[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 137 (Monday, July 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 42122]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17992]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12711-003]

Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC; Notice Concluding Pre-Filing
Process and Approving Process Plan And Schedule

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File Application for License
for a Hydrokinetic Pilot Project.
    b. Project No.: 12711-003.
    c. Dated Filed: July 24, 2009.
    d. Submitted By: Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Cobscook Bay Tidal Energy Project.
    f. Location: In Cobscook Bay, in Washington County, Maine. The
project would not occupy federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 and 5.5 of the Commission's
regulations.
    h. Applicant Contact: Christopher R. Sauer, Ocean Renewable Power
Company, LLC, 120 Exchange Street, Suite 508, Portland, Maine 04101,
(207) 772-7707.
    i. FERC Contact: Timothy Konnert<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (ORPC) has filed with the
Commission: (1) A notice of intent (NOI) to file an application for a
pilot hydrokinetic hydropower project and a draft license application
with monitoring plans; (2) a request for waivers of certain Integrated
Licensing Process (ILP) regulations necessary for expedited processing
of a license application for a hydrokinetic pilot project; (3) a
proposed process plan and schedule; and (4) a request to be designated
as the non-federal representative for section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act consultation and for section 106 consultation under the
National Historic Preservation Act.
    k. A notice was issued on August 7, 2009, soliciting comments on
the draft license application from agencies and stakeholders. Comments
were filed by federal and state agencies, and non-governmental
organizations. No comments were filed opposing the request to waive the
ILP regulations or the proposed process plan and schedule.
    l. ORPC was designated as the non-federal representative for
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act consultation and for section
106 consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act on August
7, 2009.
    m. ORPC proposes a two-phased development approach for the Cobscook
Bay Tidal Energy Project. The project would consist of: (1) A single 5-
meter-diameter axial flow Kinetic System turbine generator unit (TGU)
mounted on a triframe mount, with a rated capacity of 60 kilowatts
(kW), in Phase 1; (2) four 5-meter-diameter axial flow Kinetic System
TGUs mounted on triframe mounts, with a rated capacity of 60 kW each,
in Phase 2; (3) a direct current power and data cable approximately
3,800 feet long (3,600 feet underwater and 200 feet on shore) extending
from the TGUs to the onshore station house; (4) an on-shore building 32
feet wide by 35 feet long, housing the SatCon power inverter and the
supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system; and (5)
appurtenant facilities for navigation safety and operation. The project
would have a total rated capacity of 300 kW, with an estimated annual
generation between 1,200,000 and 1,300,000 kilowatt-hours.
    n. The pre-filing process has been concluded and the requisite
regulations have been waived such that the process and schedule
indicated below can be implemented.
    o. Post-filing process schedule. The post-filing process will be
conducted pursuant to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule
may be made as needed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Milestones                              Dates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final license application expected..  August 31, 2011.
Issue notice of acceptance and ready  September 15, 2011.
 for environmental analysis and
 request for interventions.
Issue biological assessment.........  September 15, 2011.
Recommendations, conditions,          October 15, 2011.
 comments and interventions due.
Issue notice of availability of       December 14, 2011.
 environmental assessment.
Comments due and 10(j) resolution,    January 13, 2011.
 if needed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    p. Register online at http://ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm to be
notified via e-mail of new filing and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: July 12, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-17992 Filed 7-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 147)]
[Notices]
[Page 45109-45110]
[DOCID:fr02au10-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP10-14-000]

Kern River Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Availability of
the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed APEX
Expansion Project

July 23, 2010.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared a final environmental impact statement (EIS)
for the Apex Expansion Project proposed by Kern River Gas Transmission
Company (Kern River) in the above-referenced docket. Kern River
requests authorization to expand its natural gas pipeline system in
Wyoming, Utah, and Nevada, to transport an additional 266 million cubic
feet per day of natural gas from existing receipt points in
southwestern Wyoming, to existing delivery connections in southern
Nevada.
    The final EIS assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the Apex Expansion Project in accordance
with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed project
would have some adverse environmental impact; however, these impacts
would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the
implementation of Kern River's proposed mitigation and the additional
measures recommended in the final EIS.
    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Forest Service (USFS), and
the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) participated as cooperating
agencies in the preparation of the EIS. Cooperating agencies have
jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to resources
potentially affected by the proposal and participate in the NEPA
analysis. The cooperating agencies will adopt and use the EIS to
consider the issuance of right-of-way grants on federally administered
lands. While the conclusions and recommendations presented in the final
EIS were developed with input from the cooperating agencies, the
agencies will present their own conclusions and recommendations in
their respective Records of Decision for the project.
    The final EIS addresses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the following project facilities:

     Approximately 27.6 miles of 36-inch-diameter natural gas
pipeline loop \1\ extending southwest in Utah from Morgan County,
through Davis to Salt Lake County;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A loop is a segment of pipe that is usually installed
adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to it at both ends.
The loop allows more gas to be moved through the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     One new 30,000-horsepower compressor station (known as the
Milford Compressor Station) in Beaver County, Utah;
     Modifications to four existing compressor stations to add
additional compression: The Coyote Creek Compressor Station located in
Uinta County, Wyoming; the Elberta Compressor Station located in Utah
County, Utah; the Fillmore Compressor Station located in Millard
County, Utah; and the Dry Lake Compressor Station located in Clark
County, Nevada;
     Six mainline valves; and
     Three pig \2\ launcher and two pig receiver facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A pig is an internal tool that can be used to clean and dry
a pipeline and/or to inspect it for damage or corrosion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final EIS has been placed in the public files of the FERC and
is available for public viewing on the FERC's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov. A limited number of copies are available for distribution
and public inspection at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public
Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502-8371.
    Copies of the EIS have been mailed to federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; local
newspapers and libraries in the project area; parties to this
proceeding; and potentially affected landowners and other interested
individuals and groups. Paper copy versions of this EIS were mailed to
those specifically requesting them; all others received a CD version.

Questions?

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC (http://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search,'' and enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP10-
14). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>; for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and
submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you
spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-18838 Filed 7-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                             OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY
AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

RE:  	Meeting with the American Coatings Association on PIP (3:1) in the Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals Under TSCA Section 6(h)
List of Contents
 Meeting Summary
 Attendees
 Contact
Meeting Summary

On February 15, 2022, representatives from EPA met with representatives from the American Coating Association (ACA), Akzo Nobel, and the U.S. Navy, regarding anti-foaling agents and coatings containing phenol, isopropylated phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1)) (CASRN 68937-41-7) that are applied to the hulls of ships, especially military vessels. The coating is a Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) registered product that uses PIP (3:1) under its registration as an inert ingredient under FIFRA and meets military specifications to be applied to aluminum hulled Navy ships. ACA members told EPA that they are seeking a limited No Action Assurance (NAA) for PIP (3:1) in anti-foaling coating. In requesting an NAA, ACA noted the lengthy military certification process, identifying, replacing, and certifying a viable alternative, and current contracts with the coating specified as reasons for needing more time to move away from PIP (3:1).

Attendees
EPA:
Joel Wolf
Niva Kramek
Cindy Wheeler
Gabriela Rossner
Tanya Mottley
Mark Hartman
Susanna Blair
Catherine Diaz
Michal Freedhoff
ACA:
Riaz Zaman

Akzo Nobel:

Elizabeth Rice
Mike Winter
US Navy:
Mark Ingle


is the subject of the recall was manufactured. Instead, this
information may only identify the location of a distributor and have no
bearing on the actual location of manufacture. We believe that it is
important for the

agency to know where the component that is the subject of the recall is
fabricated or assembled so as to appropriately focus follow-up
activities of our Recall Management Division to ensure that products
imported into this country meet all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standards and are free of safety-related defects. Therefore, we
are proposing to amend subsection 573.6(c)(2)(iv) to add language
requiring the reporting manufacturer to provide the country of origin
of the component identified containing the defect or noncompliance. By
country of origin, we intend for the reporting manufacturer to provide
the location of the manufacturing or assembly process where the
component is assembled or manufactured in its completed form.
Accordingly, we propose to amend subsection 573.6(c)(2)(iv) to read:
``In the case of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment in
which the component that contains the defect or noncompliance was
manufactured by a different manufacturer from the reporting
manufacturer, the reporting manufacturer shall identify the component
and its country of origin (i.e., final place of manufacture or
assembly), and the manufacturer and/or assembler of the component by
name, business address, and business telephone number. If the reporting
manufacturer does not know the identity of the manufacturer of the
component, it shall identify the entity from which it was obtained.''
    We seek comments on our proposal to require the reporting
manufacturer to provide the country of origin for the component that
contains the defect or noncompliance.

IV. Request for Comments

How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments. Your comments must not be
more than 15 pages long.\15\ We established this limit to encourage you
to write your primary comments in a concise fashion. However, you may
attach necessary additional documents to your comments. There is no
limit on the length of the attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 49 CFR 553.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please submit your comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    If you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe)
file, we ask that the documents submitted be scanned using Optical
Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency to search
and copy certain portions of your submissions.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Optical character recognition (OCR) is the process of
converting an image of text, such as a scanned paper document or
electronic fax file, into computer-editable text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for
substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet
the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data
Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the
guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed
at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html. DOT's
guidelines may be accessed at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/
DataQualityGuidelines.pdf.

How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?

    If you submit your comments by mail and wish Docket Management to
notify you upon its receipt of your comments, enclose a self-addressed,
stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon
receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the postcard by
mail.

How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. When you send a comment
containing information claimed to be confidential business information,
you should include a cover letter setting forth the information
specified in our confidential business information regulation.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 49 CFR part 512.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, you should submit a copy, from which you have deleted
the claimed confidential business information, to the Docket by one of
the methods set forth above.

Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?

    We will consider all comments received before the close of business
on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To the extent
possible, we will also consider comments received after that date.
Therefore, if interested persons believe that any new information the
agency places in the docket affects their comments, they may submit
comments after the closing date concerning how the agency should
consider that information for the final rule.
    If a comment is received too late for us to consider in developing
a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider that
comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?

    You may read the materials placed in the docket for this document
(e.g., the comments submitted in response to this document by other
interested persons) at any time by going to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. You may also
read the materials at the Docket Management Facility by going to the
street address given above under ADDRESSES. The Docket Management
Facility is open between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

V. Privacy Act Statement

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) provides for making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines as ``significant

regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    This document was reviewed under E.O. 12866 and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This rulemaking
action is not considered ``significant'' under Department of
Transportation policies and procedures. The effects of these proposed
rule changes have been analyzed in a Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation.
Two of the proposed rule changes presented within this document would
raise the reporting thresholds under EWR rules and have the effect of
lowering the reporting burden on manufacturers of light vehicles and
trailers. Although we are proposing to eliminate the reporting
threshold for bus manufacturers, the result of this action will not
impose a significant burden on this industry. Finally, the proposals
being made within this document related to data consistency and the
addition of reporting field for light vehicle manufacturers would place
only a minimal burden on EWR manufacturers through a one-time
adjustment to their EWR databases. The agency estimates that the
proposal will result in a net annual reduction in costs of $3.5
million.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
requires agencies to evaluate the potential effects of their proposed
and final rules on small businesses, small organizations and small
governmental jurisdictions. Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to
certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if the proposed
rulemaking is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect 237 manufacturers (30 light vehicle
manufacturers, 190 trailer manufacturers, and 17 bus manufacturers).
The rule would relieve reporting burdens currently imposed on some
light vehicle manufacturers and trailer manufacturers and impose modest
new burdens on the bus manufacturers. In order to determine if any of
these manufacturers are small entities under the RFA, NHTSA reviewed
the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. Under
those criteria, manufacturers of light vehicles, light and heavy duty
trucks, buses, or motor vehicle bodies are classified as a small
business if they have fewer than 1,000 employees. For trailer
manufacturers, the company must have fewer than 500 employees to be
considered a small business. All employees from the parent company and
its subsidiaries are considered when determining the number of
employees.
    Based on our application of these criteria (for details of our
analysis, see our Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation in the docket of
this rulemaking), NHTSA has concluded that the majority of the light
vehicle manufacturers and almost all of the 190 trailer manufacturers
that would be relieved of quarterly reports by this rule (except for
instances of fatalities) are small businesses.
    In the bus industry, we estimate there are 45 businesses, 28 of
which currently report to us and 17 of which will be required to report
all EWR data to us. Of those 17 bus companies that would be required to
report data fully under this rule, based on our review of publicly
available information, we estimate that 11 companies are small
businesses having fewer than 1,000 employees. In our view, 11 small
businesses out of a total of 17 entities (64.7 percent) constitute a
substantial number.
    To determine whether the proposal would have a significant economic
impact on the small bus companies, we look at our estimated cost of the
proposal (an annual reporting cost of $13,238 per average company and a
one time start-up cost of $3,500 per company) and compare that to the
revenues of the company (which would include the parent company and its
subsidiaries). The two smallest bus companies that are not a subsidiary
of a larger company appear to be Ebus with 60 employees and U.S. Bus
Corporation with 70 employees. U.S. Bus has sales revenues of $9.7
million. Costs imposed by this rule would equal 0.17 percent of revenue
($16,500 divided by $9,700,000), which the agency does not consider to
be a significant economic impact. Based on publicly available
information, Ebus sells approximately 12 vehicles per year at an
estimated cost of about $100,000 each. Thus, its estimated revenues are
at least $1.2 million and its costs under this rule would equal 1.37
percent of revenue ($16,500 divided by $1,200,000), which the agency
does not consider to be a significant economic impact.
    For the automobile and light truck manufacturers affected by this
proposal, we estimate a cost savings of $47,282 per manufacturer. For
trailer manufacturers affected by this proposal, we estimate a cost
savings of $11,832 per manufacturer. Even though we do not have revenue
estimates for these manufacturers, these are cost savings and not
burdens and we do not believe that they are economically significant.
    In summary, while this proposal will affect a substantial number of
small businesses (a majority of the light vehicle manufacturers, most
of the trailer manufacturers, and 11 bus manufacturers), the agency
believes that the proposal will not have a significant economic impact
on those entities. Accordingly, I certify that this proposed rule would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 on ``Federalism'' requires us to develop an
accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of `regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.' '' The Executive Order defines this
phrase to include regulations ``that 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.'' The agency has analyzed this proposed
rule in accordance with the principles and criteria set forth in
Executive Order 13132 and has determined that it will not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant consultation with State
and local officials or the preparation of a federalism summary impact
statement. The changes proposed in this document only affect a rule
that regulates the manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle
equipment, which does not have substantial direct effect 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million
annually (adjusted annually for inflation with base year of 1995).
Adjusting this amount by the implicit gross domestic product price
deflator for the year 2007 results in $130 million (119.682 / 92.106 =
1.30). This proposal would not result in expenditures by State, local
or tribal governments of more than $130 million annually. The proposal
would result in an annual savings of about $3.4 million. The Final Rule
did not have unfunded mandates implications. 67 FR 49263 (July 30,
2002).

E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' \18\
the agency has considered whether this proposed rule would have any
retroactive effect. We conclude that it would not have a retroactive or
preemptive effect, and judicial review of it may be obtained pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section does not require that a petition for
reconsideration be filed prior to seeking judicial review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless
the collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
control number. The collection of information associated with Part 579
is titled ``Reporting of Information and Documents About Potential
Defects'' and has been assigned OMB Control Number 2127-0616. At
present, OMB is reviewing NHTSA's request for an extension of approval
to collect this information. Based on Part 579 as presently written,
NHTSA has estimated that the collection of information will result in
2,355 responses, with a total of 82,391 burden hours on affected
manufacturers.
    NHTSA has published today's NPRM in order to reduce the reporting
burden on manufacturers associated with Part 579. NHTSA believes that
if this NPRM is made final, there will be a reduction of 26,247 burden
hours on those reporting. The reduction in burden hours was calculated
by separating the type of reports that manufacturers are required to
submit under EWR into two groups, A and B. Group A reports include
reports that all manufacturers, regardless of industry, are required to
submit if they meet the specific industry threshold. Group B reports
are reports that not all manufacturers are required to submit even if
they meet the specific industry threshold. Our calculation follows:

                                                 Group A Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    At present            NPRM                          Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claims and notices of injury/   508.9 hours......  508.4 hours......  -0.4 hours.
 fatality.
Property damage...............  1200.6 hours.....  1198.3 hours.....  -2.3 hours.
Field reports.................  12,691.5 hours...  12,686.25 hours..  -5.25 hours.
Foreign Death claims..........  18 hours.........  18 hours.........  0.
                                                                     -------------------------------------------
                                                                      Total change of -8 hours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Bus Manufacturers--As noted, if the NPRM is made final, there will
be an extra collection of information burden on bus manufacturers.
NHTSA estimates that bus manufacturers will file an additional 7 claims
and notices of injury/fatality reports a year, for a total of 35
minutes. NHTSA estimates an additional 19 reports on property damage,
for a total of 95 minutes. NHTSA estimates an additional 579
manufacturer field reports, for a total of 2,895 minutes. NHTSA
estimates there will be no additional foreign death claim reports.
Thus, if the NPRM is made final, NHTSA estimates there will be an
additional 605 reports or 50.42 burden hours on bus manufacturers.
    50.42 additional burden hours minus 8 hours of reduced burden on
other vehicle manufacturers that submit Group A reports, results in a
total of 42.42 burden hours a year if this NPRM is made final.
Group B Reports
    Group B reports consist of warranty claims, consumer complaints,
and dealer field reports. If this NPRM is made final, the number of
manufacturers reporting on light vehicles will be reduced from 56 to 26
(a reduction of 30 manufacturers) or -636.5 burden hours. The number of
bus manufacturers reporting will increase from 28 to 45 (an addition of
17 manufacturers) for a total of +225.4 burden hours. The number of
trailer manufacturers will decrease from 251 to 61 (a reduction of 190
trailer manufacturers), or -503.93 burden hours.
    Thus, if this NPRM is made final, NHTSA estimates there will be a
reduction of 915 burden hours on vehicle manufacturers for Group B
reports.
Computer Maintenance Burden Hours
    If this NPRM is made final, there will be 30 fewer light vehicle
manufacturers reporting, or 30 x 347 burden hours per manufacturer, for
-10,410 fewer burden hours. There will be 17 more bus manufacturers
reporting, or 17 x 86.52 burden hours per manufacturer, for a total
increase of +1470.84 more burden hours on bus manufacturers. There will
be 190 fewer trailer manufacturers reporting multiplied by 86.5 burden
hours each, for a total of -16,435 burden hours for trailer
manufacturers. Thus, there will be a reduction of 25,374 burden hours
on industry resulting from computer maintenance, if this NPRM is made
final.

      Total Burden Hours on Industry, if Today's NPRM Is Made Final
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group A Reports...........................  + 42 burden hours.
Group B Reports...........................  -915 burden hours.
Computer Maintenance Reports..............  -25,374 burden hours.
                                           -----------------------------
    Grand total...........................  -26,247 burden hours.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

For these reasons, if this NPRM is made final, NHTSA believes industry
will incur 26,247 fewer burden hours a year in reporting requirements
to NHTSA.

G. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined
to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2)
concerns an environmental, health or safety risk that NHTSA has reason
to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the
regulatory action meets both criteria, we must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children,
and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by us.
    This rulemaking is not economically significant.

H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in or about April and October of each
year. You may use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of
this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

I. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists or
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them
in your comments on this proposal.

J. Data Quality Act

    Section 515 of the FY 2001 Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 106-554, section 515, codified at 44 U.S.C.
3516 historical and statutory note), commonly referred to as the Data
Quality Act, directed OMB to establish government-wide standards in the
form of guidelines designed to maximize the ``quality,''
``objectivity,'' ``utility,'' and ``integrity'' of information that
Federal agencies disseminate to the public. As noted in the EWR final
rule (67 FR 45822), NHTSA has reviewed its data collection, generation,
and dissemination processes in order to ensure that agency information
meets the standards articulated in the OMB and DOT guidelines. The
changes proposed by today's document would alleviate some of the burden
for manufacturers to provide EWR reports by reducing the reporting
requirement on light vehicle manufacturers and trailer manufacturers.
Where the proposed rule change is requiring additional reporting by
manufacturers, the new requirement will serve to improve the quality of
the data NHTSA receives under the EWR rule, enabling the agency to be
more efficient and productive in proactively searching for potential
safety concerns as mandated through the TREAD Act.

VII. Proposed Regulatory Text

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Parts 573 and 579

    Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Tires.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes that 49 CFR parts
573 and 579 be amended as set forth below:

PART 573--DEFECT AND NONCOMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITY AND REPORTS

    1. The authority citation for part 573 is revised to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30102, 30103, 30116-30121, 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 49 CFR 501.8.

    2. Amend Sec.  573.6 by revising paragraphs (c)(2)(iii) and (iv) to
read as follows:

Sec.  573.6  Defect and noncompliance information report.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) In the case of items of motor vehicle equipment, the
identification shall be by the generic name of the component (tires,
child seating systems, axles, etc.), part number (for tires, a list of
tire identification numbers), size and function if applicable, the
inclusive dates (month and year) of manufacture if available and any
other information necessary to describe the items.
    (iv) In the case of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle
equipment in which the component that contains the defect or
noncompliance was manufactured by a different manufacturer from the
reporting manufacturer, the reporting manufacturer shall identify the
component and its country of origin (i.e. final place of manufacture or
assembly), and the manufacturer and/or assembler of the component by
name, business address, and business telephone number. If the reporting
manufacturer does not know the identity of the manufacturer of the
component, it shall identify the entity from which it was obtained.
* * * * *
    3. Revise Sec.  573.9 to read as follows:

Sec.  573.9  Address for submitting required reports and other
information.

    All submissions, except as otherwise required by this part, shall
be addressed to the Associate Administrator for Enforcement, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Attention: Recall Management
Division (NVS-215), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
These submissions may be submitted as an attachment to an e-mail
message to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>in a portable document format (.pdf). Tire
Identification Numbers that are required to be submitted pursuant to
Sec.  573.6(c)(2)(iii) may be submitted as an attachment to the
aforementioned e-mail message and provided in a commercially available
text format (e.g. Microsoft Access or Excel) or, if the manufacturer
has an early warning reporting identification and password pursuant to
49 CFR 579.28, submitted to NHTSA's tire identification number
repository identified on the Office of Defects' Internet homepage
(http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/safetrecall/TINupload). Whether or not
these submissions are also submitted electronically, defect or
noncompliance reports required by Sec.  573.6 of this part must be
submitted by certified mail in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30118(c).

PART 579--REPORTING OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT
POTENTIAL DEFECTS

    4. The authority citation for part 579 is amended to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30102-103, 30112, 30117-121, 30166-167;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 49 CFR 501.8.

Subpart A--General

    5. Amend Sec.  579.4 by adding at the end of paragraph (b) a new
sentence and amending paragraph (c) by revising the definitions of
``Model,'' ``Other safety

campaign,'' and ``Service brake system'' and adding the definition of
``Fuel and/or propulsion system type'' in alphabetical order, to read
as follows:

Sec.  579.4  Terminology.

* * * * *
    (b) Regulatory terms. * * * The term Electronic Stability Control
System is used as defined in S4. of Sec.  571.126 of this chapter.
    (c) Other terms. * * *
* * * * *
    Fuel and/or propulsion system type means the variety of fuel and/or
propulsion systems used in a vehicle, coded as follows: 01 gasoline
only, 02 diesel only, 03 gasoline--dual fueled, 04 diesel--dual fueled,
05 hybrid--gas/electric, 06 hybrid--diesel/electric, 07 electric--
battery, 08 electric--hydrogen fuel cell, 09 natural gas, 10 liquefied
petroleum gas, 11 hydrogen internal combustion, 12 alcohol only, 13
other.
* * * * *
    Model means a name that a manufacturer of motor vehicles applies to
a family of vehicles within a make that have a degree of commonality in
construction, such as body, chassis or cab type. For light vehicles, if
a model has sub-models with different fuel and/or propulsion system
types, it means each such sub-model. For equipment other than child
restraint systems, it means the name that the manufacturer uses to
designate it. For child restraint systems, it means the name that the
manufacturer uses to identify child restraint systems with the same
shell, buckle, base (if so equipped) and restraint system.
* * * * *
    Other safety campaign means an action in which a manufacturer
communicates with owners and/or dealers in a foreign country with
respect to conditions under which motor vehicles or equipment should be
operated, repaired, or replaced that relate to safety (excluding
promotional and marketing materials, customer satisfaction surveys, and
operating instructions or owner's manuals that accompany the vehicle or
child restraint system at the time of first sale); or advice or
direction to a dealer or distributor to cease the delivery or sale of
specified models of vehicles or equipment.
* * * * *
    Service brake system means all components of the service braking
system of a motor vehicle intended for the transfer of braking
application force from the operator to the wheels of a vehicle,
including the foundation braking system, such as the brake pedal,
master cylinder, fluid lines and hoses, braking assist components,
brake calipers, wheel cylinders, brake discs, brake drums, brake pads,
brake shoes, and other related equipment installed in a motor vehicle
in order to comply with FMVSS Nos. 105, 121, 122, or 135 (except
equipment relating specifically to a parking brake). This term also
includes systems and devices for automatic control of the brake system
such as antilock braking, traction control, and enhanced braking, but
does not include systems or devices necessary for electronic stability
control. The term includes all associated switches, control units,
connective elements (such as wiring harnesses, hoses, piping, etc.),
and mounting elements (such as brackets, fasteners, etc.).
* * * * *

Subpart C--Reporting of Early Warning Information

    6. Amend Sec.  579.21 by:
    a. Revising the section heading;
    b. Revising the introductory text;
    c. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (b)(2);
    d. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (c); and
    e. Adding a fifth sentence to paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  579.21  Reporting requirements for manufacturers of 5000 or more
light vehicles annually.

    For each reporting period, a manufacturer whose aggregate number of
light vehicles manufactured for sale, sold, offered for sale,
introduced or delivered for introduction in interstate commerce, or
imported into the United States, during the calendar year of the
reporting period or during each of the prior two calendar years is 5000
or more shall submit the information described in this section. For
paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section, the manufacturer shall submit
information separately with respect to each make, model (separately
reported by fuel and/or propulsion system type and code), and model
year of light vehicle manufactured during the reporting period and the
nine model years prior to the earliest model year in the reporting
period, including models no longer in production.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) For each incident described in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section, the manufacturer shall separately report the make, model
(separately reported by fuel and/or propulsion system type and code),
model year, the type and VIN of the vehicle, the incident date, the
number of deaths, the number of injuries for incidents occurring in the
United States, the State or foreign country where the incident
occurred, each system or component of the vehicle that allegedly
contributed to the incident, and whether the incident involved a fire
or rollover, coded as follows: 01 steering system, 02 suspension
system, 03 service brake system, 05 parking brake, 06 engine and engine
cooling system, 07 fuel system, 10 power train, 11 electrical system,
12 exterior lighting, 13 visibility, 14 air bags, 15 seat belts, 16
structure, 17 latch, 18 vehicle speed control, 19 tires, 20 wheels, 22
seats, 23 fire, 24 rollover, 25 electronic stability control system, 98
where a system or component not covered by categories 01 through 22 or
25, is specified in the claim or notice, and 99 where no system or
component of the vehicle is specified in the claim or notice. * * *
    (c) Numbers of property damage claims, consumer complaints,
warranty claims, and field reports. Separate reports on the numbers of
those property damage claims, consumer complaints, warranty claims, and
field reports which involve the systems and components that are
specified in codes 01 through 22, or 25 in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section, or a fire (code 23), or rollover (code 24). * * * For each
report, the manufacturer shall separately state the vehicle type if the
manufacturer stated more than one vehicle type for a particular make,
model, model year in paragraph (a) of this section.
* * * * *
    7. Amend Sec.  579.22 by revising the section heading and by
revising the introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  579.22  Reporting requirements for manufacturers of buses and
manufacturers of 500 or more medium-heavy vehicles (other than buses)
annually.

    For each reporting period, any manufacturer who has manufactured
for sale, sold, offered for sale, introduced or delivered for
introduction in interstate commerce, or imported one or more buses into
the United States, during the calendar year of the reporting period or
during either of the prior two calendar years shall submit the
information described in this section. For each reporting period, any
manufacturer who has manufactured for sale, sold, offered for sale,
introduced or delivered for introduction in interstate commerce, or
imported a total of 500 or more medium-heavy vehicles (a sum that does
not include buses) shall submit the information described in this
section.

For paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section, the manufacturer shall
submit information separately with respect to each make, model, and
model year of medium-heavy vehicle and/or bus manufactured during the
reporting period and the nine model years prior to the earliest model
year in the reporting period, including models no longer in production.
* * * * *
    8. Amend Sec.  579.24 by revising the section heading and by
revising the first sentence of the introductory text to read as
follows:

Sec.  579.24  Reporting requirements for manufacturers of 5000 or more
trailers annually.

    For each reporting period, a manufacturer whose aggregate number of
trailers manufactured for sale, sold, offered for sale, introduced or
delivered for introduction in interstate commerce, or imported into the
United States, during the calendar year of the reporting period or
during either of the prior two calendar years is 5000 or more shall
submit the information described in this section. * * *
* * * * *
    9. Amend Sec.  579.27 by revising the section heading to read as
follows:

Sec.  579.27  Reporting requirements for manufacturers of fewer than
500 medium-heavy vehicles or motorcycles annually, for manufacturers of
fewer than 5000 light vehicles or trailers annually, for manufacturers
of original equipment, and for manufacturers of replacement equipment
other than child restraint systems and tires.

* * * * *
    10. Amend Sec.  579.29 by adding paragraph (a)(3) to read as
follows:

Sec.  579.29  Manner of reporting.

    (a) * * *
    (3) For each report required under paragraphs (a) through (c) of
Sec. Sec.  579.21 through 579.26 and submitted in the manner provided
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, a manufacturer must provide a
make, model and model year that is identical to the make, model, model
year provided in the manufacturer's previous report. A manufacturer
that intends to provide a make, model, model year in its report that is
not identical to the manufacturer's previous report, must notify NHTSA
by populating the appropriate field in the template required under
paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
* * * * *

    Issued on: November 26, 2008.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E8-28873 Filed 12-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65664-65665]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22859]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2016-0022]

Revisions to the Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is accepting
comments on proposed revisions to the Public Assistance Program and
Policy Guide (PAPPG).

DATES: Comments must be received by October 24, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be identified by docket ID FEMA-2016-0022 and
may be submitted by one of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. Please note that this proposed
policy is not a rulemaking and the Federal Rulemaking Portal is being
utilized only as a mechanism for receiving comments.
    Mail: Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Room 835, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472-3100.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Logan, Acting Director,
Public Assistance Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or
material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will
include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting
this information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice, which can be viewed by clicking on the ``Privacy Notice'' link
in the footer of www.regulations.gov.
    You may submit your comments and material by the methods specified
in the ADDRESSES section above. Please submit your comments and any
supporting material by only one means to avoid the receipt and review
of duplicate submissions.
    Docket: The proposed additions and changes to the PAPPG are
available in docket ID FEMA-2016-0022. For access to the docket to read
background documents or comments received, go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov and search for the
docket ID. Submitted comments may also be inspected at FEMA, Office of
Chief Counsel, Room 835, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472.

II. Background

    The purpose of this notice is to seek public comment on proposed
revisions to the PAPPG. The revisions are intended to clarify and
reflect current Public Assistance policy. The proposed policy does not
have the force or effect of law.
    FEMA seeks comment on the proposed policy language, which is
available online at http://www.regulations.gov in docket ID FEMA-2016-
0022. Based on the comments received, FEMA may make appropriate
revisions to the proposed policy. Although FEMA will consider any
comments received in the drafting of the final policy, FEMA will not
provide a response to comments document. When FEMA issues the revised
PAPPG, FEMA will publish a notice of availability in the Federal
Register and make the final policy available at http://www.regulations.gov. The final policy will not have the force or effect
of law.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207.

    Dated: September 16, 2016.
David Bibo,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Policy and Program Analysis,
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-22859 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: December 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 249)]
[Notices]
[Page 74392-74396]
[DOCID:fr31de07-106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57018; File No. SR-Phlx-2007-68]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto
Relating to Customized U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency Options

December 20, 2007.
    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 6, 2007, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Phlx. On
December 18, 2007, the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.\3\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaces the original filing in its
entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Phlx proposes to amend Rule 1079, FLEX Index and Equity Options, to
permit trading of U.S. dollar-settled foreign currency options
(``FCOs'') with certain individually tailored features.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``FLEX'' is a trademark of the Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at Phlx, the
Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.phlx.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, Phlx 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. Phlx 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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to permit the trading of
U.S. dollar-settled FCOs with individually tailored expiration dates
and exercise prices.\5\ Currently, a variety of customized physical
delivery FCOs are traded on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 1069,
Customized Foreign Currency Options.\6\ Users currently have the
ability with respect to physical delivery FCOs to customize the strike
price and quotation method and to choose underlying and base currency
combinations from among various Exchange listed currencies, including
the U.S. dollar. Customized physical delivery FCOs were originally
introduced to provide investors with the flexibility and variety
offered in the over-the-counter market as well as the benefits
attributed to an exchange auction market as they hedge their exchange
rate risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') will be the
issuer and guarantor of these new options.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34925 (November 1,
1994), 59 FR 55720 (November 8, 1994) (approving SR-Phlx-94-18).
Customized physical delivery FCOs trade without a specialist or
limit order book pursuant to Rule 1069.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Individually tailored equity and index options may also be traded
pursuant to Rule 1079, FLEX Index and Equity Options.\7\ The Exchange
now proposes to amend Rule 1079 to permit some individual tailoring of
U.S. dollar-

settled FCOs as well.\8\ Individually tailored U.S. dollar-settled FCOs
would be known as ``FLEX currency options'' and Rule 1079 would be
amended to include FLEX currency options in its title. Any references
in Exchange rules or proposed rule changes to ``FLEX currency options''
would apply only to U.S. dollar-settled FCOs that are proposed to trade
pursuant to Rule 1079. ``FLEX currency options'' would not include
customized physical delivery FCOs that trade pursuant to Rule 1069.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39549 (January 14,
1998), 63 FR 3601 (January 23, 1998) (adopting SR-Phlx-96-38).
    \8\ Corresponding changes are proposed to be made to Options
Floor Procedure Advice F-28, Trading FLEX Index and Equity Options.
The Exchange is not proposing to amend Rule 1069, Customized Foreign
Currency Options. Rule 1069 will continue to apply to physical
delivery FCO only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to this proposed rule change, the Exchange would be able
to offer market participants the ability to trade FLEX currency options
with non-standardized expiration dates. At present, pursuant to
Exchange Rule 1012, Series of Options Open for Trading, FCO users can
only trade U.S. dollar-settled FCO contracts with standardized terms,
including standardized expiration dates. Thus, U.S. dollar-settled FCO
contracts currently may only be traded with expirations at 1, 2, 3, 6,
9 and 12 months. The Exchange is proposing to revise this previously-
standard term by allowing FLEX currency option contracts to expire on
any month, business day and year within two years, provided that a FLEX
currency option would not be permitted to expire on any day that falls
on or within two business days prior or subsequent to an expiration day
for a non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCO on the same underlying currency
or on any day on which the Federal Reserve Bank is not scheduled to
publish its Noon Buying Rate.\9\ This flexibility would enable market
participants to hedge their exchange rate exposure more accurately by
trading a contract that expires on a trading day of their choosing. All
FLEX currency options with customized expiration dates would expire at
11:59 p.m. eastern time on their designated expiration date and cease
trading at 10:15 a.m. eastern time that day.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See proposed amendment to Rule 1079(a)(6)(A).
    \10\ Id. See also proposed amendment to Rule 1079(a)(9)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Rule 1079(a)(3), users will also be able to
individually tailor the strike prices of U.S. dollar-settled FCOs.
Strike prices need not be consistent with strike price intervals
permissible for non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCOs. The strike price may
be specified in terms of a specific dollar amount rounded to the
nearest ten thousandth of a dollar (expressed without reference to the
first two decimal places) for FLEX currency options other than the
Japanese yen currency option. FLEX options on the Japanese yen may be
specified in terms of a specific dollar amount rounded to the nearest
one millionth of a dollar (expressed without reference to the first
four decimal places). FLEX U.S. dollar-settled foreign currency options
will be margined at the same levels as the Exchange's non-FLEX U.S.
dollar-settled foreign currency options.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Phlx Rule 722.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the proposed amendment to Rule 1079(a)(4)(B), FLEX
currency options would be quoted in terms of dollars per unit of
underlying foreign currency, just like the non-FLEX U.S. dollar settled
FCOs. FLEX currency options may be quoted and traded in the same
minimum increments that are established for non-FLEX U.S. dollar
settled FCOs pursuant to Exchange Rule 1034.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Rule 1034, Minimum Increments, section (a), for the
minimum increments applicable to non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCO.
Commencing January 2, 2008, U.S. dollar-settled FCO will be quoted
and traded in minimum increments of $.0001 (expressed as .01) for
option contracts on the British pound, $.0001 (expressed as .01) for
option contracts on the Swiss franc, $.0001 (expressed as .01) for
option contracts on the Canadian dollar, $.0001 (expressed as .01)
for option contracts on the Australian dollar, $.0001 (expressed as
.01) for option contracts on the Euro, $.000001 (expressed as .01)
for option contracts on the Japanese yen. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 56933 (December 7, 2007), 72 FR 71185 (December 14,
2007) (approving SR-Phlx-2007-70).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 1079(a)(9) is being amended to provide for settlement for FLEX
currency options. The closing settlement value for FLEX options on the
Australian dollar, the Euro and the British pound would be the day's
announced Noon Buying Rate, as determined by the Federal Reserve Bank
of New York on the expiration date. If the Noon Buying Rate is not
announced by 5:00 p.m. eastern time, the closing settlement value would
be the most recently announced Noon Buying Rate, unless the Exchange
determined to apply an alternative closing settlement value as a result
of extraordinary circumstances. The closing settlement value for FLEX
options on the Canadian dollar, the Swiss franc and the Japanese yen
would be an amount equal to one divided by the day's announced Noon
Buying Rate, as determined by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on
the expiration date, rounded to the nearest .0001 (except in the case
of the Japanese yen where the amount would be rounded to the nearest
.000001). If the Noon Buying Rate were not announced by 5 p.m. eastern
time, the closing settlement value would be based upon the most
recently announced Noon Buying Rate, unless the Exchange determined to
apply an alternative closing settlement value as a result of
extraordinary circumstances. This settlement provision closely tracks
Rule 1057, U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency Option Closing
Settlement Value, applicable to non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCOs.\13\
FLEX currency options will be subject to the exercise-by-exception
procedures of OCC.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ However, Rule 1057 bases the closing settlement value for
non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCO on the Noon Buying Rate of the
business day prior to expiration rather than that of the expiration
date itself.
    \14\ See OCC Rule 805, which sets forth the expiration date
exercise procedures for options cleared and settled by the OCC. The
exercise-by-exception or ``Ex-by-Ex'' procedure employed by OCC in
OCC Rule 805 allows an OCC Clearing Member to effect a choice not to
exercise an option that is in the money by the exercise threshold
amount or more, or to exercise an option which has not reached the
exercise threshold amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 1079(a)(5), which currently
permits market participants to determine whether a FLEX index or equity
option will have either an American or European exercise style.\15\ As
amended, Rule 1079(a)(5) would continue to permit this flexibility for
FLEX index and equity options, while limiting FLEX currency options to
European exercise style only. The option type may be a put, call or
hedge order.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ An American style option may be exercised at any time up to
its expiration, while a European style option can only be exercised
on its expiration day. See Phlx Rule 1000(b)(34) and (35).
    \16\ See Exchange Rules 1079(a)(2), 1000(b)(7) and 1066(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently Rule 1079(c), which will also apply to FLEX currency
options, provides that at least two Exchange members (ROTs and/or a
Specialist) must be assigned to each FLEX option. ROTs and Specialists
must apply on the appropriate Exchange form to be assigned in FLEX
options.\17\ An assigned ROT or assigned Specialist may choose to be
assigned in a particular FLEX option. Assigned ROTs and the assigned
Specialist are subject to certain obligations respecting the trading of
FLEX options. For example, the affirmative and negative market making
obligations of Rule 1014(c) apply. Assigned ROTs and the assigned
Specialist must respond with a market respecting any FLEX option upon
request by a Floor Official. However, assigned ROTs and assigned
Specialists

are not required to provide continuous quotes or markets at a certain
minimum bid-ask differential (quote spread parameter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Rule 1079(c)(1) regarding Assigned ROTs and Assigned
Specialists. Rule 1079(c)(1) currently applies to all FLEX options
and would apply to FLEX currency options as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If there is an assigned Specialist and an assigned ROT in a FLEX
option, the FLEX option trades pursuant to the specialist system, just
as non-FLEX options do on the Exchange. Only the Specialist in the non-
FLEX option may be the assigned specialist in that FLEX option.
However, there may not be a Specialist in FLEX options.
    Where there is no assigned FLEX Specialist, two assigned ROTs are
required.\18\ The current responsibilities of a Specialist to determine
a market based on the bids and offers voiced as well as to disseminate
bids/offers and trades may be handled by the Requesting Member, where
there is no assigned Specialist in that FLEX option. If a trade occurs
where the Requesting Member is not a participant and there is no
assigned Specialist, the responsibility to submit the trade falls upon
the seller or largest participant, in accordance with existing trading
procedure.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The non-FLEX Specialist may be an assigned ROT in the FLEX
option, or not assigned at all.
    \19\ See Floor Procedure Advice F-2, Time Stamping, Matching and
Access to Matched Trades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Trading of FLEX currency options will be subject to Rule 1079(b),
which currently governs the trading of FLEX equity and index options.
Generally, like FLEX equity and index options, FLEX currency options
would be traded in accordance with many existing option rules. Rule
1079 states that although FLEX options are generally subject to the
rules in the options section of the Exchange rules, to the extent that
the provisions of Rule 1079 are inconsistent with other applicable
Exchange rules, Rule 1079 takes precedence with respect to FLEX
options. Provisions of Rule 1079 that are not limited by their terms to
FLEX equity or index options would be equally applicable to FLEX
currency options.\20\ Thus, most of Rule 1079(b), Procedure for Quoting
and Trading FLEX Options, will apply to FLEX currency options in the
same way it applies to FLEX equity and index options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ For example, the following provisions of Rule 1079 are not
restricted to FLEX equity or index options or to FLEX U.S. dollar-
settled FCOs, and are therefore applicable to each of them: The
introductory language of Rule 1079; Rule 1079(a)(2) which specifies
permissible order types; Rule 1079(a)(6)(C) which provides that a
FLEX option cannot expire on the same day that series is established
at OCC; Rule 1079(a)(7) which provides that requests for quotes
(``RFQs'') are to be submitted pursuant to Rule 1079(b); Rule
1079(a)(10), which generally defines the term ``Requesting Member''
as a member of the Exchange qualified to trade FLEX options who
initiates an RFQ; Rule 1079(b), which establishes the procedure for
quoting and trading FLEX options (other than Rule 1079(b)(1)(3)
which is being revised to apply only to equity and index FLEX
options); and Rule 1079(c), which establishes who may trade FLEX
options. Rule 1079(b)(5)(B) is being amended to make that provision
applicable to FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCO just as it applies to
FLEX index and FLEX equity options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Automated Options Market (``AUTOM'') system is not available
for FLEX options.\21\ All FLEX options must be quoted and traded in the
trading crowd of the corresponding non-FLEX option. Because FLEX
options are not continuously quoted, nor are series pre-established,
the variable terms of FLEX options are established by the following
process. In order to initiate a transaction, a Requesting Member must
submit an RFQ to the appropriate trading crowd, announcing the terms of
the quote sought. The characteristics, including which terms and to
what degree certain option features may be individually tailored, are
outlined in Rule 1079(a). On receipt of an RFQ in proper form, the
assigned Specialist or the Requesting Member causes the terms of the
RFQ to be disseminated as an administrative text message through the
Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'').\22\ RFQs, responsive
quotes, booked orders and completed trades are promptly reported to
OPRA and disseminated as an administrative text message. Although
certain information is not required to be part of the RFQ (such as
account type, crossing intention, response time and size), this
information is reflected on the final order ticket. Further, the size
and crossing intention must be voiced as part of voicing the RFQ.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The term ``AUTOM'' is used interchangeably with the term
``Phlx XL,'' the Exchange's fully electronic trading platform for
options. The Exchange intends to file a separate proposed rule
change to update its rules to reflect that orders are now delivered
electronically over Phlx XL.
    \22\ Operationally, the Requesting Member provides this
information to data entry personnel, who enter it into Exchange
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following the RFQ announcement, a preset response time begins,
during which members may provide responsive quotes. As stated in
existing Rule 1079(b)(2), the response time, between 2 and 15 minutes,
is determined by the Options Committee.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The Options Committee has established a response time of
ten minutes for FLEX equity and index options. The response time for
FLEX currency options would be the same as for FLEX equity and index
options. Although the Options Committee is authorized to change the
response time within the permissible range, any such change would be
preceded by notice to the Exchange membership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to proposed Rule 1079(a)(8), as proposed to be amended, if
there is no open interest in the particular FLEX currency option series
when an RFQ is submitted, the minimum size of an RFQ for FLEX currency
options would be 50 contracts. If there is open interest, the minimum
size of the RFQ would be 25 contracts, or the remaining size on a
closing transaction, whichever is less. The minimum value size for a
responsive quote, other than a responsive quote of an assigned ROT or
assigned specialist, would be 50 contracts or the remaining size on a
closing transaction, whichever is less. Assigned ROTs and assigned
Specialists who respond to an RFQ would be required to respond to each
RFQ with at least 250 contracts or the size amount requested in the
RFQ, whichever is less.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ These minimum sizes are different from the minimum sizes
applicable to equity options and index options under existing Rule
1079(a)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the response time, qualified members could provide
responsive quotes to the RFQ, which may be entered, modified or
withdrawn during such response time. At the end of the response time,
the assigned Specialist, or if none, the Requesting Member would
determine the best bid and offer (``BBO''), based on price,
disseminating such market with reference to the corresponding RFQ.
However, where two or more bids/offers are at parity, under Rule
1079(b)(3) bids/offers submitted by an assigned Specialist, assigned
ROT or customer would have priority over the bids/offers submitted by
non-assigned ROTs and by controlled accounts as defined in Phlx Rule
1014(g)(i).
    Following the determination of the BBO, a BBO Improvement Interval
may be invoked if the Requesting Member rejects the BBO or the BBO is
for less than the entire size requested. The BBO Improvement Interval
is a two minute time period during which the BBO may be matched or
improved. As a result of the Improvement Interval, a new BBO is
established, which is disseminated with reference to the corresponding
RFQ. An assigned ROT and the assigned Specialist who responded with a
market during the response time may immediately join the new BBO.
    A trade in FLEX options cannot be executed until the end of the
response time or BBO Improvement Interval. Once the response time or
BBO Improvement Interval ends, the Requesting Member is given the first
opportunity to trade on the market by voicing a bid/offer in the
trading crowd. The Requesting Member has no obligation to accept any
bid or offer for a FLEX option. If the Requesting Member rejects the
BBO or the BBO size

exceeds the entire size requested, another member may accept such BBO
or the unfilled balance of the BBO. Acceptance of a bid/offer creates a
binding contract under Exchange rules.
    Once the BBO is established, the RFQ remains open that trading day,
unless a trade occurs, and a member may re-quote the market with
respect to the open RFQ without submitting an additional RFQ.\25\ If a
trade occurs, a new RFQ is required. Only an assigned ROT or assigned
Specialist who responded to the open RFQ during the response time or
BBO Improvement Interval may immediately join the re-quoted market,
thus matching for parity purposes. Neither the Requesting Member, nor
the re-quoting member, is given the first opportunity to trade on the
re-quoted market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ A re-quote does not require the submission of a new RFQ,
thereby avoiding the delay of a new response time where such time
may not be needed due to a recent quote. An option quoted earlier in
the trading day should be easier to price, such that a new response
time is not needed. Any time a market is re-quoted that day, the new
BBO and any resulting trade are disseminated with reference to the
original RFQ. However, once a trade occurs, a new RFQ is required.
The Options Committee may determine to establish an abbreviated
response time for a new RFQ, because the full ten minutes may not be
required for pricing determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, as with FLEX index options and FLEX equity options, there
will be a limit order book for FLEX currency options. As with FLEX
index and equity options, the Specialist in the listed non-FLEX U.S.
dollar-settled FCO, whether or not assigned in FLEX options, must
accept FLEX orders on the FLEX book after completion of the RFQ
process. As such, the Specialist would be required to monitor FLEX
markets for any booked orders. The Exchange would require all
Specialists in U.S. dollar-settled FCOs, whether acting as an assigned
FLEX currency option Specialist or not, to maintain the FLEX book for
consistency with the procedures for non-FLEX options and to prevent
investor confusion. Only customer day limit orders may be placed on the
FLEX currency option book. Booked orders expire at the end of each
trading day. The limit price and size must be written on the RFQ ticket
and disseminated as an administrative text message through OPRA.
    In order to trade with the book, an executing member must quote the
market and announce the trade. The Exchange believes that the FLEX
order book should serve as a useful tool for customers, as does the
current limit order book respecting non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled
currency options. With respect to booked orders for the same FLEX
currency option (that is, orders for a FLEX currency option with
identical terms), Rule 1014 will apply to determine priority and parity
among such orders.\26\ When trading with a booked order, a member must
re-quote the market and announce the trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Although the principles of price/time priority and
simultaneous bids/offers at parity of Rule 1014 would apply, the
enhanced specialist participation of sub-paragraphs (g)(ii) and
(iii) are not applicable to FLEX options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, on the Phlx options floor, a cross may take place in
accordance with Rule 1064. Crossing in FLEX currency options will be
governed Rule 1079(b)(6), which currently applies to crosses in the
existing FLEX equity and index options. The Requesting Member must
voice the crossing intention as part of voicing the RFQ. After the BBO
has been determined, the Requesting Member intending to cross must bid
(or offer) at or better than the BBO. If the Requesting Member's bid/
offer is at the BBO, the Requesting Member may execute 25% or a fair
split, whichever is greater, of the contra-side of the order that is
the subject of the RFQ. For instance, if there are two members on
parity at the BBO, the Requesting Member and an assigned ROT, the
Requesting Member is entitled to receive 50% of the contra-side
contracts, which is a fair split, not just the 25% guaranteed minimum
right of participation. The remainder of the contra-side is split in
accordance with the parity/priority provision applicable to determining
the BBO, such that assigned ROTs/Specialists may be afforded priority.
    If the Requesting Member's bid/offer improves the existing BBO, an
assigned ROT or assigned Specialist who responded with a market during
the response time or BBO Improvement Interval, may immediately join the
Requesting Member's improved bid or offer, thus matching for parity
purposes. However, the Requesting Member may execute 25% or a fair
split, whichever is greater, of the contra-side of the order that is
the subject of the RFQ. The remainder of the contra-side is split in
accordance with the parity/priority provision applicable to determining
the BBO, such that assigned ROTs/Specialists may be afforded priority.
However, broker-dealer crosses and solicited orders, as defined in Rule
1064, are not eligible for the split afforded by these crossing
provisions. Broker-dealer crosses and solicited orders must be
announced and bid/offered, under the FLEX crossing provision. No 25%
minimum guaranteed right of participation applies to solicited orders
or broker-dealer/broker-dealer crosses. In addition, crossing
transactions may not be subject to a minimum right of participation,
because a customer-to-customer cross would not be required to yield the
remainder (75%) to assigned ROTs/Specialists.
    Assigned ROTs and the assigned Specialist who respond with a market
during the response time may join a new bid/offer voiced during the
Improvement Interval and prior to a cross, provided they do so
immediately and subject to preserving the priority of customer orders.
Enabling assigned ROTS and the assigned Specialist to join any such new
bid/offer affords them parity at that new BBO.
    Proposed Rule 1079(d)(3) is unique to FLEX currency options and
provides that positions in FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCOs would be
aggregated with positions in non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCO contracts
as well as physical delivery FCO contracts for purposes of determining
compliance with the position limits established by Rule 1001. Like non-
FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCOs, (i) one British pound FLEX option
contract would count as one third of a contract, (ii) one Euro FLEX
option contract would count as one sixth of a contract, (iii) one
Australian dollar FLEX option contract would count as one fifth of a
contract, (iv) one Canadian dollar FLEX option contract would count as
one fifth of a contract, (v) one Swiss Franc FLEX option contract would
count as one sixth of a contract, and (vi) one U.S. dollar-settled
Japanese yen FLEX option contract would count as one sixth of a
contract.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The counting of both FLEX and non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled
FCO contracts as less than one full contract reflects the fact that
the size of the U.S. dollar-settled FCO contract is smaller than the
Exchange's physical delivery contract on the same currencies. The
position limit rules were originally adopted for the larger physical
delivery contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to existing Rule 1079(c)(3), no ROT or Specialist may
effect any FLEX option transaction unless a Letter of Guarantee has
been issued by a clearing member organization and filed with the
Exchange pursuant to Rule 703 specifically accepting financial
responsibility for all FLEX option transactions made by such person and
such letter has not been revoked. As a rule applicable to all FLEX
options, Rule 1079(c)(3) would apply to the new FLEX currency options
as well. The Exchange may waive the financial requirements of this Rule
in unusual circumstances. Assigned Specialists/ROTs in FLEX currency
options, as well as non-assigned ROTs/Specialists in FLEX currency
options, also would be required to comply with Exchange

financial requirements set forth in Rule 703, Financial Responsibility
and Reporting.
    Like other FLEX options, there would be no trading rotations in
FLEX currency options, either at the opening or at the close of
trading. The Exchange has determined that, initially, FLEX currency
options would have the same trading hours as non-FLEX U.S. dollar-
settled FCO. The Exchange would be able to establish other trading
times for FLEX currency options within the regular trading hours for
the non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCOs, including reflecting any new
trading hours for non-FLEX U.S. dollar-settled FCOs.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Under this proposal, expanding and narrowing FLEX currency
trading hours within the regular trading hours of the particular
product would not require a proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b) of the Act. The Exchange, however, would notify its members,
in advance, prior to making any such change. Any proposal to expand
trading hours outside of established regular trading hours would be
submitted as a proposed rule change to the Commission pursuant to
Section 19(b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend Floor Procedure Advice F-28,
Trading FLEX Index and Equity Options, to include FLEX Currency Options
in its title and to make parallel changes to those being proposed to
Rule 1079(b).
    Exchange rules and regulations involving sales practice will be
applicable to FLEX currency options. Finally, the Exchange represents
that it has adequate surveillance procedures for, and systems capacity
to support, the trading of FLEX currency options.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\29\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\30\ in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest, by providing investors the
ability to tailor foreign currency option contracts to suit their
particular investment requirements and increased flexibility in
satisfying particular investment objectives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \30\ 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 would
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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which Amex consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Phlx-2007-68 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 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2007-68. 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 Phlx. 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-Phlx-2007-68 and should be
submitted on or before January 22, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-25355 Filed 12-28-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 75 (Thursday, April 18, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 16257]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07773]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1116-000.
    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Filing- April
9 2019 Encana 1011022 to be effective 4/9/2019.
    Filed Date: 4/9/19.
    Accession Number: 20190409-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-843-001.
    Applicants: Southern LNG Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing Ship Loading Service Correction
Filing to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 4/9/19.
    Accession Number: 20190409-5003.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/16/19.

    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: April 10, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-07773 Filed 4-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P