted depth (dollar value of shares) at the
inside.
    In addition to submitting the above data to the Commission, which
FINRA has provided on a monthly basis for the duration of the Pilot,\9\
FINRA also committed to providing to the Commission an assessment on
the operation of the Tier Size Pilot that, among other things, would
address the impact of the Pilot, the concerns raised by commenters
during the rule filing process, and whether the Pilot has resulted in
the desired effects. FINRA submitted this assessment on September 13,
2013. The assessment utilized Pilot data covering the period from
November 12, 2012 through June 30, 2013.\10\ As noted in the
assessment, FINRA believes that the analysis of the data generally
showed that the Tier Size Pilot had a neutral to positive impact on OTC
market quality for the majority of OTC Equity Securities and tiers.
FINRA also found that there was an increase of 13% in the number of
customer limit orders that met the minimum quotation sizes to be
eligible for display under the Pilot tiers (for all tiers combined).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ FINRA will continue to submit monthly data until the new
Tier Size Pilot period expiration date of February 13, 2015.
    \10\ The assessment is part of the SEC's comment file for SR-
FINRA-2011-058 and also is available on FINRA's Web site at: http://www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/RuleFilings/2011/P124615 (``Pilot
Assessment'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA also observed certain impacts that appeared to be temporary.
Specifically, FINRA noted that, while some large market makers
initially reduced the number of securities actively quoted on a priced
basis, the

number of market makers providing quotes gradually reversed over time
as the Pilot progressed. Thus, to allow additional time to observe the
operation of the Pilot and to provide the SEC with data over a longer
time period so that the effects of the Pilot could be more thoroughly
reviewed, FINRA filed an extension for another year, extending the
period from November 12, 2013 until November 14, 2014.
    The purpose of this filing is to extend the operation of the Tier
Size Pilot for an additional three month period, until February 13,
2015, to provide FINRA with additional time to consider the
implications of the data collected since June 30, 2013 and to determine
whether FINRA will propose that the Pilot tiers be adopted as
permanent.
    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness. The effective date of the proposed rule change will be
the date of filing.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\11\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA also believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(11) of the Act.\12\
Section 15A(b)(11) requires that FINRA rules include provisions
governing the form and content of quotations relating to securities
sold otherwise than on a national securities exchange which may be
distributed or published by any member or person associated with a
member, and the persons to whom such quotations may be supplied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that the extension of the Tier Size Pilot for an
additional three months is consistent with the Act in that it would
provide the Commission and FINRA with additional data and more time to
undertake a thorough review of the submitted data. FINRA believes this
additional time will facilitate FINRA's consideration of the impact of
the Pilot using data after June 30, 2013, and determination of the
appropriateness of making the Pilot tiers permanent.

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2014-041 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2014-041. 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 St. NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2014-041, and should
be submitted on or before October 30, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-24102 Filed 10-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30949-30950]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12171]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2020-E-2039 and FDA-2020-E-2034]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; MAYZENT

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has
determined the regulatory review period for MAYZENT and is publishing
this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the
determination because of the submission of applications to the Director
of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of
Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human drug
product.

DATES: Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) are incorrect may submit either electronic
or written comments and ask for a redetermination by August 9, 2021.
Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination
regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence
during the regulatory review period by December 7, 2021. See
``Petitions'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more
information.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before August 9, 2021. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of August 9, 2021. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket Nos.
FDA-2020-E-2039 and FDA-2020-E-2034 for ``Determination of Regulatory
Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; MAYZENT.'' Received
comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be
placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with Sec.  10.20 (21 CFR 10.20) and
other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's
posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18,
2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984

(Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term
Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may
be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item
(human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food
additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA
before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory
review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension
an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the
testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical
investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the
approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the human drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award
(for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any
time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's
determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human
drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase
as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product, MAYZENT
(siponimod). MAYZENT is indicated for the treatment of relapsing forms
of multiple sclerosis, to include clinically isolated syndrome,
relapsing-remitting disease, and active secondary progressive disease,
in adults. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received patent term
restoration applications for MAYZENT (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,939,519 and
8,492,441) from Novartis AG, and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance
in determining the patents' eligibility for patent term restoration. In
a letter dated December 14, 2020, FDA advised the USPTO that this human
drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the
approval of MAYZENT represented the first permitted commercial
marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that
FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
MAYZENT is 4,544 days. Of this time, 4,299 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 245 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective:
October 19, 2006. The applicant claims October 18, 2006, as the date
the investigational new drug application (IND) became effective.
However, FDA records indicate that the IND effective date was October
19, 2006, which was the first date after receipt of the IND that the
investigational studies were allowed to proceed.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the human drug product under section 505 of the FD&C Act: July 26,
2018. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the new drug
application (NDA) for MAYZENT (NDA 209884) was initially submitted on
July 26, 2018.
    3. The date the application was approved: March 26, 2019. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that NDA 209884 was approved on March
26, 2019.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 1,561 days or 848 days of patent term extension.

III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under
21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, as
specified in Sec.  60.30 (21 CFR 60.30), any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period.
To meet its burden, the petition must comply with all the requirements
of Sec.  60.30, including but not limited to: Must be timely (see
DATES), must be filed in accordance with Sec.  10.20, must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation, and must certify that a
true and complete copy of the petition has been served upon the patent
applicant. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42,
1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Submit petitions electronically to https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are
required) to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: June 3, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-12171 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


Non-Road.....................................................           23           26           29           -3        -13.0           -6        -26.1

PHL-CEP......................................................  ...........            0            0            0  ...........            0  ...........
ERC..........................................................  ...........            0            0            0  ...........            0  ...........
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................................................        5,329        5,117        5,162          212          4.0          167          3.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 7a provides a summary of PM2.5, NOX,
and SO2 emissions for the entire Philadelphia Area for the
2007 attainment year, the 2017 interim year, and the 2025 maintenance
plan end year for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. The inventories show that, between 2007 and 2025, the Area is
projected to reduce PM2.5 emissions by 16.2 percent,
NOX emissions by 41.2 percent, and SO2 emissions
by 46.8 percent.

                       Table 7a--Comparison of 2007, 2017, and 2025 PM2.5, NOX, and SO2 Emissions for the Entire Philadelphia Area
                                                                          [tpy]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    PM2.5                             NOX                              SO2
                                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2007       2017       2025       2007       2017       2025       2007       2017       2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania portion.................................     14,114     12,678     11,837     38,520     29,460     25,701    123,390     82,567     68,402
Delaware portion.....................................      3,193      2,844      2,893     15,228      6,995      6,958     23,084     14,475     13,797
New Jersey portion...................................      5,159      4,549      4,102      4,965      1,579      1,880     41,718     26,057     17,780
                                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total............................................     22,466     20,071     18,832     58,713     38,034     34,539    188,192    123,099    100,069
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The redesignation requests for Delaware and New Jersey did not
include VOC and NH3 emission inventories. Therefore, in
order to take VOC and NH3 emissions for the Delaware and New
Jersey portions of the Area into consideration, Pennsylvania used
information from EPA's Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. Table 7b provides a comparison of the 2007 and
2020 VOC and NH3 emissions for the entire Philadelphia Area.
The RIA only projected to 2020; however, Pennsylvania believes, and EPA
agrees, that the downward trend for these precursors and attainment
would continue into 2025, given that the area is attaining both the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with the current
level of emissions in the Area, and that additional reductions will be
achieved from the Federal and State measures that will be implemented
during the maintenance period. The projected emissions inventories show
that the Philadelphia Area will continue to maintain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standards during the maintenance period.

          Table 7b--Comparison of 2007 and 2020 VOC and NH3 Emissions for the Entire Philadelphia Area
                                                      [tpy]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                VOC                             NH3
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2007            2020            2007            2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania portion............................          95,255          75,861           5,229           4,903
Delaware portion................................          14,326           9,242             984             850
New Jersey portion..............................          36,108          27,510           1,677           1,526
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................         145,689         112,613           7,890           7,279
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Monitoring Network
    Pennsylvania currently operates PM2.5 monitors in each
of the five counties that comprise the Pennsylvania portion of the
Philadelphia Area. Pennsylvania's maintenance plan includes a
commitment by PADEP and the Philadelphia County Health Department to
continue to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary
to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. In its September 5,
2014 submittal, Pennsylvania stated that it will consult with EPA prior
to making any necessary changes to the network and will continue to
operate the monitoring network in accordance with the requirements of
40 CFR part 58.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    To provide for tracking of the emission levels in the Area, PADEP
will: (a) Evaluate annually the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) data and
the annual emissions reported from

stationary sources to compare them with the assumptions used in the
maintenance plan; and (b) evaluate the periodic emissions inventory for
all PM2.5 precursors prepared every three years in
accordance with EPA's Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) to
determine whether there is an exceedance of more than ten percent over
the 2007 inventories. Also, as noted in the previous subsection, PADEP
has stated that it will continue to operate its monitoring system in
accordance with 40 CFR 58 and remains obligated to quality-assure
monitoring data and enter all data into the AQS in accordance with
federal requirements. PADEP has stated that it will use this data in
considering whether additional control measures are needed to assure
continuing attainment in the Area.
5. Contingency Measures
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a
violation of the 1997 annual and/or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS that occurs in the Pennsylvania portion of the Area after
redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to ensure that
a state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs
after redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the events
that would ``trigger'' the adoption and implementation of a contingency
measure(s), the contingency measure(s) that would be adopted and
implemented, and the schedule indicating the time frame by which the
state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
    Pennsylvania's maintenance plan describes the procedures for the
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to reduce emissions
should a violation occur. Pennsylvania's contingency measures include a
first level response and a second level response. A first level
response is triggered if the annual mean PM2.5 concentration
exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/m\3\ in a single calendar year within the Area, if
the 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5 concentration exceeds 35.0
[mu]g/m\3\ in a single calendar year within the Area, or if the
periodic emissions inventory for the Area exceed the attainment year
inventory (2007) by more than ten percent. The first level response
will consist of a study to determine if the emissions trends show
increasing concentrations of PM2.5, and whether this trend
is likely to continue. If it is determined through the study that
action is necessary to reverse a trend of emissions increases,
Pennsylvania will, as expeditiously as possible, implement necessary
and appropriate control measures to reverse the trend.
    A second level response will be prompted if the two-year average of
the annual mean concentration exceeds 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ or if the two-
year average of 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5 concentration
exceeds 35.0 [mu]g/m\3\ within the Area. This would trigger an
evaluation of the conditions causing the exceedance, whether additional
emission control measures should be implemented to prevent a violation
of the standard, and analysis of potential measures that could be
implemented to prevent a violation. Pennsylvania would then begin its
adoption process to implement the measures as expeditiously as
practicable. If a violation of the PM2.5 NAAQS occurs, PADEP
will propose and adopt necessary additional control measures in
accordance with the implementation schedule in the maintenance plan.
    Pennsylvania's candidate contingency measures include the
following: (1) A regulation based on the Ozone Transport Commission
(OTC) Model Rule to update requirements for consumer products; (2) a
regulation based on the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for
industrial cleaning solvents; (3) voluntary diesel projects such as
diesel retrofit for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets,
idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives, and idling
reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses, and
other freight-handling facilities; (4) promotion of accelerated
turnover of lawn and garden equipment, focusing on commercial
equipment; and (5) promotion of alternative fuels for fleets, home
heating and agricultural use. Pennsylvania's rulemaking process and
schedule for adoption and implementation of any necessary contingency
measure is shown in the SIP submittals as being 18 months from PADEP's
approval to initiate rulemaking. For all of the reasons discussed in
this section, EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania
portion of the Philadelphia Area as meeting the requirements of section
175A of the CAA.

C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires Federal actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas to ``conform to'' the goals of SIPs. This means
that such actions will not cause or contribute to violations of a
NAAQS, worsen the severity of an existing violation, or delay timely
attainment of any NAAQS or any interim milestone. Actions involving
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) funding or approval are subject to the transportation conformity
rule (40 CFR part 93, subpart A). Under this rule, metropolitan
planning organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment and maintenance areas
coordinate with state air quality and transportation agencies, EPA, and
the FHWA and FTA to demonstrate that their long range transportation
plans and transportation improvement programs (TIP) conform to
applicable SIPs. This is typically determined by showing that estimated
emissions from existing and planned highway and transit systems are
less than or equal to the MVEBs contained in the SIP. On September 5,
2014, Pennsylvania submitted SIP revisions that contain the 2017 and
2025 PM2.5 and NOX onroad mobile source budgets
for Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia Counties.
Pennsylvania did not provide emission budgets for SO2, VOC,
and NH3 because it concluded, consistent with the
presumptions regarding these precursors in the Transportation
Conformity Rule at 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(v), which predated and were not
disturbed by the litigation on the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation
Rule, that emissions of these precursors from motor vehicles are not
significant contributors to the Area's PM2.5 air quality
problem. EPA issued conformity regulations to implement the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in July 2004 and May 2005 (69 FR 40004, July 1,
2004 and 70 FR 24280, May 6, 2005). That decision does not affect EPA's
proposed approval of the MVEBs for the Area. The MVEBs are presented in
Table 8.

Table 8--MVEBs for the Pennsylvania Portion of the Philadelphia Area for
              the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 24-Hour NAAQS, in tpy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Year                           PM2.5       NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017..............................................      1,679     37,922
2025..............................................      1,316     25,361
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of MVEBs are
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Additionally, to approve the MVEBs, EPA
must complete a thorough review of the SIP, in this case the
PM2.5 maintenance plan, and conclude that with the projected
level of motor vehicle and all other emissions, the SIPs will achieve
its overall purpose, in this case providing for maintenance of the 1997

annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA's process for
determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of three basic steps: (1)
Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2) providing the
public the opportunity to comment on the MVEB during a public comment
period; and (3) EPA taking action on the MVEB.
    In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA is initiating the process
for determining whether or not the MVEBs are adequate for
transportation conformity purposes. The publication of this rulemaking
starts a 30-day public comment period on the adequacy of the submitted
MVEBs. This comment period is concurrent with the comment period on
this proposed action and comments should be submitted to the docket for
this rulemaking. EPA may choose to make its determination on the
adequacy of the budgets either in the final rulemaking on this
maintenance plan and redesignation request or by informing Pennsylvania
of the determination in writing, publishing a notice in the Federal
Register and posting a notice on EPA's adequacy Web page (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For additional information on the adequacy process, please
refer to 40 CFR 93.118(f) and the discussion of the adequacy process
in the preamble to the 2004 final transportation conformity rule.
See 69 FR 40039-40043.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has reviewed the MVEBs and found that the submitted MVEBs are
consistent with the maintenance plan and meet the criteria for adequacy
and approval. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for Bucks, Chester, Delaware,
Montgomery, and Philadelphia Counties for transportation conformity
purposes. Additional information pertaining to the review of the MVEBs
can be found in the TSD dated December 17, 2014, available on line at
www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0868.

VI. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's request to redesignate
the Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. EPA has evaluated Pennsylvania's redesignation request and
determined that upon approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions
inventory for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS proposed as part
of this rulemaking action, it would meet the redesignation criteria set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for both standards. EPA
believes that the monitoring data demonstrate that the Philadelphia
Area is attaining and will continue to attain the 1997 annual and 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the
associated maintenance plan for the Pennsylvania portion of the Area as
a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS because it meets the requirements of CAA section
175A for both standards. For transportation conformity purposes, EPA is
also proposing to approve MVEBs for both the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Final approval of the redesignation
requests would change the official designations of the Pennsylvania
portion of the Philadelphia Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively, found at 40 CFR part 81,
from nonattainment to attainment, and would incorporate into the
Pennsylvania SIP the associated maintenance plan ensuring continued
attainment of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
in the Pennsylvania portion of the Area for the next 10 years, until
2025. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule proposing to approve Pennsylvania's
redesignation request, maintenance plan, 2007 comprehensive emissions
inventory for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and MVEBs for
transportation conformity purposes for the Pennsylvania portion of the
Philadelphia Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: February 2, 2015.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2015-03169 Filed 2-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 186)]
[Notices]
[Page 59260]
[DOCID:fr27se10-89]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-2658-000]

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

September 16, 2010.

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
HOP Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 6, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-24082 Filed 9-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P