The finding of failure to submit a revision in response to a SIP call, or EPA's disapproval of that corrective SIP revision, can also trigger sanctions under CAA section 179. If a state fails to submit a complete SIP revision that responds to a final SIP call, CAA section 179(a) provides for the EPA to issue a finding of state failure. Such a finding starts mandatory 18-month and 24- month sanctions clocks. The two sanctions that apply under CAA section 179(b) are the 2-to-1 emission offset requirement for all new and modified major sources subject to the nonattainment new source review program and restrictions on highway funding. However, CAA section 179 leaves it to the EPA to decide the order in which these sanctions apply. The EPA issued an order of sanctions rule in 1994 but did not specify the order of sanctions where a state fails to submit or submits a deficient SIP revision in response to a SIP call. In this document, we are now proposing and taking comment on the following timeline: the EPA proposes that the 2-to-1 emission offset requirement will apply for all new sources subject to the nonattainment new source review program 18 months following such finding or disapproval unless the state corrects the deficiency before that date. The EPA proposes that the highway funding restrictions sanction will also apply 24 months following such finding or disapproval unless the state corrects the deficiency before that date. The EPA is proposing that the provisions in 40 CFR 52.31 regarding staying the sanctions clock and deferring the imposition of sanctions would also apply.
	Mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179 generally apply only in nonattainment areas. By its definition, the emission offset sanction applies only in areas required to have a part D NSR program, typically areas designated nonattainment. CAA section 179(b)(1) expressly limits the highway funding restriction to nonattainment areas. Additionally, EPA interprets the section 179 sanctions to apply only in the area or areas of the state that are subject to or required to have in place the deficient SIP and for the pollutant or pollutants the specific SIP element addresses. For example, if the deficient provision applies statewide and applies for all NAAQS pollutants, then the mandatory sanctions would apply in all areas designated nonattainment for all NAAQS within the state. Following through on this interpretation, it is reasonable to expect that any newly designated nonattainment areas subsequent to the EPA taking final action on this proposal would also be subject to sanctions for failure to comply with SIP submittal obligations stemming from this SIP call, if finalized (or failure to comply with similar obligations for previously identified deficient statewide SSM provisions). In such cases, the EPA will evaluate the geographic scope of potential sanctions at the time it makes a final determination whether the state's SIP is substantially inadequate and issues a SIP call, as this may vary depending upon the provisions at issue.
B. SIP Call Timing Under CAA Section 110(k)(5)
	If the EPA finalizes a proposed finding of substantial inadequacy and a proposed SIP call for any state, CAA section 110(k)(5) requires EPA to establish a SIP submission deadline by which the state must make a SIP submission to rectify the identified deficiency. Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5), the EPA has authority to set a SIP submission deadline up to 18 months from the signature date of the final finding of inadequacy. The EPA is proposing here that if it promulgates a final finding of inadequacy and a SIP call for a state, it will establish a date 18 months from the date of promulgation of the final finding for the state to respond to the SIP call. Thereafter, the EPA will review the adequacy of that new SIP submission and take appropriate action on the submission in accordance with the CAA requirements of sections 110(a), 110(k), 110(l), 113(b), 113(e), 193, and 304, including EPA's interpretation of the CAA reflected in the SSM Policy as clarified and updated through this action.
	The EPA is proposing the maximum time permissible under the CAA for a state to respond to a SIP call. The EPA believes that it is appropriate to provide states with the maximum time allowable under CAA section 110(k)(5) in order to allow states sufficient time to make SIP revisions following their own SIP development process. The EPA considers this a reasonable time period for the affected states to revise their state regulations, provide for public input, process the SIP revision through the state's own procedures, and submit the SIP revision to the EPA. Such a schedule will allow for the necessary SIP development process to correct the deficiencies, yet still achieve the necessary SIP improvements as expeditiously as practicable. The EPA acknowledges that the longstanding existence of many of the provisions at issue, such as automatic exemptions for SSM events, may have resulted in undue reliance on them as a compliance mechanism by some sources. As a result, development of appropriate SIP revisions may entail reexamination of the applicable emission limitations themselves, and this process may require the maximum time allowed by the CAA. Nevertheless, the EPA encourages the affected states to make the necessary revisions in as timely a fashion as possible and encourages the states to work with the respective EPA Regional office as they develop the corrective SIP revisions.
	The EPA notes that the SIP calls that it is proposing for affected states in this document would be narrow and apply only to the specific SIP provisions determined to be inconsistent with the requirements of the CAA. To the extent that a state is concerned that elimination of a particular aspect of an existing emission limitation, such as an impermissible exemption, will render that emission limitation more stringent than the state originally intended and more stringent than needed to meet the CAA requirements it was intended to address, EPA anticipates that the state will revise the emission limitation accordingly, but without the impermissible exemption or other feature that necessitated the SIP call. The EPA will evaluate any such SIP revision in accordance with applicable CAA requirements, including CAA section 110(l).
	Finally, the EPA notes that its authority under CAA section 110(k)(5) does not extend to requiring a state to adopt a particular control measure in its SIP in response to the SIP call. Under principles of cooperative federalism, the CAA vests air agencies with substantial discretion to develop SIP provisions, so long as the provisions meet the legal requirements and objectives of the CAA. Thus, the issuance of a SIP call should not be misconstrued as a directive to the state in question to adopt a particular control measure. The EPA is merely proposing to require that affected states make a SIP revision to remove or revise existing SIP provisions that fail to comply with fundamental requirements of the CAA. The states retain discretion to remove or revise those provisions as they determine best, so long as they bring their SIPs into compliance with the requirements of the CAA.

IX. Environmental Justice Considerations
	This proposal applies, but does not change, EPA's interpretation of the statutory requirements of the CAA outlined in its 2015 SSM SIP Action. Through the SIP calls issued to certain states as part of this SIP call action under CAA section 110(k)(5), EPA is requiring each affected state to revise its SIP to comply with existing requirements of the CAA. EPA's action, therefore, leaves to each affected state the flexibility bound by the CAA as to how to revise the SIP provision in question to make it consistent with CAA requirements and to determine, among other things, which of the several lawful approaches to the treatment of excess emissions during SSM events will be applied to particular sources. In the 2015 SSM SIP Action, the EPA did not perform an environmental justice analysis for purposes of this action, because it determined that it cannot geographically identify or quantify the resulting source-specific emission reductions.
	The EPA believes it is not practicable to assess whether the conditions that exist prior to this proposed action result in disproportionate and adverse effects on people of color, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples. While it is difficult to assess the environmental justice implications of this proposed action because the EPA cannot geographically identify or quantify the resulting source-specific emission reductions, the EPA believes that this proposed action is likely to either reduce or have no adverse impact on existing disproportionate and adverse effects on people of color, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples.
	As articulated in the 2021 McCabe memo, SIP provisions that contain exemptions or affirmative defense provisions are not consistent with CAA requirements and, therefore, generally are not approvable if contained in a SIP submission. While there are many different kinds of SSM provisions with varying scope and effect, the EPA notes that the overarching effect of these provisions is to allow or excuse excess emissions that exceed SIP limitations. Eliminating impermissible SSM provisions is intended to ensure that all communities and populations, including overburdened communities, receive the full health and environmental protections provided by the CAA. The correction of SIP deficiencies by the states affected by this notice is, therefore, expected to contribute to reduced excess emissions during SSM periods and improve human and environmental health for U.S. citizens, including people of color, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples.
	If the EPA finalizes this action, as described elsewhere in this document, affected states will be required to revise their SIPs. In complying with minimum public notice and comment requirements associated with SIP development processes, the EPA encourages affected state and local air agencies to provide for meaningful public engagement during that SIP review process and, where appropriate and applicable, evaluate environmental justice considerations.
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
 Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
	The EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket for this action.
 Paperwork Reduction Act
	This action does not impose any new information collection burden. This proposed action is merely reiterates EPA's interpretation of the statutory requirements of the CAA and does not require states to collect any additional information. To the extent that the EPA proposes to issue a SIP call to a state under CAA section 110(k)(5), the EPA is only proposing an action that requires the state to revise its SIP to comply with existing requirements of the CAA.
 Regulatory Flexibility Act
	I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities. Instead, the action merely reiterates EPA's interpretation of the statutory requirements of the CAA. Through the SIP calls issued to certain states as part of this SIP call action under CAA section 110(k)(5), EPA is only requiring each affected state to revise its SIP to comply with existing requirements of the CAA. EPA's action, therefore, leaves to each affected state the choice as to how to revise the SIP provision in question to make it consistent with CAA requirements and to determine, among other things, which of the several lawful approaches to the treatment of excess emissions during SSM events will be applied to particular sources.
 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
	This action does not contain an unfunded of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531 - 1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action may impose a duty on certain state governments to meet their existing obligations to revise their SIPs to comply with CAA requirements. The direct costs of this action on states would be those associated with preparation and submission of a SIP revision by those states for which the EPA issues a SIP call. Examples of such costs could include development of a state rule, conducting notice and public hearing, and other costs incurred in connection with a SIP submission. These aggregate costs would be far less than the $100-million threshold in any 1 year. Thus, this action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
	This proposed action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The regulatory requirements of this action would apply to the states for which the EPA issues a SIP call. To the extent that such states allow local air districts or planning organizations to implement portions of the state's obligation under the CAA, the regulatory requirements of this action would not significantly or uniquely affect small governments because those governments have already undertaken the obligation to comply with the CAA.
 Executive Order 13132 -- Federalism
	This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
 Executive Order 13175 -- Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
	This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). In this document, the EPA is not addressing any tribal implementation plans. This action is limited to states. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. However, the EPA invites comment on this action from tribal officials.

 Executive Order 13045 -- Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
	The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of "covered regulatory action" in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it because it merely prescribes EPA's action for states regarding their obligations for SIPs under the CAA.
 Executive Order 13211 -- Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
	This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
	This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
 Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
	Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations (people of color and/or indigenous peoples) and low-income populations.
   	The EPA believes it is not practicable to assess whether the conditions that exist prior to this proposed action result in disproportionate and adverse effects on people of color, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples. While it is difficult to assess the environmental justice implications of this proposed action because the EPA cannot geographically identify or quantify the resulting source-specific emission reductions, the EPA believes that this proposed action is likely to either reduce or have no adverse impact on existing disproportionate and adverse effects on people of color, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples. The basis for this decision is contained in Section IX of this preamble.
 Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA governs judicial review of final actions by the EPA. This section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: (i) When the agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations promulgated, or final actions taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii) when such action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.'' For locally or regionally applicable final actions, the CAA reserves to the EPA complete discretion whether to invoke the exception in (ii).
 	The EPA is proposing to issue SIP calls to eight states (applicable in 10 statewide and local jurisdictions) located in four of the ten EPA regions pursuant to a uniform process and analytical approach. The EPA is proposing to apply a nationally consistent policy regarding SSM provisions in SIPs in each of these eight states as a follow-up to EPA's larger 2015 SSM SIP Action, in which the Agency issued SIP calls pursuant to the same nationally consistent policy to 36 states (applicable in 45 statewide and local jurisdictions), for which petitions for review were all filed in the D.C. Circuit in 2015. The jurisdictions that would be affected by this action, if finalized, represent a wide geographic area and fall within six different judicial circuits.
If the Administrator takes final action on this proposal, then, in consideration of the effects of the action across the country, the EPA views this action to be ``nationally applicable'' within the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). In the alternative, to the extent a court finds this proposal, if finalized, to be locally or regionally applicable, the Administrator intends to exercise the complete discretion afforded to him under the CAA to make and publish a finding that this action is based on a determination of ``nationwide scope or effect'' within the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1).
XI. Statutory of Authority
	The statutory authority for this proposed action is provided in CAA section 101 et seq. (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR 52
	Environmental protection, Affirmative defense, Air pollution control, Carbon dioxide, Carbon dioxide equivalents, Carbon monoxide, Excess emissions, Greenhouse gases, Hydrofluorocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Methane, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrous oxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Perfluorocarbons, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Startup, shutdown and malfunction, State implementation plan, Sulfur hexafluoride, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

______________________
Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 162 (Monday, August 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56743-56744]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20006]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Application
for Employment With the Federal Aviation Administration

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 information collected is used to evaluate the
qualifications of applicants for a variety of positions within the FAA.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by September 21, 2016.

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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronda Thompson at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0597.
    Title: Application for Employment with the Federal Government.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on May 3, 2016 (81 FR 26615). There were no comments.
Under the provisions of Public Law 104-50, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) was given the authority and the responsibility for
developing and implementing its own personnel system. The agency
requests certain information needed to determine basic eligibility for
employment and potential eligibility for veteran's preference and
Veteran's Readjustment Act appointments. In addition, occupation
specific questions assist the FAA in determining candidates'
qualifications so that only the best-qualified candidates may be hired
for the many aviation safety-related occupations.
    Respondents: Approximately 118,000 annually.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 1.5 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 177,000 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 17, 2016.
Ronda Thompson,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy &
Records Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2016-20006 Filed 8-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 61346]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22020]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2007-0008]

National Advisory Council; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Committee Management; Notice of open Federal Advisory Committee
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency's National Advisory
Council (NAC) will meet on October 25-27, 2022. The meeting will be
open to the public through virtual means.

DATES: The NAC will meet from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Central Time (CT)
on Tuesday, October 25, 2022; from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. CT on
Wednesday, October 26, 2022; and from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. CT on
Thursday, October 27, 2022. Please note that the meeting will pause for
breaks and may end early any day on which the NAC has completed its
business.

ADDRESSES: Anyone who wishes to participate in the NAC meeting must
register with FEMA in advance by providing their name, official title,
organization, telephone number, and email address to the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below by 5:00 p.m. CT on
Friday, October 21, 2022. Members of the public are urged to provide
written comments on the issues to be considered by the NAC. The topic
areas are indicated in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Any
written comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. CT on Friday, October
21, 2022, identified by Docket ID FEMA-2007-0008, and submitted via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, following the
instructions for submitting comments below.
    Instructions for Submitting Comments: All submissions must include
the words ``Federal Emergency Management Agency'' and the docket number
(Docket ID FEMA-2007-0008) for this action. Comments received,
including any personal information provided, will be posted without
alteration at http://www.regulations.gov. For access to the docket or
to read comments received by the NAC, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
and search for Docket ID FEMA-2007-0008.
    Opportunities for public comments, limited to one minute and
directed to the current topic, will be offered by the Designated
Federal Officer during meeting discussions on Tuesday, October 25,
2022, from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. CT, and Thursday, October 27, 2022,
from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. CT. An open public comment period is
available on Wednesday, October 26, 2022, from 5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m.
CT. All speakers must register in advance of the meeting to make
remarks during the public comment period and must limit their comments
to three minutes. Comments should be addressed to the NAC. Any comments
unrelated to the agenda topics will not be considered. To register to
make remarks during the public comment period, contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below by 5:00
p.m. CT on Friday, October 21, 2022. Please note that the public
comment period may end before the time indicated, following the last
call for comments.
    The NAC is committed to ensuring all participants have equal access
regardless of disability status. If you require a reasonable
accommodation due to a disability to fully participate, please contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
below as soon as possible and no later than October 18, 2022. Last-
minute requests will be considered but may not be possible to fulfill.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob Long, Designated Federal Officer,
Office of the National Advisory Council, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472-3184,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. The NAC website is https://www.fema.gov/about/offices/national-advisory-council.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix.
    The NAC advises the FEMA Administrator on all aspects of emergency
management. The NAC incorporates input from state, local, tribal, and
territorial (SLTT) governments, and the private sector in the
development and revision of FEMA plans and strategies. The NAC includes
a cross-section of officials, emergency managers, and emergency
response officials from SLTT governments, the private sector, and
nongovernmental organizations.
    Agenda: On Tuesday, October 25, 2022, NAC subcommittees will
present to the full NAC their draft annual recommendations regarding
the 2022-2026 FEMA Strategic Plan goals and objectives. The NAC 2022
Draft Recommendations will be available one week prior to this meeting
for public review at https://www.fema.gov/about/offices/national-advisory-council. On Wednesday, October 26, 2022, the NAC will meet
with FEMA leadership in the morning and, in the afternoon, host panel
discussions on inter-governmental relationships and challenges with
emergency management from the perspectives of Tribal Nations in FEMA
Region 6. On Thursday, October 27, 2022, the NAC will vote on the
adoption of the NAC 2022 Draft Recommendations.
    The full agenda and any related documents for this meeting will be
available at https://www.fema.gov/about/offices/national-advisory-council on Tuesday, October 18, 2022, or by contacting the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-22020 Filed 10-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-48-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 122 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30658-30660]
[FR Doc No: E9-15153]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60150; File No. SR-Phlx-2009-35]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Clarify
the Definition of ``Narrow-Based Index''

June 19, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on June 16, 2009, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. Phlx has designated the proposed
rule change as constituting a non-controversial rule change under Rule
19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to file a proposed rule change to add a
commentary to Rule 1000A(b)(12) to clarify that this rule, which
defines the term ``narrow-based index'' to mean ``to be representative
of a particular industry or a group of related industries'' to also
accommodate an index the constituents of which are all headquartered
within a single country to be listed as a narrow-based index pursuant
to Exchange rules.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXPHLX/Filings/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    Phlx is filing the proposed rule change to add a commentary to
clarify that Phlx Rule 1000A(b)(12), which defines the term ``narrow-
based index'' (or ``industry index'') to mean ``to be representative of
a particular industry or a group of related industries'' to also
accommodate an index the constituents of which are all headquartered
within a single country to be listed as a narrow-based index pursuant
to Exchange rules. This would enable options based on an index,
including companies all headquartered within a single country, to be
rightfully considered as a generic narrow-based index for purposes of
listing on the Exchange and trading.
    The listing and trading of index options on the Exchange is
generally conditioned on the ability to meet the rule requirements for
narrow-based and broad based indexes.\4\ More particularly regarding
narrow-based indexes, Phlx Rule 1009A(b) states that the Exchange may
trade options on an underlying index pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) of the
Act \5\ where all of the noted conditions noted are satisfied.\6\
Indeed, the Exchange has, and continues to, list and trade options on
narrow-based indexes based on industries or a group of related
industries that are located within various countries. These options are

traded pursuant to the Exchange's index option trading rules.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Broad-based indexes (or market indexes), which are not at
issue in this filing, are defined in Phlx Rule 1000A(b)(11).
    \5\ The Chicago Board Options Exchange and International
Securities Exchange have the same ability pursuant to their own
rules.
    \6\ These include the index is capitalization-weighted, price-
weighted, modified capitalization-weighted or equal dollar-weighted,
and consists of ten or more component securities; each component
security has a market capitalization of at least $75 million, except
that for each of the lowest weighted component securities in the
index that in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the
weight of the index; the market capitalization is at least $50
million; and trading volume of each component security has been at
least one million shares for each of the last six months, except
that for each of the lowest weighted component securities in the
index that in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the
weight of the index, trading volume has been at least 500,000 shares
for each of the last six months. See Phlx Rule 1009A(b)(1)-(12) for
all of the conditions.
    \7\ See Phlx Rules 1000A et seq. (index options trading rules).
See also Phlx Rules 1000 et seq. (general options trading rules).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the Exchange's interpretation of Phlx Rule 1000A(b)(12) as
discussed herein, the Exchange intends to list and trade options,
pursuant to Phlx Rule 1009A(b), on an index(es) that includes
industries all headquartered within a single country. The Exchange
represents that, in all other material aspects, these options will meet
the requirements for generic listing and trading pursuant to Rule
1009A(b). The proposed rule change simply seeks to clarify that the
generic listing and trading standards would cover an index that
otherwise qualifies as a ``narrow-based index,'' with the exception
that the constituents of the index are all headquartered within a
single country.
    For example, the proposed rule change would allow the Exchange to
list and trade options on the NASDAQ China Index (the ``Index'')
pursuant to generic listing standards. Options on the Index would not
otherwise qualify for listing on the Exchange because the Index does
not currently fit within the definition of a narrow-based index under
Phlx Rule 1000A(b)(12). In all other respects the Index meets the
applicable generic listing standards under Rule 1009A(b). The Exchange
intends to list and trade options on the Index pursuant to Rule
1009A(b) almost immediately upon operation of the changes in the
proposed commentary to Phlx Rule 1000A(b)(12).
    Moreover, like the presently traded narrow-based index options,
these narrow-based options will be traded pursuant to the Exchange's
trading rules.\8\ The Exchange represents that its existing
surveillance procedures applicable to trading in options will be
adequate to properly monitor the trading in options on these narrow-
based indexes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id. The trading rules include, among other things, position
limits, exercise limits, and terms of options contracts (Phlx Rules
1001A, 1002A, and 1101A, respectively). See also Securities and
Exchange Release No. 42132 (November 12, 1999), 64 FR 63837
(November 22, 1999) (SR-Phlx-98-99) (order approving narrow-based
options position limit increase to 18,000, 24,000, and 31,500
contracts).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal 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
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by clarifying the term ``narrow-based index'' also
accommodates an index the constituents of which are all headquartered
within a single country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or 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 \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 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.
Phlx has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \13\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \14\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests
that its proposal become operative immediately so that Phlx may list
and trade options on the NASDAQ China Index immediately pursuant to its
generic listing standards for narrow-based indexes. The Commission
believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay to make the product
available without delay is consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission designates the
proposal operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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-Phlx-2009-35 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2009-35. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at

the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be
posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make publicly available. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2009-35 and should be submitted on
or before July 17, 2009.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-15153 Filed 6-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P