[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 148 (Wednesday, August 1, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45492-45495]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18519]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0402; FRL9705-8

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; South Carolina
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 and 2006
Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submissions, submitted by the State of South Carolina,
through the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
Control (SC DHEC), as demonstrating that the State meets the SIP
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
the Act) for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a
SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by the EPA, which is commonly referred to as an
``infrastructure'' SIP. South Carolina certified that the South
Carolina SIP contains provisions that ensure the 1997 annual and 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and
maintained in South Carolina (hereafter referred to as ``infrastructure
submission''). South Carolina's infrastructure submissions, provided to
EPA on March 14, 2008, and September 18, 2009, certification
submissions (as clarified in a letter on November 9, 2009), and the
State's April 3, 2012, SIP revision address all the required
infrastructure elements for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be effective August 31, 2012.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0238. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 a.m. excluding
federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. This Action
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the CAA require states to address basic SIP requirements,
including emissions inventories, monitoring, and modeling to assure
attainment and maintenance for that new NAAQS. On July 18, 1997 (62 FR
36852), EPA promulgated a new annual PM2.5 NAAQS and on
October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA promulgated a new 24-hour NAAQS. On
June 6, 2012, EPA proposed in two separate actions to approve South
Carolina's March 14, 2008, September 18, 2009, and April 3, 2012,
infrastructure submissions for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. See 77 FR 33372 and 77 FR 33380. The March 14,
2008 and September 18, 2009, infrastructure submission for the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS addressed elements
110(a)(2)(A)-(H), (J)-(M), except for sections 110(a)(2)(C)--the
nonattainment area requirements; 110(a)(2)(D)(i)--the interstate
transport requirements; 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)--board requirements; \1\ and
110(a)(2)(G)--

emergency powers. See EPA's June 6, 2012, proposed rulemakings at 77 FR
33372 for more detail. The April 3, 2012, SIP revision addressed
elements 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and 110(a)(2)(G). See EPA's June 6, 2012,
proposed rulemakings at 77 FR 33380 for more detail. A summary of the
background for today's final action is provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA is clarifying through today's final rulemaking that
South Carolina's April 13, 2012, SIP revision proposed that existing
State statute meet the requirements of 128.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or
revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section
110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to
EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may
vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. The data and
analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits
the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains. In the case of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, states typically have met the basic program
elements required in section 110(a)(2) through earlier SIP submissions
in connection with previous PM NAAQS.
    More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and
timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related
to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As already mentioned, these
requirements include SIP infrastructure elements such as modeling,
monitoring, and emissions inventories that are designed to assure
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements that are the
subject of this final rulemaking are listed below \2\ and in EPA's
October 2, 2007, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements
Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not
governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1)
because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS, but rather are due at the time the nonattainment
area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These
requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C)
to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required
in part D Title I of the CAA, and (2) submissions required by
section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today's final rulemaking
does not address infrastructure elements related to section
110(a)(2)(I) but does provide detail on how South Carolina's SIP
addresses 110(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
     110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
     110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control
measures.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element
as they relate to attainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Today's final rule does not address element 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
(Interstate Transport) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Interstate transport requirements were formerly addressed by South
Carolina consistent with the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). On
December 23, 2008, CAIR was remanded by the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals, without vacatur, back to EPA. See North Carolina v. EPA,
531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008). Prior to this remand, EPA took final
action to approve South Carolina's SIP revision, which was submitted
to comply with CAIR. See 72 FR 57209 (October 9, 2007). In so doing,
South Carolina's CAIR SIP revision addressed the interstate
transport provisions in Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. Concerning the 2006 p.m.2.5
NAAQS, EPA has finalized a new rule to address the interstate
transport of NOX and SOX in the eastern United
States. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011) (``the Transport Rule'').
EPA's action on element 110(a)(2)(D)(i) will be addressed in a
separate action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources.
     110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring system.
     110(a)(2)(G): Emergency power.
     110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
     110(a)(2)(I): Areas designated nonattainment and meet the
applicable requirements of part D.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ This requirement was inadvertently omitted from EPA's
October 2, 2007, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements
Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' but
as mentioned above is not relevant to today's final rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials;
public notification; and PSD and visibility protection.
     110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data.
     110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.

II. This Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve South Carolina's
infrastructure submissions as demonstrating that the State meets the
applicable requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA for
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 110(a)
of the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated
by the EPA, which is commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure'' SIP.
South Carolina certified that the South Carolina SIP contains
provisions that ensure the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and maintained in
South Carolina.
    EPA received no adverse comments on its June 6, 2012, proposed
approval of South Carolina's March 14, 2008, September 18, 2009, and
April 3, 2012, infrastructure submissions. Additionally, on June 23,
2012, EPA published a final rulemaking action approving revisions to
South Carolina's New Source Review (NSR) requirements relating to the
PM2.5 standard. See 76 FR 36875. EPA is not taking action
today on South Carolina's NSR program, as these requirements are
already approved in South Carolina's SIP.
    South Carolina's infrastructure submissions, provided to EPA on
March 14, 2008, and September 18, 2009, as certification submissions
(as clarified in a letter on November 9, 2009), and the State's April
3, 2012, SIP revision addressed all the required infrastructure
elements for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA has determined that South Carolina's March 14, 2008, September 18,
2009, and April 3, 2012, submissions are consistent with section 110 of
the CAA.

III. Final Action

    As already described, SC DHEC has addressed the elements of the CAA
110(a)(1) and (2) SIP requirements pursuant to EPA's October 2, 2007,
guidance to ensure that 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and maintained in the State. EPA is
taking final action to approve South Carolina's March 14, 2008,
September 18, 2009, and April 3, 2012, submissions for 1997 annual and
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS because these submissions are
consistent with section 110 of the CAA. Today's action is not approving
any specific rule, but rather making a determination that South
Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this 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).
    EPA has determined that this final rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because there are no ``substantial direct effects''
on an Indian Tribe as a result of this action. The Catawba Indian
Nation Reservation is located within the South Carolina portion of the
bi-state Charlotte nonattainment area. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian
Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all state and local
environmental laws and regulations apply to the Catawba Indian Nation
and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state and
local agencies and authorities.'' Thus, the South Carolina SIP applies
to the Catawba Reservation. EPA has also preliminarily determined that
these revisions will not impose any substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by October 1, 2012. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 16, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart PP--South Carolina

0
2. Amend Sec.  52.2120 in paragraph (e) by adding three new entries for
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 Fine
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards,''
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2006 Fine
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' and
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 1997 and 2006 Fine
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards Elements
110(a)(1) and (2) (E)(ii) and (G)'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                              EPA-Approved South Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     State
                   Provision                    effective date          EPA approval date           Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements        4/14/2008  8/1/2012 [Insert citation of
 for 1997 Fine Particulate Matter National                       publication].
 Ambient Air Quality Standards.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements        9/18/2009  8/1/2012 [Insert citation of
 for 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National                       publication].
 Ambient Air Quality Standards.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements         4/3/2012  8/1/2012 [Insert citation of
 for 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter                       publication].
 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
 Elements 110(a)(1) and (2) (E)(ii) and (G).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2012-18519 Filed 7-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 164)]
[Notices]
[Page 48708]
[DOCID:fr24au07-128]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56227A; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-83]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend CBOE Rules relating to
the Appointment Cost for Options on the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking Stock

 August 20, 2007.

Correction

    FR Document No. E7-15901, beginning on page 45846 for Wednesday,
August 15, 2007,\1\ incorrectly stated the date of the release as
August 8, 2008. The date should be revised to read ``August 8, 2007.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56227 (August 8,
2007), 72 FR 45846.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-16753 Filed 8-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 81009]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33043]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: General
Aviation and Air Taxi Activity and Avionics Survey

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on October 26, 2011, vol. 76, no. 207, page 66346-66347.
Respondents to this survey are owners of general aviation aircraft.
This information is used by FAA, NTSB, and other government agencies,
the aviation industry, and others for safety assessment, planning,
forecasting, cost/benefit analysis, and to target areas for research.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by January 26, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy DePaepe at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at: Kathy A<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 2120-0060.
    Title: General Aviation and Air Taxi Activity and Avionics Survey.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: Title 49, United States Code, empowers the Secretary of
Transportation to collect and disseminate information relative to civil
aeronautics, to study the possibilities for development of air commerce
and the aeronautical industries, and to make long-range plans for, and
formulate policy with respect to, the orderly development and use of
the navigable airspace, radar installations and all other aids for air
navigation. Respondents to this survey are owners of general aviation
aircraft. This information is used by FAA, NTSB, and other government
agencies, the aviation industry, and others for safety assessment,
planning, forecasting, cost/benefit analysis, and to target areas for
research.
    Respondents: Approximately 83,500 owners of general aviation
aircraft.
    Frequency: Information is collected annually.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 20 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 13,000 hours.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20503.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC on December 19, 2011.
Albert R. Spence,
FAA Assistant Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. 2011-33043 Filed 12-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 5, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26123-26125]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11985]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83349; File No. SR-MIAX-2018-11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rule 307, Position Limits, and
Exchange Rule 309, Exercise Limits

May 30, 2018.
    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 May 24, 2018, Miami International Securities
Exchange, LLC (``MIAX Options'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and III 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 307,
Position Limits, Interpretations and Policies .01, and Exchange Rule
309, Exercise Limits, Interpretations and Policies .01, to amend the
position and exercise limits for options on the SPDR[supreg] S&P
500[supreg] ETF Trust (``SPY'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/ at MIAX Options'
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
    Exchange Rule 307, Position Limits, and Exchange Rule 309, Exercise
Limits, establish position and exercise limits, respectively, for
aggregate positions in option contracts traded on the Exchange.
Interpretations and Policies .01 to Exchange Rule 307 lists specific
position limits for certain select underlying securities, and
Interpretations and Policies .01 to Exchange Rule 309 lists specific
exercise limits for certain select underlying securities. SPY is among
the certain select underlying securities listed in each such Rule.
Currently, these Rules provide that there are no position limits and
there are no exercise limits on options overlying SPY pursuant to a
pilot program, which is

scheduled to expire on July 12, 2018 (``SPY Pilot Program'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81020 (June 26,
2017), 82 FR 29951 (June 30, 2017)(SR-MIAX-2017-30)(extending the
SPY Pilot Program to July 12, 2018); see also Securities Exchange
Act Release Nos. 67672 (August 15, 2012), 77 FR 50750 (August 22,
2012)(SR-NYSEAmex-2012-29); 67937 (September 27, 2012), 77 FR 60489
(October 3, 2012)(SR-CBOE-2012-091).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 307, Interpretations
and Policies .01, and Exchange Rule 309, Interpretations and Policies
.01, to allow the SPY Pilot Program to terminate on July 12, 2018, the
current expiration date of the SPY Pilot Program. In lieu of extending
the SPY Pilot Program for another year, the Exchange proposes to allow
the SPY Pilot Program to terminate and to establish position and
exercise limits of 1,800,000 contracts, for options on SPY, with such
change becoming operative on July 12, 2018, so that there is no lapse
in time between termination of the SPY Pilot Program and the
establishment of the new limits. Furthermore, as a result of the
termination of the SPY Pilot Program, the Exchange does not believe it
is necessary to submit a SPY Pilot Program Report at the end of the SPY
Pilot Program. Based on the prior SPY Pilot Program Reports provided to
the Commission,\4\ the Exchange believes it is appropriate to terminate
the SPY Pilot Program and that permanent position and exercise limits
should be established for SPY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Position limits are designed to address potential manipulative
schemes and adverse market impact surrounding the use of options, such
as disrupting the market in the security underlying the options. The
potential manipulative schemes and adverse market impact are balanced
against the potential of setting the limits so low as to discourage
participation in the options market. The level of those position limits
must be balanced between curtailing potential manipulation and the cost
of preventing potential hedging activity that could be used for
legitimate economic purposes.
    The SPY Pilot Program was established in 2012 in order to eliminate
position and exercise limits for physically-settled SPY options. \5\ In
2005, the position limits for SPY options were increased from 75,000
contracts to 300,000 contracts on the same side of the market.\6\ In
July 2011, the position limit for these options was again increased
from 300,000 contracts to 900,000 contracts on the same side of the
market.\7\ Then, in 2012, the position limits for SPY options were
eliminated as part of the SPY Pilot Program.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67672 (August 15,
2012), 77 FR 50750 (August 22, 2012)(SR-NYSEAmex-2012-29); 67937
(September 27, 2012), 77 FR 60489 (October 3, 2012)(SR-CBOE-2012-
091).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51041 (January 14,
2005), 70 FR 3408 (January 24, 2005)(SR-CBOE-2005-06).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64928 (July 20,
2011), 76 FR 44633 (July 26, 2011)(SR-CBOE-2011-065).
    \8\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The underlying SPY tracks the performance of the S&P 500 Index and
the Exchange notes that the SPY and SPY options have deep, liquid
markets that reduce concerns regarding manipulation and disruption in
the underlying markets. In support of this proposed rule change, the
Exchange has collected the following trading statistics for SPY and SPY
Options: (1) The average daily volume (``ADV'') to date (as of May 15,
2018) for SPY is 108.32 million shares; (2) the ADV to date in 2018 for
SPY options is 3.9 million contracts per day; (3) the total shares
outstanding for SPY are 965.43 million; and (4) the fund market cap for
SPY is 261.65 billion. The Exchange represents further that there is
tremendous liquidity in the securities that make up the S&P 500 Index.
    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend Interpretations and
Policies .01 to Exchange Rule 307 and Interpretations and Policies .01
to Exchange Rule 309 to set forth that the position and exercise limits
for options on SPY would be 1,800,000 contracts on the same side of the
market. These position and exercise limits equal the current position
and exercise limits for options on QQQ, which the Commission previously
approved to be increased from 900,000 contracts on the same side of the
market, to 1,800,000 contracts on the same side of the market. \9\ The
Exchange also notes that SPY is more liquid than QQQ.\10\ The Exchange
believes that establishing position and exercise limits for the SPY
options in the amount of 1,800,000 contracts on the same side of the
market subject to this proposal would allow for the maintenance of the
liquid and competitive market environment for these options, which will
benefit customers interested in these products. Under the proposal, the
reporting requirement for the options would be unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82931 (March 22,
2018), 83 FR 13323 (March 28, 2018)(SR-MIAX-2018-10); see also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82770 (February 23, 2018), 83 FR
8907 (March 1, 2018)(SR-CBOE-2017-057).
    \10\ From the beginning of the year, through May 15, 2018, the
ADV for SPY was 108.32 million shares while the ADV for QQQ was
46.64 million shares (calculated using data from Yahoo Finance as of
May 15, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\11\ Specifically, the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \12\ because 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
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange
believes that establishing permanent position and exercise limits for
SPY options subject to this proposal will encourage Market Makers to
continue to provide sufficient liquidity in SPY options on the
Exchange, which will enhance the process of price discovery conducted
on the Exchange. The proposal will also benefit institutional investors
as well as retail traders, and public customers, by continuing to
provide them with an effective trading and hedging vehicle. In
addition, the Exchange believes that the structure of the SPY options
subject to this proposal and the considerable liquidity of the market
for those options diminishes the opportunity to manipulate this product
and disrupt the underlying market that a lower position limit may
protect against.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increased position limits for select actively traded options, such
as that proposed herein (increased as compared to the 900,000 limit in
place prior to the SPY Pilot Program),\13\ is not novel and has been
previously approved by the Commission. For example, the Commission has
previously approved a rule change permitting the Exchange to double the
position and exercise limits for FXI, EEM, IWM, EFA, EWZ, TLT, QQQ, and
EWJ.\14\ Furthermore, as previously mentioned, the Commission
specifically approved a proposal by the Exchange to increase the
position and exercise limits for options on QQQ from 900,000 contracts
on the same side of the market to 1,800,000 contracts on the same side
of the market; similar to the

current proposal for options on SPY. \15\ The Exchange also notes that
SPY is more liquid than QQQ.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 7.
    \14\ See supra note 9.
    \15\ Id.
    \16\ See supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Commission expressed the belief that implementing
higher position and exercise limits may bring additional depth and
liquidity without increasing concerns regarding intermarket
manipulation or disruption of the options or the underlying
securities.\17\ The Exchange's existing surveillance and reporting
safeguards are designed to deter and detect possible manipulative
behavior which might arise from increasing position and exercise limits
(increased as compared to the 900,000 limit in place prior to the SPY
Pilot Program).\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 9.
    \18\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    MIAX Options does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes the
entire proposal is consistent with Section (6)(b)(8) of the Act \19\ in
that it does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. On the
contrary, the Exchange believes the proposal promotes competition
because it will enable the option exchanges to attract additional order
flow from the over-the-counter market, who in turn compete for those
orders. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will result
in continued opportunities to achieve the investment and trading
objectives of market participants seeking efficient trading and hedging
vehicles, to the benefit of investors, market participants, and the
marketplace in general. MIAX Options believes this proposed rule change
is necessary to permit fair competition among the options exchanges and
to establish uniform position limits for additional multiply listed
option classes. Furthermore, MIAX Options believes that the other
options exchanges will file similar proposals with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \21\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2018-11 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-MIAX-2018-11. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2018-11 and should be submitted on
or before June 26, 2018.

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

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-11985 Filed 6-4-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P