[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 218 (Friday, November 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69493-69494]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28540]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63257; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-155]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Fees Assessed for Use of the Testing Facility

November 5, 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 October 29, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``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 prepared by PHLX. 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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    PHLX proposes to amend the fees assessed for use of the Testing
Facility. PHLX will implement the proposed rule change on November 1,
2010.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site, at 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, 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
    PHLX proposes to amend the fees assessed for use of the Testing
Facility. The Testing Facility provides subscribers with a virtual PHLX
System test environment that closely approximates the production
environment, on which they may test their automated systems that
integrate with PHLX. Subscribers may test upcoming PHLX releases and
product enhancements, as well as test software prior to implementation.
Currently, PHLX assesses a fee of $285 per hour for active connection
testing using current PHLX access protocols during the normal operating
hours, and $333 per hour for such testing after hours.
    PHLX does not currently assess a fee for idle test ports.
Subscribers often have test ports assigned to them through which no
testing is conducted for extended periods, yet PHLX must maintain and
constantly monitor these idle testing ports for purposes of billing
under the current rule. Such monitoring represents a cost to PHLX with
no off-setting fee. Further, subscribers have no incentive to notify
PHLX when they have completed testing and no longer require a test
port. Accordingly, PHLX is proposing to eliminate the current hourly
fee structure and assess a flat fee of $300 per test port, per month.
This

fee will cover the cost of maintaining these test ports and provide an
incentive to firms to cancel test ports when they have completed
testing.
    PHLX notes that it will continue to allow new subscribers and
existing subscribers to test new services and modifications initiated
by PHLX, and to test new services not previously accessed for the first
30 days at no cost pursuant to paragraph (c) of the Testing Facility
rule. This 30-day fee waiver includes testing for subscribers that are
accessing PHLX through a service bureau for the first time. Subscribers
must cancel the test port prior to the expiration of the 30-day free
period in order to avoid future charges for test ports under the new
rule. In addition, current subscribers will be able to cancel their
idle ports at no cost at any point during the first month that the fee
is effective. Further, PHLX is eliminating the word ``hourly'' from
paragraph (c) of the Testing Facility rule, since the fees for the
Testing Facility no longer include hourly fees. Last, PHLX is
eliminating language concerning market data feed testing from paragraph
(c) of the Testing Facility rule, since it is superfluous given that
the rule already references fees that include such testing.
2. Statutory Basis
    PHLX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act, \3\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act, \4\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
members and issuers and other persons using any facility or system
which PHLX operates or controls. The amended fee schedule applies to
all subscribers equally based on the number of test ports subscribed.
This proposed charge would apply to both members that obtain test ports
for direct access and non-member service bureaus that act as a conduit
for orders entered by PHLX members that are their customers. The
proposed fees will cover the costs associated with separately offering
the service, responding to customer requests, configuring PHLX's
systems, programming to user specifications, and administering the
service, among other things, and may provide PHLX with a profit to the
extent costs are covered. PHLX believes that the proposed fee structure
strikes a balance between covering these costs, and providing
incentives to subscribers to make efficient use of Test Facility ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    PHLX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments Regarding 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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \5\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\6\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-2010-155 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-155. 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 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 such filing also will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received
will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make publicly available. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-155 and should be submitted on
or before December 3, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-28540 Filed 11-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 28045]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11743]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0355]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Current Good Manufacturing Practice
in Manufacturing, Packaging, Labeling, or Holding Operations for
Dietary Supplements

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled ``Current Good Manufacturing
Practice in Manufacturing, Packaging, Labeling, or Holding Operations
for Dietary Supplements'' has been approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denver Presley, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400B,
Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of September 27,
2010 (75 FR 59266), the Agency announced that the proposed information
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44
U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0606.
The approval expires on February 28, 2014. A copy of the supporting
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: May 4, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-11743 Filed 5-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


Memorandum to the Docket From: Diane Isbell, Special Review and Reregistration Division Date: November 29, 2005 Subject: Questions to Consider While Reviewing the Assessments in the Azinphos methyl Docket OPP 2005 0061 On October 19, 2005, EPA will announce availability the Environmental Fate and Ecological Effects Risk Assessment, dated September 29, 2005, the 2005 Grower Impacts Assessments for Azinphos methyl, and the BEAD Assessment of Citations Submitted by Plaintiffs ( Case 2: 04 Cv 00099 RSM) in Regard to EPA's 2001 Benefits Assessments for Azinphosmethyl These documents will be available for a 90 day public comment period. These assessments pertain to the following crops: almonds; apples and crab apples; blueberries, lowbush and highbush; Brussels sprouts; sweet and tart cherries; nursery stock; parsley; pears; pistachios; and walnuts. While all public comments are welcome, certain types of information are most useful to the Agency for refining these assessments and developing risk management options. The information requested below is intended to guide commenters toward the most pertinent types of information Generally, comments supported by published literature or data are of greater utility than expressions of opinion. If you believe, based on your own expertise or experience, that the assumptions used in the assessments are well founded, that is also useful information to provide to EPA.

EPA will make the human health assessment available for public comment in 2006, prior to or in conjunction with the Agency's proposed decisions on the continued use of azinphosmethyl for above listed uses. For the current comment period, please confine your comments to the ecological and grower impact assessments made available on October 19, 2005. The following topics are suggested for comment:

1. The Agency is seeking data for pest management scenarios applicable to commercial scale commodity production ( that include domestic and export markets) other than those discussed in the azinphos methyl assessments. Please describe in detail:

a) Whether these alternatives to azinphos methyl would be likely to be used by a significant number of growers and if so, why. b) The cost per acre of these alternatives. c) The efficacy of these alternatives, focusing on yield and quality effects. d) The implications of the proposed scenarios on the marketability of the commodity. 2 2. The Agency invites the submission of data or other relevant information that addresses economically important pests currently controlled most effectively or only by AZM, and which were not discussed in the assessments, please submit data that address the following:

a) The proportion of crop acres by region affected by the pest. b) Details on the life cycle of the pest and nature of damage inflicted. c) Efficacy studies comparing AZM to potential alternatives for control of the pests, focusing on yield and quality impacts. If such studies have been done, also provide copies of the studies, citations, or contact information so that we may obtain the studies.

3. If available, the Agency is seeking new crop budgets for any crops discussed in these assessments, please provide copies or citations for these documents.

4. The Agency is seeking any information related to the use patterns ( location where the crop is grown ( county and state), application rate, lowest effective application rate, number of applications, the timing of each application, or increased buffer zones) that differs from what was relied upon in the assessments.

5. The Agency is interested in information concerning any typical practices, not reflected on current labels, that serve to reduce exposure to non target species and water resources, for example, special equipment to reduce spray drift.

6. The Agency is seeking information related to any additional measures that could be added to current labels to reduce exposure to non target species and water resources, for example, larger buffers for some or all crops.


[Federal Register: February 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 32)]
[Notices]
[Page 7687-7688]
[DOCID:fr19fe09-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP04-36-005]

Weaver's Cove Energy, LLC; Notice of Filing

February 11, 2009.
    Take notice that on January 30, 2009, Weaver's Cove Energy, LLC
(Weaver's Cove) filed an application, pursuant to Section 3 of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 153 and 380 of the Commission's Rules
and Regulations, to amend its certificate issued on July 15, 2005 in
Docket No. CP04-36-000. Weaver's Cove requests authority to site,
construct, and operate an offshore berth for receiving and unloading
LNG for the approved LNG terminal, in Mount Hope Bay in Massachusetts
waters. The application is on file with the Commission and open for
public inspection. This filing is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please
contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Weaver's Cove proposes to construct, and operate: (1) An offshore
berth for receiving and unloading LNG tankers in Mount Hope Bay in
Massachusetts waters, (2) an LNG transfer system with buried submarine
LNG transfer lines incorporating insulated ``pipe-in-pipe'' technology
(PiP) to transfer LNG from the offshore berth to the LNG storage tank
at the certificated terminal in Fall River, Massachusetts, and (3)
associated minor piping and equipment changes at the terminal to
accommodate the PiP transfer system. The proposed offshore berth is
located approximately four miles from the certificated LNG terminal.
The proposed location is approximately one mile from the nearest
shoreline and two miles south of the Braga Bridge. Weaver's Cove
proposes to begin construction in June 2011 and meet an in-service date
in December 2014.
    Any questions regarding the application are to be directed to
Marcia MacClary, Weaver's Cove Energy, LLC, One New Street, Fall River,
MA 02720,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Bruce Kiely, Baker Botts L.L.P., 1299
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    On April 29, 2008, the Commission staff granted Weaver's Cove's
request to use the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Pre-Filing
Process and assigned Docket No. PF08-18-000 to staff activities
involving the offshore berth project. Now, as of the filing of this
application on January 30, 2009, the NEPA Pre-Filing Process for this
project has ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be
conducted in Docket No. CP04-36-005, as noted in the caption of this
Notice.
    Any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to
the proceedings for this project should, on or before the below listed
comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the
NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on
the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will
receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for
court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
    Persons may also wish to comment further only on the environmental
review of this project. Environmental commenters will be placed on the
Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of
environmental documents issued by the Commission, and will be notified
of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review
process. Those persons, organizations, and agencies who submitted
comments during the NEPA Pre-Filing Process in Docket No. PF08-18-000
are already on the Commission staff's environmental mailing list for
the proceeding in the above dockets and may file additional comments on
or before the below listed comment date. Environmental commenters will
not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other
parties. However, environmental commenters are also not parties to the
proceeding and will not receive copies of all documents filed by other
parties or non-environmental documents issued by the Commission.
Further, they will not have the right to seek court review of any final
order by Commission in this proceeding.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically

via the Internet in lieu of paper, see 18 CFR 385.2001 (a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing''
link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.
    Comment Date: March 4, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-3456 Filed 2-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 195 (Thursday, October 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60895-60896]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25635]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-553-000]

Equitrans, L.P.; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on September 18, 2015, Equitrans, L.P.
(``Equitrans''), pursuant to section 7(c) of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission's (FERC) regulations under the Natural Gas Act
(NGA), filed in Docket No. CP15-553-000, application for all
authorizations necessary for it to restate the certificated capacities
for the Allegheny Valley Connector (AVC) storage facilities located in
Cambria, Clarion, Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania to
reflect actual operations. The new collective storage deliverability
will be adjusted to 246 MMcf/d from 260 MMcf/d and the new working gas
capacity will be adjusted to 11.2 Bcf from 15.1 Bcf. The filing may
also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to
Matthew Eggerding, Counsel--Midstream, EQT Corporation, 625 Liberty
Avenue, Suite 1700, Pittsburgh, PA 15222 by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>; by
faxing<PHONE_NUMBER>; or by emailing<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,

within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 5 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or
intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on October 23, 2015.

    Dated: October 2, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-25635 Filed 10-7-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 235)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 74029-74031]
[DOCID:fr05de08-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-0290, FRL-8745-6]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Great
Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District and Kern County Air
Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD) and Kern
County Air Pollution Control District (KCAPCD) portions of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the
Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are approving
local rules that address permitting.

DATES: This rule is effective on February 3, 2009 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by January 5, 2009. If we
receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2007-0290, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an
anonymous access system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, Permits Office (AIR-
3), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What are the purposes of the rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they
were revised or amended by the local air agencies and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Local agency                Rule No.           Rule title         Revised or amended      Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBUAPCD...........................             201  Exemptions...........  01/23/06 Revised.....        06/16/06
KCAPCD............................             205  Permit Renewal.......  05/02/96 Amended.....        07/23/96
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 21, 2006, the submittal of GBUAPCD Rule 201 was determined
to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which
must be met before formal EPA review. On October 30, 1996, the
submittal of KCAPCD Rule 205 was determined to meet the completeness
criteria.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved the September 5, 1974 version of GBUAPCD Rule 201 into
the SIP on December 8, 1976 (41 FR 53661). We did not act on versions
of GBUAPCD Rule 201 revised on February 15, 1989 and May 8, 1996 and
submitted to us by CARB on October 25, 1991 and March 3, 1997,
respectively.
    We approved the April 18, 1972 version of KCAPCD Rule 205 into the
SIP on September 22, 1972 (37 FR 19812). We did not act on a version of
KCAPCD Rule 205 revised on June 1, 1987 and submitted to us by CARB on
June 22, 1987.
    While we can act on only the most recently submitted version, we
have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals.

C. What are the purposes of the rule revisions?

    The purposes of revisions of GBUAPCD Rule 201 relative to the SIP
rule are as follows:
     GBUAPCD Rule 201: A blanket provision is added stating
that the equipment listed in this rule shall not be exempt from
permitting requirements if the equipment emits any pollutants in excess
of the quantities stated in GBUAPCD Rule 209-A.B.2.
     GBUAPCD Rule 201.D.3: The exemption from permitting for
internal combustion engines is modified to no longer exempt diesel
engines larger than 50 brake horsepower that are also subject to the
State air toxic control measure.
     GBUAPCD Rule 201.P: An exemption from permitting for open
burn/open detonation operations on military bases, provided the
operations comply with the requirements of GBUAPCD Rules 217 and 432,
is added.
    The purposes of revisions to KCAPCD Rule 205 relative to the SIP
rule are as follows:
     KCAPCD Rule 205.I: The requirement for an application for
a Permit to Operate (PTO) to expire in two years is added. The
requirement for the PTO to be renewed each year by payment of a renewal
fee is added. A PTO for non-operating equipment may be renewed if the
equipment is intact and operable. A PTO for removed equipment may be
renewed if the equipment is returned intact within one year.
     KCAPCD Rule 205.II: The allowance to renew an Authority to
Construct (ATC) for one two-year period is added, providing onsite
construction has begun or the applicant has entered into binding
agreements or contractural obligations that may realize substantial
economic loss if cancelled.
     KCAPCD Rule 205.II.A: The allowance to renew an ATC for
one two-year period if construction is delayed due to an economic
downturn, is added.
    The TSD has more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    These rules describe administrative provisions that support
emission controls found in local agency requirements. In combination
with the other requirements, these rules must be enforceable (see
section 110(a) of the CAA) and must not relax existing requirements
(see sections 110(l) and 193). The EPA guidance and policy documents
that we used to define specific enforceability and relaxation
requirements is as follows:
     Review of New Sources and Modifications, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR
part 51, subpart I.
     Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, (August 21, 2001). (The Little Bluebook)

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    GBUAPCD Rule 201 and KCAPCD Rule 205 are consistent with relevant
policy and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The
TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    The TSDs describe additional revisions to GBUAPCD Rule 201 and
KCAPCD Rule 205 that do not affect EPA's current action but are
recommended for the next time the local agencies modify the rules.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by January 5, 2009, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on February 3, 2009. This will incorporate these
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
    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.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a

SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 3, 2009. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: October 24, 2008.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(239)(i)(C)(5) and
(345)(i)(D) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (239) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (5) Rule 205, (a part of regulation II), ``Permit Renewal,''
adopted on April 18, 1972 and amended on May 2, 1996.
    (i) Resolution of May 2, 1996.
* * * * *
    (345) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (D) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District
    (1) Rule 201, ``Exemptions,'' adopted on September 5, 1974 and
revised on January 23, 2006.
* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E8-28732 Filed 12-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 1, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 230)]
[Notices]
[Page 74701-74702]
[DOCID:fr01de10-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket Nos. CP11-24-000; PF10-18-000]

Ryckman Creek Resources, LLC; Notice of Application

November 23, 2010.
    Take notice that on November 8, 2010, Ryckman Creek Resources, LLC
(Ryckman), 3 Riverway, Suite 1110, Houston, TX 77056, filed in Docket
No. CP11-24-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural
Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 and 284 of the Commission's regulations
seeking authorization construct and operate an underground natural gas
storage facility to provide up to 35 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of
working gas capacity in Uinta County, Wyoming, all as more fully set
forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the web at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Ryckman requests that the Commission issue an order granting it:
(1) A certificate of public convenience and necessity to develop,
construct, own, operate and maintain a new interstate natural gas
storage facility to be developed from an existing partially depleted
oil field in Uinta County, Wyoming; (2) a blanket certificate under
Part 284, Subpart G, of the Commission's regulations authorizing
Ryckman to provide open-access non discriminatory natural gas storage
and related services with pre-granted abandonment of such services; (3)
a blanket certificate under Part 157, Subpart F, of the Commission's
regulations authorizing Ryckman to construct, acquire, operate and
abandon certain facilities in accordance with the Commission's
regulations; (4) authorization to charge market-based rates for the
proposed natural gas storage and hub services, including interruptible
wheeling services; (5) approval of the pro forma FERC Gas Tariff
pursuant to which Ryckman will provide open-access, non-discriminatory
natural gas storage and hub services, including interruptible wheeling
services, consistent with the Commission's policies; and (6) waiver of
certain Commission regulations and requirements that have been found to
be inapplicable to storage providers granted market-based rate
authority.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Thomas Wynne, Ryckman Creek Resources, LLC, 3 Riverway, Suite 1110,
Houston, Texas 77056, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or facsimile (713) 974-
5601, or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    On April 26, 2010, the Commission staff granted Ryckman's request
to use the pre-filing process and assigned Docket No. PF10-18-000 for
this proceeding during the pre-filing review of the Ryckman Creek
Storage project. Now, as of the filing of Ryckman's application on
November 8, 2010, the pre-filing process for this project has ended.
From this time forward, Ryckman's proceeding will be

conducted in Docket No. CP11-24-000, as noted in the caption of this
Notice.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR
157.9, within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission's staff will
either complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission's staff issuance of
the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's
public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and
state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary
reviews, and the subsequent need to reach a final decision on a request
for federal authorization within 90 days of the date of issuance of the
Commission staff's EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1) (iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's web site under the ``e-Filing'' link.
    Comment Date: December 15, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30163 Filed 11-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 139)]
[Notices]
[Page 41392-41394]
[DOCID:fr18jy08-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58130; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-72]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Exchange's Quarterly Options Series Pilot Program

July 9, 2008.
    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 2, 2008, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has
designated this proposal as non-controversial under Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposed rule change effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NYSE Arca proposes to amend its rules to (i) extend the Quarterly
Options Series pilot program (``Pilot Program'') until July 10, 2009,
(ii) add provisions to the Pilot Program regarding the addition of new
strike prices and the delisting of inactive series and, (iii) make
minor technical changes. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at (http://www.nyse.com), at the
Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On July 12, 2006 the Exchange filed with the Commission a proposal
to list and trade Quarterly Options Series on a pilot basis (``Pilot
Program'') through July 10, 2007. The rule change was effective upon
filing.\5\ The original Pilot Program was subsequently extended and is
now due to expire on July 10, 2008.\6\ The Exchange now proposes to
extend the Pilot Program for another year, so that it will now expire
on July 10, 2009; to amend the Pilot Program in certain respects; and
make minor technical changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54166 (July 18,
2006), 71 FR 42151 (July 25, 2006) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-45).
    \6\See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56119 (July 24,
2007), 72 FR 41563 (July 30, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-70).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pilot Extension
    The Exchange stated that it would submit, in connection with any
proposed extension of the Pilot Program, a Pilot Program Report
(``Report'') that would provide an analysis of the Pilot Program
covering the entire period which the program was in effect. The Report
was to include: (1) Data and written analysis on the open interest and
trading volume in the classes for which Quarterly Options Series were
opened; (2) an assessment of the appropriateness of the option classes
selected for the Pilot Program; (3) an assessment of the impact of the
Pilot Program on the capacity on the Exchange, OPRA and on 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 Pilot Program and how the Exchange addressed such problems; (5)
any complaints that the Exchange received during the operation of the
Pilot Program and how the Exchange addressed them; and (6) any
additional information that would assist the Commission in assessing
the operation of the Pilot Program. The Exchange has submitted the
Report.
    The Exchange represents that the Report supports its belief that
extension of the Pilot Program is proper. Among other things, the
Report shows the strength of the Pilot Program as reflected by the
overall volume and open interest of Quarterly Options Series traded on
NYSE Arca and other national options exchanges. The Report shows that
the Pilot Program has not created, and in the future should not create,
any capacity, operational or regulatory problems attributable to
Quarterly Options Series. Finally, NYSE Arca represents that the
Exchange has the necessary system capacity to support any additional
series listed as part of the Pilot Program.

Proposal Related to the Listing and Delisting of Strikes

    On August 7, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'')
filed a proposal to revise the terms of its Quarterly Options Series
pilot program. As part of this filing, CBOE proposed to implement new
policies related to the listing and delisting of additional strike
prices for Quarterly Options Series. The proposal, as amended, was
approved by the Commission on March 3, 2008.\7\ NYSE Arca proposes to
adopt the revised terms of the CBOE's pilot program, for use in its own
Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57410 (March 3,
2008), 73 FR 12483 (March 7, 2008) (SR-CBOE-2007-96).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, NYSE Arca proposes to amend Rule 6.4, Commentary .08
to permit the Exchange to list additional strike prices for Quarterly
Options Series in exchange traded fund (``ETF'') options that fall
within a percentage range (30%) above and below the price of the
underlying ETF.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Pursuant to the existing Pilot Program, the Exchange is
presently limited to listing new strike prices on Quarterly Options
Series that fall within a $5 range from the closing price of the
underlying security on the preceding day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, upon demonstrated customer interest, the Exchange
also will be permitted to open additional strike prices of Quarterly
Options Series

in ETF options that are more than 30% above or below the current price
of the underlying ETF. Market-makers trading for their own account will
not be considered when determining customer interest under this
provision. In addition to the initial listed series, the proposal will
permit the Exchange to list up to sixty (60) additional series per
expiration month for each Quarterly Options Series in ETF options.
    The proposed policies regarding the listing of new strikes are
identical to those approved for CBOE. The Exchange also proposes to
adopt the same policy approved for CBOE, regarding the delisting of
inactive strikes in Quarterly Options Series. Under the proposed
delisting policy, the Exchange will, on a monthly basis, review
Quarterly Options Series that are outside a range of five (5) strikes
above and five (5) strikes below the current price of the underlying
ETF, and delist series with no open interest in both the put and the
call series having a strike price: (i) Higher than the highest strike
price with open interest in the put and/or call series for a given
expiration month; or (ii) lower than the lowest strike price with open
interest in the put and/or call series for a given expiration month.
Notwithstanding the proposed delisting policy, the Exchange will grant
customer requests to add strikes and/or maintain strikes in Quarterly
Options Series eligible for delisting.
    The delisting policy proposed by the Exchange is designed to
mitigate the number of options series with no open interest, and reduce
quote traffic accordingly. If during the life of the Pilot Program the
Exchange identifies series for delisting, the Exchange will notify
other options exchanges with similar delisting polices, and shall work
with such other exchanges to develop a uniform list of securities to be
delisted, to help to ensure uniform series delisting of multiply listed
Quarterly Options Series in ETF options.
    Finally, the Exchange notes that the delisting policy, once
approved, would become part of the Pilot Program and, going forward,
would be considered by the Commission when the Exchange seeks to renew
or make permanent the Pilot Program in the future.
    The proposed policies regarding the delisting of inactive strikes
are identical to those in place as part of the CBOE Quarterly Options
Series Pilot Program.

Non-Substantive Changes

    The Exchange also proposes at this time to make minor, non-
substantive changes, to Rule 5.19(a)(3) and Rule 6.4 Commentary .08 in
order to revise the dates used in existing examples that describe the
listing process for Quarterly Options Series, and to renumber certain
subsections of the rule for clarity purposes. These changes serve only
to update the text, and make no changes to the Pilot Program itself, or
the rules governing such.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the continuation of the Pilot Program,
along with the proposed revision to the program, will continue to
stimulate customer interest in options by creating greater trading
opportunities and flexibility in investment choices. The Exchange
further believes that continuation of the Pilot Program will provide
the ability to more closely tailor investment strategies and provide a
valuable hedging tool for investors. Also, the Exchange believes that
by revising its Pilot Program to include similar provisions contained
in the CBOE Quarterly Options Series pilot program will make for more
uniform rules across exchanges that have implemented a Quarterly
Options Series pilot program. For these reasons, the Exchange believes
the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder 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) of the Act,\10\
which requires that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will not impose
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 on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

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

    The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one that:
(1) Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the
public interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on
competition; and (3) does not become operative for 30 days from the
date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Therefore, the foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has fulfilled this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the operative delay
to permit the proposed rule change to become operative prior to the
30th day after filing. The Commission has determined that waiving the
30-day operative delay of the Exchange's proposal is consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest and will promote
competition because such waiver will allow NYSE Arca to continue the
existing Pilot Program without interruption.\13\ Therefore, the
Commission designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that NYSE Arca's proposed changes regarding
additional series and the delisting policy will become part of the
Pilot Program and, going forward, its effects will be considered by the
Commission in the event that the Exchange seeks to renew or make
permanent the Pilot Program. Thus, in the Exchange's future reports on
the Pilot Program, the Exchange should include analysis of (1) the
impact of the additional series on the Exchange's market and quote
capacity, and (2) the implementation and effects of the delisting
policy, including the number of series eligible for delisting during
the period covered by the report, the number of series actually
delisted during that period (pursuant to the delisting policy or
otherwise), and documentation of any customer requests to maintain QOS

strikes that were otherwise eligible for delisting.
    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate the 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 No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-72 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-NYSEArca-2008-72. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-NYSEArca-2008-72 and should be
submitted on or before August 8, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-16421 Filed 7-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: April 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 70)]
[Notices]
[Page 18498-18499]
[DOCID:fr12ap07-90]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55589; File No. SR-ISE-2007-18]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities
Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Customer Orders on the Book

April 5, 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 March 5, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE''
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 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 include in an automated information feed
to members the aggregate quantity of customer interest at the
Exchange's best bid and offer (``BBO'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The proposed rule change also will correct some cross-
references in ISE Rule 713.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
principal office, at http://www.iseoptions.com/legal/proposed_rule_changes.asp
, 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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to provide all ISE
members with information regarding orders of public customers at the
ISE BBO. Currently, the ISE provides full customer information only to
its Primary Market Makers (``PMMs''), who effectively act as
specialists on the Exchange. Other ISE members do not have this
information. Because the ISE provides customer orders with priority
over broker-dealer orders and market maker quotations, having access to
customer order information would allow members to know how many
customer contracts first would need to be satisfied in order to have
certainty of knowledge before crossing a large block. This is
particularly useful for broker-dealers attempting to execute larger-
sized orders through the ISE's Block and Facilitation Mechanisms.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See ISE Rule 716.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ISE recently confirmed that at least one other exchange--the
Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'')--provides all its members
with full information regarding customer orders at that exchange's BBO.
The information is available through the CBOE's electronic data feed to
its members. In order to remain competitive with the CBOE, we believe
it is necessary to provide our members with similar information. Thus,
we propose to make available to our members the full quantity of public
customer interest included in the Exchange's BBO.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the basis under the Act for this
proposed rule change is the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \5\ that
an exchange have rules that are designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, 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,
the proposal will provide members with additional information to help
them execute their orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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 the ISE 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-ISE-2007-18 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-18. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule

change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public
Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-18 and should be
submitted on or before May 2, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-6870 Filed 4-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 91 (Friday, May 12, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 22095]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09540]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0614; FRL-9961-73-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; Repeal of Transportation
Facilities Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality through the Division
of Air Quality on September 16, 2016, for the purpose of removing the
statewide transportation facilities rules. The state provided a Clean
Air Act section 110(l) noninterference demonstration for the removal of
these rules. EPA is proposing to approve this SIP revision because the
State has demonstrated that it is consistent with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 12, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2016-0614 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Sheckler can be reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this issue of
the Federal Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP revision as a
direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this
as a noncontroversial submittal 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 on this document.
Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at
this time.

    Dated: March 31, 2017.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2017-09540 Filed 5-11-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P