[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 118 (Thursday, June 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35198-35200]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14315]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72390; File No. SR-CBOE-2014-050]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Trade Nullification and Price Adjustment

June 13, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on June 3, 2014, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange rules regarding trade
nullification and price adjustment. The text of the proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of
the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to add Rule 6.19, ``Trade Nullification
and Price Adjustment Procedure.'' \3\ As proposed, Rule 6.19 will allow
for transactions to be nullified if both parties to the transaction
agree to the nullification and allow the price of executions to be
adjusted if the price adjustment is agreed to by both parties to the
transaction and authorized by the Exchange.\4\ The Exchange is also
proposing to make other conforming administrative changes to streamline
the rules governing this subject within the Exchange's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange notes that this proposal is only intended to be
effective until the joint efforts by the exchanges to create uniform
trade nullification and adjustment rules are approved and in effect.
Once the uniform rule has been approved and is effective, the
Exchange will amend its rules appropriately.
    \4\ The Exchange notes that, as proposed, Rule 6.19 will only
apply to trades that were executed on the Exchange and, as such, any
orders that were either fully or partially routed to, or executed,
on another Exchange will not be subject to the proposed Rule 6.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    Currently, pursuant to Exchange Rules 6.13(d) and 6.25(f), the
Exchange allows for parties to agree to nullify an execution. Rule
6.13(d) also states that once both parties agree to the trade
nullification, one party must ``contact the Help Desk which will
confirm the agreement and disseminate cancellation information in
prescribed OPRA format.'' In addition, the Exchange currently allows
for a mutual price adjustment for trades that meet the obvious error
requirements pursuant to Exchange Rules 6.25(a)(1)(i) and
6.25(a)(1)(ii) if those mutual agreements are done within specific
timeframes.\5\ The Exchange is now proposing to relocate the
aforementioned trade nullification language and add a provision to
allow parties to mutually adjust prices of executions outside of those
done in obvious error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Exchange Rule 6.25(a)(1)(i) which allows executions that
are erroneous to be adjusted to an agreed upon price within ten (10)
minutes where no party to the transaction is a non-broker-dealer
customer. See also 6.25(a)(1)(ii) which allows parties to adjust an
erroneous transaction to a mutually agreed upon price within thirty
(30) minutes where at least one party is a non-broker-dealer
customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed New Rule 6.19
    The Exchange is proposing to add Rule 6.19, ``Trade Nullification
and Price Adjustment Procedure,'' which would: (a) Allow for any trades
on the Exchange to be nullified if both parties to the trade agree to
such nullification, and (b) allow for prices of executions to be
adjusted if the price adjustment is agreed upon by both parties of the
trade and authorized by the Exchange.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See note 4 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, the Exchange currently allows for trades to be
nullified based upon mutual agreement.\7\ With the proposed addition of
Rule 6.19, the Exchange is only moving the location of this provision
to eliminate confusion. The Exchange believes that having the provision
as a standalone rule will make it easier for Trading Permit Holders
(``TPHs'') to locate. In addition, the Exchange believes this
administrative change will streamline the provisions surrounding this
notion to put in one place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Exchange Rules 6.13(d) and 6.25(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing, however, to add a provision to
allow TPHs to mutually agree to adjust a price of an execution. The
Exchange believes this provision is necessary given the benefits of
adjusting a trade price rather than nullifying the trade completely.
Because options trades are used to hedge transactions in other markets,
including securities and futures, many TPHs, and their customers, would
rather adjust prices of executions rather than nullify the transactions
and, thus, lose

a hedge altogether. As such, the Exchange believes it is in the best
interest of investors to allow for price adjustments as well as
nullifications. In addition, the Exchange believes it is in the nature
of a fair and orderly market to allow for price adjustments rather than
only cancellations because an adjustment will result in the least
amount of disruption to the overall market. The Exchange also notes
that current Exchange rules allow for prices of trades to be adjusted
at the consent of both parties if such transactions are within the
current obvious error provisions. The Exchange is now proposing to
merely allow this practice for any trade.
    As proposed, Rule 6.19 expressly states that trades may be subject
to nullification or price adjustment only if such trades are authorized
by the Exchange. The Exchange notes that this process is very similar
to the process TPHs follow today for trade nullification based upon
mutual consent. As described in more detail above, current Rule 6.13(d)
allows two parties to agree to a trade nullification and ``contact the
Help Desk which will confirm the agreement and disseminate cancellation
information in prescribed OPRA format.'' The Exchange is only slightly
changing this procedure by expressly requiring Exchange authorization
prior to the effectuation of such nullification or price adjustment. As
part of the authorization process, in the case of a mutual
nullification or mutual price adjustment, the Exchange will only
authorize if the Exchange received verification from both parties to
the trade that a mutual agreement has been made. In addition, prior to
an authorization for a mutual price adjustment, the Exchange will
ensure the agreed upon price would have been permissible and in
compliance with all Exchange and Securities and Exchange Commission
Rules, as amended, at the time the original transaction was
executed.\8\ Finally, the proposed rule will state that the format and
information required by the Exchange for this submission will be
released by the Exchange via Regulatory Circular. As such, prior to
Rule 6.19 becoming operative, the Exchange will provide TPHs with
specific requirements via an Exchange Regulatory Circular. The circular
will, among other things, state specific timeframes required for
requests and the format in which the requests will be accepted by the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For example, the Exchange would ensure that the mutually
agreed upon price would ensure that that mutually agreed upon price
would not have traded through resting interest at the time of the
initial execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Administrative Changes
    Finally, the Exchange is proposing to make administrative
conforming changes to ensure Exchange rules on the subject are
consistent. More specifically, the Exchange is proposing to delete the
provisions in current Rules 6.13(d) and 6.25(f). The Exchange believes
that deleting current Exchange Rule 6.13(d) will avoid any confusion
with the proposed Rule 6.19. Because the proposed Rule 6.19 will
address trade nullification and adjustments at all times, the Exchange
does not believe it is still necessary to include a reference to trade
nullification within the Exchange's rule related to obvious and
catastrophic errors or other places in the Exchange's rules. Thus, the
Exchange believes the proposed administrative changes are necessary to
eliminate confusion given the proposed Rule 6.19.
Conclusion
    To conclude, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes are in
furtherance of the Act because the proposed Rule 6.19 will allow TPHs
to agree to nullify transaction or adjusts prices of transactions to
maintain a fair and orderly market. As stated above, the Exchange
intends to release a Regulatory Circular to announce the implementation
of the Rule and other specifics surrounding the procedures of the
implementation. In addition, prior to implementation, the Exchange will
ensure it has proper policies and procedures in place to correctly
administer the Rule.
 2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\9\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \10\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \11\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes
are consistent with the act as they are designed to promote just and
equitable principles and protect investors and the public interest. In
particular, the Exchange believes the proposed change to move the
provision authorizing parties to mutually agree to nullify a trade
protects investors by eliminating confusion and making the provision
more clear. Because options trades are used to hedge transactions in
other markets, including securities and futures, many market
participants would rather adjust prices of executions rather than
nullify the transactions and, thus, lose a hedge altogether. As such,
the Exchange believes it is in the best interest of investors to allow
for price adjustments as well as nullifications. In addition, the
Exchange believes it is in the nature of a fair and orderly market to
allow for price adjustments rather than only cancellations because an
adjustment will result in the least amount of disruption to the overall
market. Finally, the Exchange believes that the other administrative
changes are just and equitable as they are merely trying to create more
transparency in the Exchange's rules. Finally, the Exchange does not
believe that the proposed changes are unfairly discriminatory because
they will be applied to all Trading Permit Holders equally.

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In contrary, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will foster competition as it
will allow for less overall disruption to the market and encourage
participation on the Exchange.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve or disapprove 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2014-050 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2014-050. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2014-050 and should be
submitted on or before July 10, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-14315 Filed 6-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 173)]
[Notices]
[Page 46435-46436]
[DOCID:fr09se09-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0664]

Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee; Notice of
Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory
Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on October 9, 2009, from
8:30 a.m. to approximately 4:30 p.m.
    Location: Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill Rd., Bethesda, MD.
    Contact Person: Gail Dapolito or Danielle Cubbage, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research (HFM-71), Food and Drug
Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20853,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-
0572 in the Washington, DC area), code<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please call the
Information Line for up-to-date information on this meeting. A notice
in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a
previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be
published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you
should always check the agency's Web site and call the appropriate
advisory committee hot line/phone line to learn about possible
modifications before coming to the meeting.
    Agenda: On October 9, 2009, in open session, the Committee will
discuss ISOLAGEN THERAPY, BLA 125348, Isolagen Technologies, Inc., for
moderate to severe nasolabial fold wrinkles. Nasolabial fold wrinkles
are the two skin folds that run from each side of the nose to the
corners of the mouth.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee

meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA's Web site
after the meeting. Background material is available at http://
www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the
appropriate advisory committee link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
October 2, 2009. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 11:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. Those desiring to make
formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a
brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they
wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and
an indication of the approximate time requested to make their
presentation on or before October 1, 2009. Time allotted for each
presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to
speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the
scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to
determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session.
The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their
request to speak by October 2, 2009.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Gail Dapolito at
least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 2, 2009.
David Horowitz,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-21557 Filed 9-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register: June 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 112)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 33668-33669]
[DOCID:fr12jn06-29]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0004; FRL-8176-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Indiana State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone. The state is adding four chemical
compounds to its list of compounds that are now exempt from being
considered a volatile organic compound (VOC). Indiana also is removing
a compound from the list of hazardous air pollutants (HAP). The
revisions Indiana made parallel the changes EPA made to our VOC
definitions and HAP list on November 29, 2004 and that became effective
on December 29, 2004.
    Four VOCs were found by EPA to make a negligible contribution to

tropospheric ozone formation. The compounds are: 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-
heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane, 3-ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-
dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl)hexane, 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-
heptafluoropropane, and methyl formate. Companies producing or using
the four compounds will no longer need to follow the VOC rules for
these compounds.
    The requirements for t-butyl acetate are also modified. It is not
considered a VOC for emission limits and content requirements. T-butyl
acetate will still be considered a VOC for the recordkeeping, emissions
reporting, and inventory requirements.
    Indiana is removing ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (EGBE) (2-
Butoxyethanol) from its HAP list, too. EGBE will no longer be
considered a hazardous air pollutant.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 12, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2006-0004, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions

for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section,
Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
     Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m.to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal
holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submission as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submission and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For
additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in
the Rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: May 16, 2006.
Norman Niedergang,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 06-5251 Filed 6-9-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 140 (Thursday, July 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42792-42795]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17851]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62505; File No. SR-BX-2010-047]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Establish a Short Term Option Program

July 15, 2010.
    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 July 14, 2010, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective
upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Rules of the Boston Options
Exchange Group, LLC (``BOX'') to permit the listing and trading of
options series that expire one week after being opened for trading
(``Short Term Option Program'' or ``STO Program''). The text of the
proposed rule change is available from the Exchange's Web site at
http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXBX/Filings/, the
principal office of the Exchange, on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.sec.gov, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 this proposal is to amend the BOX Rules to establish
a Short Term Option Program on the Exchange by proposing to add new
Supplementary Material .07 to Chapter IV, Section 6 (Series of Options
Open for Trading) and Supplementary Material .02 to Chapter XIV,
Section 10 (Terms of Index Options Contracts) in order to list option
series that expire one (1) week after being opened for trading. The
Exchange also proposes to add the definition of Short Term Option
Series to Chapter 1, Section 1(a) and Chapter XIV, Section 2.\5\ In
addition, the Exchange proposes to make non-substantive changes to
conform the language of Chapter IV, Section 6 and to renumber and
reletter definitions in Chapter 1, Section 1(a) and Chapter XIV,
Section 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Short Term Option Series is defined as: a series in an
option class that is approved for listing and trading on BOX in
which the series is opened for trading on any Thursday or Friday
that is a business day and that expires on the Friday of the next
business week. If a Thursday or Friday is not a business day, the
series may be opened (or shall expire) on the first business day
immediately prior to that Thursday or Friday, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission approved the Short Term Option Program on behalf of
the Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'') on a pilot basis in 2005
and for permanent establishment in 2009.\6\ Thereafter, CBOE amended
Rules 5.5 and 24.9 to permit opening Short Term Option Series not just
on Friday but also on Thursday.\7\ Recently, the Commission approved
\8\ a permanent Short Term Option Program on behalf of the NASDAQ OMX
PHLX (``PHLX''); NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM''); NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``NYSE Arca''); and NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex'').\9\ The Exchange's
proposal is based directly on the Short Term Option Program in CBOE
Rules 5.5 and 24.9; PHLX Rules 1012 and Rule 1101A; NOM Rules Chapter
IV, Section 6 and Chapter XIV, Section 11; NYSE Arca Rules 5.19 and
6.4; NYSE Amex Rules 903C and 903 and ISE Rules 504 and 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ CBOE refers to its short term option program as the
``Weeklys Program.'' See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52011
(July 12, 2005), 70 FR 41451 (July 19, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2004-63)
(Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change and Notice of Filing and
Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment No. 2 Thereto To
List and Trade Short Term Option Series); 59824 (April 27, 2009), 74
FR 20518 (May 4, 2009) (SR-CBOE-2009-018) (Order Approving Proposed
Rule Change To Permanently Establish the Short Term Option Series
Pilot Program).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62170 (May 25,
2010), 75 FR 30889 (June 2, 2010) (SR-CBOE-2010-048) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Permit
CBOE To Open Short Term Option Series on Thursdays).
    \8\ As noted above, all the text of Items I and II of this
notice was prepared by the Exchange. The Commission notes, however,
that it did not approve the proposed rule changes cited by the
Exchange in this sentence. These proposals were filed under Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act for immediate effectiveness and thus were not
approved by the Commission.
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 62296 (June 15,
2010), 75 FR 35115 (June 21, 2010) (SR-PHLX-2010-084) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change by
NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. To Establish a Short Term Option Program);
62297 (June 15, 2010), 75 FR 35111 (June 21, 2010) (SR-NOM-2010-073)
(Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change by The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC To Establish a Short Term
Option Program); 62296 (June 15, 2010), 75 FR 35111 (June 21, 2010)
(SR-Arca-2010-059) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change by NYSE Arca, Inc. to make permanent the One
Week Option Series Pilot Program); 62296 (June 15, 2010), 75 FR
35111 (June 21, 2010) (SR-Amex-2010-062) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NYSE Amex, LLC to
make permanent the One Week Option Series Pilot Program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to establish a Short Term
Option Program for non-index options (e.g., equity options and ETF
options) in new Supplementary Material .07 to Chapter IV, Section 6;
and for index options in new Supplementary Material .02 to Chapter XIV,
Section 10. The Short Term Option Program will allow BOX to list and
trade Short Term Option Series. Thus, after an option class has been
approved for listing and trading on BOX, BOX may open for trading on
any Thursday or Friday that is a business day (``Short Term Option
Opening Date'') series of options on that class that expire on the
Friday of the following business week that is a business day (``Short
Term Option Expiration Date''). If the Exchange is not open for
business on the respective Thursday or Friday, the Short Term Option
Opening Date will be the first business day immediately prior to that
respective Thursday or Friday. Similarly, if the Exchange is not open
for business on the Friday of the following business week, the Short
Term Option Expiration Date will be the first business day immediately
prior to that Friday.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See proposed Supplementary Material .07 to Chapter IV,
Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02 to Chapter XIV, Section 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the STO Program, BOX may select up to five (5) approved
option classes on which Short Term Option Series could be opened. BOX
also may list Short Term Option Series on any option classes that are
selected by other securities exchanges that employ a similar program
under their respective rules.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See proposed Supplementary Material .07(a) to Chapter IV,
Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02(a) to Chapter XIV, Section
10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For each class selected for the STO Program, BOX may open up to
twenty Short Term Option Series for each expiration date in that class,
with approximately the same number of strike prices above and below the
value of the underlying security or calculated index value at about the
time that the

Short Term Option Series is opened. The interval between strike prices
on Short Term Option Series shall be the same as the strike prices for
series in that same option class that expire in accordance with the
normal monthly expiration cycle.\12\ Any strike prices listed by BOX
shall be within thirty percent (30%) above or below the current value
of the underlying index.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See proposed Supplementary Material .07(e) to Chapter IV,
Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02(e) to Chapter XIV, Section
10.
    \13\ See proposed Supplementary Material .07(c) to Chapter IV,
Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02(c) to Chapter XIV, Section
10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If BOX opens less than twenty Short Term Option Series for a given
expiration date, additional series may be opened for trading on BOX
when deemed necessary to maintain an orderly market, to meet customer
demand, or when the current value of the underlying security or index
moves substantially from the previously listed exercise prices. The
total number of series for a given expiration date, however, will not
exceed twenty series. Any additional strike prices listed by the
Exchange shall be within 30% above or below the current price of the
underlying security. BOX may also open additional strike prices of
Short Term Option Series that are more than 30% above or below the
current price of the underlying security provided that demonstrated
customer interest exists for such series, as expressed by
institutional, corporate or individual customers or their brokers.
Market Makers trading for their own account shall not be considered
when determining customer interest under this provision. Moreover, the
opening of the new Short Term Option Series shall not affect the series
of options of the same class previously opened.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See proposed Supplementary Material .07(d) to Chapter IV,
Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02(d) to Chapter XIV, Section
10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Short Term Option Program provides that no Short Term Option
Series may expire in the same week in which monthly option series on
the same class expire or, in the case of Quarterly Options Series, on
an expiration that coincides with an expiration of Quarterly Options
Series on the same class.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See proposed Supplementary Material .07(b) to Chapter IV,
Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02(b) to Chapter XIV, Section
10. Moreover, the Exchange expects that Short Term Options Series
will settle (e.g., in terms of A.M. or P.M.) in the same manner as
do the monthly expiration series in the same option class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, BOX
has analyzed its capacity and has represented to the Exchange that it
and the Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary
systems capacity to handle the potential additional traffic associated
with the listing and trading of options pursuant to the Short Term
Option Program.
    Finally, the Exchange is proposing to make non-substantive changes
to conform the language of Chapter IV, Section 6 (Series of Options
Open for Trading). Specifically, the Exchange proposes to add language
to clarify that Short Term Options Series procedures are similar to
Quarterly Options Series procedures and will be treated differently
than standard Options Series.
    The Exchange believes that the Short Term Option Program will
provide investors with a flexible and valuable tool to manage risk
exposure, minimize capital outlays, and be more responsive to the
timing of events affecting the securities that underlie options
contracts. The Exchange also believes that providing the flexibility to
list all Short Term Option series (equity and index) on any Thursday or
Friday will help implement the program more effectively and avoid
investor confusion.
    The Commission has requested, and BOX has agreed for the purposes
of this filing, to submit one (1) report to the Commission providing an
analysis of the BOX Short Term Option Program (the ``Report'').\16\ The
Report will cover the period from the date of effectiveness of the STO
Program through the first quarter of 2011, and will describe the
experience of BOX with the STO Program in respect of the options
classes included by BOX in such program. The Report will be submitted
by May 1, 2011, under separate cover and will seek confidential
treatment under the Freedom of Information Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Report would include the following: (1) Data and
written analysis on the open interest and trading volume in the
classes for which Short Term Option Series were opened; (2) an
assessment of the appropriateness of the option classes selected for
the STO Program; (3) an assessment of the impact of the STO Program
on the capacity of BOX, OPRA, and market data vendors (to the extent
data from market data vendors is available); (4) any capacity
problems or other problems that arose during the operation of the
STO Program and how BOX addressed such problems; (5) any complaints
that the BOX or the Exchange received during the operation of the
STO Program and how they were addressed; and (6) any additional
information that would assist in assessing the operation of the STO
Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\17\ in general, and Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\18\ in particular, in that it is designed to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
In particular, establishing a Short Term Option Program will provide
investors with a flexible and valuable tool to manage risk exposure,
minimize capital outlays, and be more responsive to the timing of
events affecting the securities that underlie options contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \19\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\20\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \21\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Commission has waived the five-day pre-filing requirement in this
case.

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

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay. The Commission believes that waiver of the operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest because the proposal is substantially similar to that of
another exchange that was approved by the Commission.\23\ Therefore,
the Commission designates the proposal operative upon filing.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59824 (April 27,
2009), 74 FR 20518 (May 4, 2009) (SR-CBOE-2009-018).
    \24\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2010-047 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2010-047. 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2010-047 and should be
submitted on or before August 12, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-17851 Filed 7-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 96 (Monday, May 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28800-28801]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11412]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2014-0011-N-11]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the renewal Information Collection Request (ICR)
abstracted below is being forwarded to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR describes the nature of
the information collection and its expected burden. The Federal
Register notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the
following collection of information was published on March 4, 2014 (79
FR 12263).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 18, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Planning
and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone:
(202) 493-6292), or Ms. Kimberly Toone, Office of Information
Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Ave. SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: (202) 493-
6132). (These telephone numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13, sec. 2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised at
44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part
1320, require Federal agencies to issue two notices seeking public
comment on information collection activities before OMB may approve
paperwork packages. 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5,

1320.8(d)(1), 1320.12. On March 4, 2013, FRA published a 60-day notice
in the Federal Register soliciting comment on ICR that the agency is
seeking OMB approval. See 79 FR 12263. FRA received no comments in
response to this notice.
    Before OMB decides whether to approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b); 5 CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires OMB to approve or
disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30 day
notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507 (b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also
60 FR 44978, 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the 30 day notice
informs the regulated community to file relevant comments and affords
the agency adequate time to digest public comments before it renders a
decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to OMB within 30 days of publication
to best ensure having their full effect. 5 CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60
FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995.
    The summary below describes the nature of the information
collection request (ICR) and the expected burden. The revised request
is being submitted for clearance by OMB as required by the PRA.
    Title: Railroad Safety Appliance Standards (Miscellaneous
Revisions).
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0594.
    Abstract: FRA amended the regulations related to safety appliance
arrangements on railroad equipment on April 28, 2011. See 76 FR 23714.
The amendments are intended to promote the safe placement and
securement of safety appliances on modern rail equipment by
establishing a process for the review and approval of existing industry
standards. This process permits railroad industry representatives to
submit requests for the approval of existing industry standards
relating to the safety appliance arrangements on newly constructed
railroad cars, locomotives, tenders, or other rail vehicles in lieu of
the specific provisions currently contained in part 231. It is
anticipated that this special approval process enhances railroad safety
by allowing FRA to consider technological advancements and ergonomic
design standards for new car construction and ensuring that modern rail
equipment complies with the applicable statutory and safety-critical
regulatory requirements related to safety appliances while also
providing the flexibility to efficiently address safety appliance
requirements on new designs in the future for railroad cars,
locomotives, tenders, or other rail vehicles. The information collected
under this regulation is used by FRA to better serve the goal of
adapting to changes in modern rail car design while also facilitating
statutory and regulatory compliance.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved information
collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses (Railroads).
    Form(s): N/A.
    Annual Estimated Burden: 52,518 hours.
    Addressee: Send comments regarding this information collections to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 Seventeenth Street NW., Washington, DC, 20503,
Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Comments may also be sent via email to OMB
at the following address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Comments are invited on the following: Whether the proposed
collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of
the burden of the proposed information collections; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 13, 2014.
Rebecca Pennington,
Chief Financial Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-11412 Filed 5-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 	OMB Control Number: 2060-0498

	Expiration Date: TBD

   	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

            stratospheric ozone protection program	class ii controlled substance

request for additional class ii

consumption allowances

      	1.2  Number of Transactions Reported	  FORMTEXT

1.3  Number of Pages Submitted	  FORMTEXT        	1.4    FORMCHECKBOX  Original Submittal    FORMCHECKBOX   Re-submittal

NOTE: ATTACH ALL BILLS OF LADING AND INVOICES SHOWING NET QUANTITY SHIPPED AND DOCUMENTING THE SALE

1.5 Exporting Company

	Company Name   FORMTEXT

Street Address    FORMTEXT

City    FORMTEXT        	State    FORMTEXT

           	Zip Code     FORMTEXT

Exporter EIN from Customs Form 7525    FORMTEXT

1.6 Company Contact Identification

Reporting Company Contact Person

  FORMTEXT

	Phone Number

  FORMTEXT        	Fax Number

  FORMTEXT

E-mail Address    FORMTEXT

1.7 Signature of Reporting Company Representative

I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this and all attached documents, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate, and complete.  I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.

Name   FORMTEXT

Title    FORMTEXT

Signature   FORMTEXT

Date    FORMTEXT

SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO:	For U.S. Postal Service:

Tracking System Program Manager

Stratospheric Protection Division

U.S. EPA (6205J)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC  20460	For Private Courier:

Tracking System Program Manager

Stratospheric Protection Division

U.S. EPA (6205J)

1310 L Street, NW, 10th Floor

Washington, DC  20005

Information in reports submitted in compliance with the final rule may be claimed as confidential.  A company may assert a claim of confidentiality for information submitted by clearly marking that information as confidential.  Such information shall be treated in accordance with EPA’s procedures for information claimed as confidential at 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B, and will only be disclosed by the means set forth in the subpart.  If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the report when it is received by EPA, it may be made public without further notice to the company (40 CFR 2.203).

The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 4.5 hours per response.  Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460.  Include the OMB control number in any correspondence.  Do not send the completed form to this address.

EPA Form # 5900-201, Revised 9/12    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 	OMB Control Number: 2060-0498

	Expiration Date: TBD

        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

             stratospheric ozone protection program	class ii controlled substance

request for additional class ii

consumption allowances

(Sec 82.20)

SECTION 2    TRANSACTION RECORDS

2.2 Transaction Summaries

TRANSACTION #	  FORMTEXT

Recipient Company Name    FORMTEXT

	Street Address    FORMTEXT

City   FORMTEXT        	Country   FORMTEXT         Postal Code   FORMTEXT

Company Contact Person   FORMTEXT        	Phone Number   FORMTEXT        	Fax Number   FORMTEXT

Quantity of Commodity Exported (kg)   FORMTEXT

HCFC Chemical Exported   FORMTEXT        	Quantity of HCFC Exported (kg)   FORMTEXT

Date of Export (mm/dd/yy)   FORMTEXT        	Port of Export from the U.S.   FORMTEXT

Select One: 	(a) Company that produced the HCFC (expending production and consumption allowances):    FORMTEXT        	Date Purchased

  FORMTEXT

	(b) Company that imported HCFC (expending consumption allowances), AND country imported from:

    FORMTEXT

	TRANSACTION #	  FORMTEXT

Recipient Company Name    FORMTEXT

	Street Address    FORMTEXT

摧㨖ÿ

ÿ

ô

ô

8

<

>

Z

\

^

x

z

|

摧㺭Ù

D

F

z

È

B

D

F

N

P

R

T

h

j

l

v

x

z

„

ˆ

Š

ž

jJ

ž

¢

¬

®

Æ

È

Ø

Þ

à

ô

ö

ø

j¾

㐀ۖĀ̊xဃ替Ĵ

摧噭t

摧曖Ù

gdà

摧曖Ù

摧曖Ù

摧曖Ù

摧曖Ù

摧曖Ù

j

摧曖Ù

摧氒ö

摧曖Ù

؀  FORMTEXT        	Quantity of HCFC Exported (kg)   FORMTEXT

Date of Export (mm/dd/yy)   FORMTEXT        	Port of Export from the U.S.   FORMTEXT

Select One:	(a) Company that produced the HCFC (expending production and consumption allowances):    FORMTEXT        	Date Purchased    FORMTEXT

	(b) Company that imported HCFC (expending consumption allowances), AND country imported from:

    FORMTEXT

	TRANSACTION #	  FORMTEXT

Recipient Company Name    FORMTEXT

	Street Address    FORMTEXT

City   FORMTEXT        	Country   FORMTEXT         Postal Code   FORMTEXT

Company Contact Person   FORMTEXT        	Phone Number   FORMTEXT        	Fax Number   FORMTEXT

Quantity of Commodity Exported (kg)   FORMTEXT

HCFC Chemical Exported   FORMTEXT        	Quantity of HCFC Exported (kg)   FORMTEXT

Date of Export (mm/dd/yy)   FORMTEXT        	Port of Export from the U.S.   FORMTEXT

Select One:	(a) Company that produced the HCFC (expending production and consumption allowances):    FORMTEXT        	Date Purchased    FORMTEXT

	(b) Company that imported HCFC (expending consumption allowances), AND country imported from:

    FORMTEXT

	EPA Form # 5900-201, Revised 9/12

OMB Control Number: 2060-0498

		Expiration Date: TBD  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

       stratospheric ozone protection program	class ii controlled substance

request for additional class ii

consumption allowances

(Sec 82.20)

SECTION 3    COMPANY EXPORT TOTALS

3.1 Company Name	  FORMTEXT

3.2 Company Request Summary

A	B

Chemical Name

(Commodity Code)	Total Consumption Allowances Requested (kg)

HCFC-22

(2903.71.0000)	  FORMTEXT

HCFC-142b

(2903.74.0000)	  FORMTEXT

HCFC-123

(2903.72.0020)	  FORMTEXT

HCFC-124

(2903.79.9030)	  FORMTEXT

HCFC-225ca

(2903.75.0000)	  FORMTEXT

HCFC-225cb

(2903.75.0000)	  FORMTEXT

Please note: This form must be accompanied by a written statement from the producer that the class II controlled substances were produced with expended allowances or a written statement from the importer that the class II controlled substances were imported with expended allowances.

EPA Form # 5900-201, Revised 9/12


1As discussed in today's preamble, the Agency received one comment ( from a PE) disagreeing that an extension beyond the 60 days already promulgated was needed. In addition, the Agency did receive one comment that, while agreeing that an extension was appropriate, expressly disagreed with the Agency's reasons for providing it. In particular, this commenter, also a PE, felt that there was no physical shortage of PEs. Instead, in his view, the cause of any difficulty in procuring a PE was due to the unwillingness of PEs to certify in the manner required by the amendments. In addition, this commenter argued that sites were not too remote to visit within the time frames provided, and that the problem with PE rule comprehension was not a lack of training, but a lack of clear definitions in the rule itself. This commenter felt that an extension was warranted to allow the Agency to make substantive changes to the rule. This PE's experience with regard to shortages and problems with visiting difficult locations was contradicted by PEs and facilities in other parts of the country ( Alaska, for example); this commenter's other contentions are discussed later in this document. Response to Comments As discussed in the preamble to today's rule, the Agency very carefully considered the comments submitted on the proposed extension. After reviewing the comments, the Agency has decided to extend the compliance deadlines in 40 CFR § § 112.3( a) and ( b) for 18 months, which is six months longer than the 12 months the Agency proposed. As explained more fully in today's preamble, the Agency came to this decision based, in part, on comments which confirmed that the concerns identified at the time of proposal were valid and suggested that additional time to address them was warranted. 1 In particular, there was great support in the comments for the Agency's tentative conclusions at the time of proposal that there is a shortage of PEs in some areas, that compliance is complicated in many cases by the need to visit sometimes remote facilities, and that PEs need additional time to obtain the training necessary to certify Plans under the new amendments. Many also agreed with EPA that an extension of the compliance deadlines in the rule will prevent a flood of individual extension requests to the Regions.

In addition, commenters identified a multitude of other reasons why they thought that an extension was appropriate, citing a variety of time frames for addressing such issues. For example, many argued that additional time was needed to plan their budgets for capital expenditures necessary to comply with the amendments and to address facilities affected by winter weather. Some commenters, many of them small businesses, expressed concern over the need to arrange for outside environmental consultants to ensure compliance. According to these commenters, this process not only takes more time than using in house personnel, but is likely to be slowed by the great demand created by the SPCC amendments. Small businesses discussed the 2With respect to guidance, the Agency notes that in an effort separate from this rulemaking, EPA has been working to assess the need for implementation guidance in various areas related to the amendments. EPA intends to continue this process during the 18 month extension, as appropriate.

3Several members of the regulated industry filed legal challenges to the SPCC amendments. See, American Petroleum Institute v. USEPA, No. 1,202CV02247 ( D. D. C filed 11/ 14/ 02), Petroleum Marketers Ass'n v. USEPA, No. 1: 02CV02249 ( D. D. C filed 11/ 14/ 02), and Marathon Oil Co. v. USEPA, No. 1: 02CV02254 ( D. D. C filed 11/ 14/ 02).

4Although many commenters did, with respect to their individual situations, submit time frames for when funds for expenditures associated with the rule would be available. fear that, because they will likely be very low in priority for already overtaxed PEs ( and other consultants), they will be unable to meet the deadlines as originally promulgated. Others stated that the new requirement for facility diagrams will require much more work than initially anticipated since they have found that such diagrams often do not already exist.

As for other examples, there were extensive comments arguing that until a great number of diverse issues were clarified in guidance, the rule would be too difficult to implement and the compliance deadlines should therefore be extended for a longer period. 2 Further, several parties argued that the deadlines should be postponed until resolution of the litigation challenging portions of the SPCC amendments. 3 Other examples include concerns about perceived PE reluctance, for a variety of reasons, to engage in the new certification process requirements, state law impediments to the practice of non local PEs, the economic burden of compliance with " unexpected" changes to the rules, and, for several companies, the sheer number of facilities that will need to be addressed under the amendments. Still others cautioned the Agency more generally that additional time was needed to avoid " the negative consequences of hasty implementation of highly technical and site specific measures."

As discussed in the preamble to today's rule, many commenters stated that greater than an 18 month extension was needed, but no commenter provided a technical basis in support of the time frame it was advancing. 4 Given the record before the Agency at this time on the issues raised by the commenters, which is largely comprised of anecdotal, general, speculative or vague assertions, the Agency cannot conclude that an 18 month extension is generally inadequate for the regulated community to come into compliance with the SPCC amendments. Where a facility believes that additional time is needed, that facility may seek an extension pursuant to 40 CFR § 112.3( f), where appropriate. Should there be further factual development on these issues in the future, however, the Agency will, of course, consider requests that it take appropriate action.

In addition, numerous commenters raised substantive issues regarding the rule that were not associated with the issue of whether to extend the compliance deadlines in the July 2002 rule. In particular, many commenters called for modifications, interpretations or clarifications of the amended SPCC rule. EPA did not consider these comments because they are outside the scope of today's rulemaking.

Miscellaneous issues * In addition to the arguments discussed in today's preamble, the one commenter who believed that additional time was unnecessary argued that a PE shortage was unlikely because " the revised rule . . . extends the mandatory PE certification from 3 years to 5 years." The Agency does not understand this point; although it appears unrelated to today's rulemaking, the Agency believes the commenter may have misinterpreted the 5 year technical review requirement in § 112.5( b) to require PE certification every five years. See 67 FR 47092 ( stating, in discussing this regulatory provision, that "[ d] ocumentation of completion of review is a function of the owner or operator, whereas certification of any resulting technical amendment is a function of the PE.")

* One commenter requested that " EPA confirm in the final rule that the extension dates also apply to preparing, amending, and implementing FRPs." In response, the Agency notes that the extension only applies to the regulations containing the compliance dates at issue in today's rule   40 CFR § § 112.3( a) and ( b).

* At least one commenter suggested that the Agency finalize the ability to process any future extensions without public notice and comment. The Agency did not see a need for such a provision.

* One commenter disagreed with the Agency's view in certain sections of the " Statutory and Executive Order Reviews" section of the proposed preamble that today's action will not have a significant economic impact because the costs of the SPCC amendments ( which the commenter believed were extensive) " would still occur." The Agency rejected this comment because today's extension, by postponing compliance, reduces burdens on the regulated community.