                                     Draft
                             Supporting Statement
                                      for
                        Information Collection Request

          EPA's Light-Duty In-Use Vehicle Testing Program (Renewal)

                                EPA ICR 0222.11

                           OMB Control No: 2060-0086

                                 November 2017

                             Compliance Division
                   Office of Transportation and Air Quality
                         Office of Air and Radiation
                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Section 1: Identification of the Information Collection

1(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection

	EPA's Light-Duty In-Use Vehicle Testing Program (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 0222.11, OMB Control Number 2060-0086. This ICR was formerly titled "EPA's In-Use Vehicle and Engine Testing Programs." This ICR includes only the light-duty vehicle portion of the in-use testing program. The heavy-duty and off-road vehicle and engine programs are included under OMB Control Number 2060-0287.

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

	The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Compliance Division, conducts an integrated motor vehicle and engine emission compliance program. Motor vehicles and engines are first evaluated as prototypes prior to production; those designs that meet applicable criteria are licensed for introduction into commerce. EPA also has discretion to conduct assembly line testing of new vehicles and engines as well as to test emissions of in-use vehicles and engines after they have been introduced into commerce. This Information Collection Request covers inquiries directed at the owners/lessees of in-use light-duty motor vehicles to see if their specific vehicles are suitable for an EPA in-use testing investigation and the paperwork burdens attendant upon election to participate.

	The light-duty in-use testing program can be broken down into three closely-related components. The first is the surveillance testing program, with the possibility of a confirmatory testing phase. The second component is a small program to test the functionality of onboard diagnostics (OBD) systems on in-use vehicles, which is simply additional testing on a subset of vehicles already recruited for the surveillance program. Finally, budget permitting, there are other occasional "special investigations" to address specific issues. An example of a special investigation might be procurement of a class of vehicles to test compatibility with a particular portable emissions monitoring (PEM) unit. Special investigations are similar to testing of that portion of surveillance classes that have been selected to address a specific informational need. They may or may not use the same procurement system as the surveillance and OBD programs. If they were not procured from the public, the burden will not be accounted for in this collection request as burden to the public but may be reflected in the cost to the agency. The number of such tests will vary.

	Light-duty vehicle testing typically includes standard emissions test cycles and standard OBD tests performed at EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The primary purpose of these programs is informational: to give EPA and manufacturers intelligence regarding emissions performance of in-use vehicles. Manufacturers are involved at every step of the ongoing surveillance and confirmatory programs: they are informed of the emissions tests, can be present during vehicle preparation and testing, are given test results, and participate in post-failure investigations. The testing supplements information from the manufacturers' own discretionary in-use testing programs as well as the mandatory reporting under the manufacturers' In-Use Vehicle Program (IUVP) under 40 CFR §§1845 - 1847.

	The light-duty in-use testing program entails two formalized information collections. Participation in the information collections, as well as the vehicle evaluation, is strictly voluntary. (The actual solicitation of information is conducted by EPA's contractor.)  First, 25 to 50 owners/lessees of the vehicles of interest who are located within about 70 miles of Ann Arbor, Michigan are randomly selected from the owner list of vehicles obtained from the Michigan Secretary of State and sent a letter with a reply form and return envelope to accept or decline the invitation to participate.

 	Potential participants are offered monitory compensation for allowing their vehicles to be tested. The compensation is usually either twenty dollars per day and the use of a loaner vehicle or fifty dollars per day. Occasionally, if a class of vehicles is difficult to procure, the incentive may be increased.

	After a suitable time for response, positive respondents are considered for inclusion and are contacted in the order received until the required number of vehicles is identified. If the owner/lessee is reached and willing, a screening is conducted by telephone in which about a dozen questions concerning vehicle condition and maintenance are asked. The first three owners who successfully complete the telephone screening provide the vehicles for the surveillance class. The vehicles are brought to EPA's NVFEL and tested. If there are any test failures in the first three vehicles or engines, then two more are recruited in the same manner. Additional groups of potential participants will be contacted until the necessary number of vehicles has been obtained.

	Information collected is used to ensure that vehicles procured meet relevant criteria. For example, the vehicle must not have been tampered with or have other overt problems. Special testing investigations and particular vehicle types may have additional or alternative criteria.

	Those who elect to participate are asked if they are willing to provide their maintenance records for copying. Doing so is voluntary and has no effect on eligibility. At the time of delivery or pick-up, participants go over the answers that they provided during the telephone screening and sign a notarized statement that the answers are correct. They sign a test agreement, a cash incentive form and, if elected, a loaner car agreement. Upon surrendering their vehicle, they sign a vehicle release.

	As part of the surveillance process, EPA attempts to determine the cause of any emissions test failures. Post-test "special maintenance" involves close examination of the vehicle, nearly always with manufacturer participation. This may produce relevant information about the cause of the failure. Surveillance test data are also supplemented with information from manufacturer's test data, EPA certification confirmatory test rest results, defect reports, service bulletins, CARB (California Air Resources Board) warranty reports, state Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) information, manufacturer service technician bulletins, and the results of the manufacturers' IUVP tests submitted to EPA and their own in-use testing results. Manufacturers/importers are involved in the process from the outset, and receive test results from the Federal Test Procedure (FTP), Highway, US06, evaporative and cold test procedures, including test failures. The process of identifying problems is collaborative and cooperative in nearly all cases.

	If EPA believes that a recall is indicated, and the manufacturer/importer agrees that EPA's conclusion is valid, it will agree to conduct a voluntary recall. However, if questions remain, EPA has procedures in place to run the confirmatory test phase with continued manufacturer involvement. Even at this stage the inferences are informational rather than statistical: to identify, based on engineering judgment, the appropriate population to which the problem applies, identify the cause of the problem, resolve issues regarding the testing protocols and results, etc. The process has not been adversarial in recent years.

	Based on information gathered from all sources, EPA can make an administrative finding mandating recall and repair of in-use vehicles if it determines that "a substantial number" of vehicles in a class or category do not comply with the emissions requirements as a result of its own in-use testing program. In reality, such a determination will be based on information from a variety of sources that may or may not include EPA in-use testing. Such findings are subject to the Administrative Procedures Act and are reviewable in court under the "substantial evidence" test (5 USC §706(2)(E)), which is restated in the "substantial evidence" standard in the Clean Air Act for ordering recalls.

	Procurement of light duty vehicles for a confirmatory testing phase is similar to that for the surveillance phase, except that participants whose vehicles had been in the surveillance phase are screened out and owners are asked more questions about their vehicle's use and maintenance.

	During fiscal year 2016, 125 surveillance vehicle in-use testing actions were conducted by EPA. No OBD actions or special vehicle investigations were conducted. Fourteen confirmatory testing actions were conducted for a total of 139 testing actions. This corresponds to 1,627 contacts and 154 telephone interviews and/or other follow-up participant contacts. This collection imposes a burden of 302 hours annually. This collection has no respondent recordkeeping requirements.

Section 2: Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

	Under Title II of the Clean Air Act, (42 U.S.C. §7521 et seq.), manufacturers of motor vehicles and engines are required to design and build vehicles which will comply with emission standards throughout their useful lives. ("Useful life" is defined by statute and regulation; it varies by type of vehicle or engine.)  Pursuant to section Clean Air Act section 207(c) (42 USC §7541), EPA is responsible for monitoring compliance and investigating possible noncompliance with emission standards.

	To fulfill this function, it is necessary for EPA to test actual "in-use" vehicles; these vehicles must be obtained from their owners/lessees. As part of the procurement process, EPA must determine that the vehicle is within the useful life and that it has been "properly maintained and used". In order to do this, EPA must make a limited inquiry of the owner/lessees who are willing to participate; see Attachment V for an example telephone screening tool.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	EPA needs the information from the vehicle owner/lessee to determine that the vehicle is within its "useful life" and that it has been "properly maintained and used."  EPA's Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, is the prime user of this information. Manufacturers whose models are being tested receive the vehicle identification number (VIN) of the vehicle to be tested. Manufacturers are informed of pre-test maintenance and test dates and receive test results. They also participate in post-test "special maintenance" to investigate failures.

Section 3:  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

3(a) Nonduplication

	The information obtained from the vehicle owner/lessee is unique to that specific vehicle; it is not obtainable from any other source. There is no other information available, in either public or private databases that will adequately serve the program purposes. (Some vehicle maintenance information, such as warranty repairs and scheduled maintenance done at dealers' outlets, is available from manufacturers and commercial automotive data services, and such information may be supplied by manufacturers in their own interests or as queried by EPA. However, it is not a substitute for owners'/lessees' own records.) Additionally, there are no other similar government programs which would allow sharing of data.

3(b) Public Notice Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

	EPA will solicit public comment by means of a Federal Register Notice.

3(c) Consultations

	In preparing this ICR, EPA consulted with two of its contractor's employees, Mr. David Knott,<PHONE_NUMBER>, and Ms. Kim Cieslak. (EPA's contractor procures and maintains in-use passenger cars and light duty trucks.). Ms. Cieslak mails out the procurement letters and conducts the telephone interviews; she was asked to monitor how much time the interviews required. She determined the average to be 20 minutes per telephone interview for the surveillance screening and 50 minutes for the confirmatory screening. David Knott is her supervisor.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	Information is collected only once per vehicle evaluation; less frequent collection is not possible. Less frequent collection would make it impossible for EPA to verify compliance with Title II of the Clean Air Act, (42 U.S.C. §7521 et seq.).

3 (e) General Guidelines

	This information collection activity complies with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

3 (f) Confidentiality

 	Information gathered from light-duty vehicle respondents is stored in contractor files. These records, including names and social security numbers needed for those who accept payment over $599, are completely segregated from test results which are separately handled and stored by EPA. Respondent information is handled and stored by the contractors and two EPA representatives. It is not available to the public. Test results are tracked by vehicle control number and are shared with manufacturers by email automatically; they are available to the public. This information collection has completed a Privacy Impact Assessment, which has been approved by EPA's privacy office. The system has been assigned System of Records EPA-60.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

	No sensitive questions are asked in this information collection.

Section 4. Respondents and Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/SIC & NAICS Codes

	The respondents are individual vehicle owners/lessees of any regulated vehicle or engine regulated by EPA under the Clean Air Act (No NAICS code).

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data items

	Respondents who receive EPA's initial request (see "Reply Form", etc. Attachments II and III and IV) are asked to supply the following information on a form via a postage paid return envelope; participation is entirely voluntary:

	Do they own/lease the desired vehicle?; verify the make and model
      Current odometer reading?
      Are they the original owner/lessee?
      Transmission type?
      Are they interested in participating; how EPA should contact them?

	Those who indicate they wish to be considered for participation are asked for additional information:

      Has the odometer malfunctioned and, if so, how long was it inoperative?
      Has the vehicle catalyst ever been replaced?
      Do they have maintenance records; would they allow EPA to review and copy them?

	There are no recordkeeping requirements associated with this collection.

(ii) Respondent Activities

	Responses to the request for participation and information collection are strictly voluntary.

	Those wishing to participate are asked to fill out a postage-paid information form. Some are then contacted by telephone to obtain the additional information listed above. Vehicles that will be evaluated are brought to EPA's NVFEL for testing by the vehicle owner or a contractor. The owners/lessees receive a cash incentive for each day EPA keeps the vehicle or a lesser cash incentive and, if requested, a late model loaner car with a full tank of gas and unlimited mileage for the duration of the testing, which usually takes two to four weeks.

	Most of the information requested is known by the owner/lessee; some information might have to be obtained by simple vehicle or engine inspection or by reference to maintenance records (if available).

Section 5: The Information Collected--Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management

5(a) Agency Activities

	Agency staff typically have no involvement in gathering the information, as that task is done by an EPA contractor.  However, on occasion, staff are required to answer specific questions that arise during the information gathering process. Agency staff may review the final telephone screening questions and answers for completeness as well as potential issues relevant to the vehicle being evaluated. Agency staff select the vehicle classes to be tested, view test results, and participate in discussions with manufacturers relating to the testing preparations and results.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

	Information is obtained via mailed responses and telephone interviews; it is stored in a vehicle file. The information is reviewed to see if the specific vehicle or engine meets the criteria for evaluation. The file is typically maintained for 10 years and then destroyed.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

	The information requested is completely voluntary and imposes no mandatory burden on any respondent. The information collected is the minimum necessary to assure that vehicles meet the criteria for evaluation. Therefore, there is no additional need to reduce the burden on small entities.

5(d) Collection Schedule

	Information is collected on a continuous basis. The number of solicitations mailed out in a given time frame is a function of available test capacity and how difficult a particular vehicle type is to procure.

Section 6 Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

	As explained above, EPA's contractor estimated that each telephone screening interview takes, on average, approximately 20 minutes for the surveillance screening and 50 minutes for the confirmatory screening. Subsequent information-related burdens for participants (such as reviewing and attesting to the telephone screening answers and supplying maintenance records voluntarily) upon delivery of light-duty vehicles, is estimated at 40 minutes. We estimate that the initial contact burden by letter to average five minutes. The total response burden is estimated to be 302 hours annually.

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

(i) Estimating labor costs

	There is no typical individual owner/lessee; they represent the average person who acquires or owns a vehicle or engine. For this analysis we assume a cost of $23.86 per hour, based on the mean hourly wage for All Occupations, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2016 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, United States, (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#00-0000, accessed October 27, 2017).
The annual labor cost is therefore $7,206.

(ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

	This collection has no capital, operations or maintenance costs.

(iii) Start-up Costs

	This collection has no start-up costs.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden

	EPA uses contractor employees to recruit all of the vehicles and collect essentially all of the information covered by this information collection request. The contractor is responsible for, among other things, sending out invitation letters, contacting responders, getting the vehicles, preparing the vehicles for tests, returning the vehicles to the owners, paying the monitory compensation to participants and maintaining a fleet of about nine vehicles that will be loaned to participants while their vehicles are being tested. The average annual contractor costs for the light-duty surveillance and confirmatory testing was approximately $766,000. An estimated 1.5 EPA employees oversee the programs at an annual cost of $228,000 The total estimated Agency cost is about $994,000 per year.

6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

	From the above discussion the following total burden and cost estimates can be calculated as presented below.

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

(i) Respondent Tally

Program
Vehicles/Engines
Initial Contacts
Burden @ 5 min ea.(min)
Participant Contacts
Burden @ 60 min ea (min)
Light Duty Surveillance
                                                                            125
                                                                           1257
                                                                           6285
                                                                            130
                                                                           7800
Onboard Diagnostics Surveillance
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
Special Vehicle Investigation
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0

                                                       Burden @ 90 min ea (min)
Light Duty Confirmatory
                                                                             14
                                                                            370
                                                                           1850
                                                                             24
                                                                           2160
Total
                                                                            139
                                                                           1627
                                                                          19588
                                                                            154
                                                                           9960
Total burden (hrs)

                                                                            302

There are no respondent, operating, capital, or startup costs associated with this collection.

(ii) Agency tally

Employees	 	1.5 (Involved in the light-duty vehicle in-use testing program)
Contract Cost	$766,000
Total Cost    	          	$994,000

6(f) Reasons for change in burden

	The changes in burden to the public from the burden calculated for the previous iteration of this Information Collection Request are a decrease of 2291 responses 204 hours which correspond to a decrease in estimated burden cost of $4,071. These changes are due to many different factors. Although the number of invitations sent out rises each year, the number of responses that we receive has decreased. The two factors to which the decreases are most attributed are 1) invitations are discarded as junk mail and 2) owner's concern that the invitation is a scam.  Some other factors may be that the incentive is not enough for people to go through the trouble of volunteering for the program or that the vehicles that we are trying to recruit may be more expensive vehicles and, therefore, the owners are less likely to want to volunteer their vehicles for testing. We believe that because of these reasons the number of responses and, therefore the burden to the public, has decreased.

	Before 2014, special vehicle investigations were done to study known in-use concerns that were identified in classes of vehicles (for example, older vehicles or a specific model.)  In the years between 2014 and 2016, there were special investigations but the vehicles were not obtained from the public. Instead they were procured though EPA's contractor or from manufacturers. Therefore, the information collection burden on the public was decreased to zero for special investigations. The burden instead was transferred to contractors or EPA employees.

	It should be noted that EPA has not conducted any Onboard Diagnostic Surveillance resulting in no burden due to that program.

Program
2014 Vehicles/
Engines
2016
Vehicles/
Engines
2014 Initial Contacts
2016 Initial Contacts
2014 Minutes
2016 Minutes
Light Duty Surveillance
                                                                            120
                                                                            125
                                                                           2938
                                                                           1257
                                                                          21890
                                                                          14085
Onboard Diagnostics Surveillance
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
Special Vehicle Investigation
                                                                             10
                                                                              0
                                                                            245
                                                                              0
                                                                           2065
                                                                              0
Light Duty Confirmatory
                                                                             30
                                                                             14
                                                                            735
                                                                            370
                                                                           6373
                                                                           4010
Total
                                                                            160
                                                                            139
                                                                           3918
                                                                           1627
                                                                          30328
                                                                          18095
Difference

                                                                            -21

                                                                          -2291

                                                                         -12233

                                                                     -204 hours

6(g) Burden Statement

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average approximately 302 hours per year; less than one hour on average for each owner/lessee who receives a solicitation to participate.  This estimate includes the time to review the solicitation material, complete the reply correspondence, complete the telephone screening for the subset contacted, and complete paperwork for delivery and pickup of participating vehicles and for monetary compensation. Participation is completely voluntary. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulation are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0690, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566 - 1744. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0690 and OMB Control Number 2060-0086 in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 237 (Monday, December 12, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 76039]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26858]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10479-01-OA]

Public Meeting of the Chartered Science Advisory Board

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory
Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a public meeting of the chartered
Science Advisory Board. The chartered SAB will meet to: (1) deliberate
on the adequacy of the scientific and technical basis of the proposed
rule titled Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified
Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural
Gas Sector Climate Review; and (2) discuss recommendations received
from the SAB Work Group for Review of Science Supporting EPA Decisions
concerning SAB review of EPA planned regulatory actions.

DATES: The public meeting of the chartered Science Advisory Board will
be held on Friday, January 20, 2023, from 12 p.m. to 6 p.m. All times
listed are in Eastern Standard Time.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be conducted virtually. Please refer to the
SAB website at https://sab.epa.gov for information on how to attend the
meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wants
further information concerning this notice may contact Dr. Thomas
Armitage, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), via telephone (202) 564-
2155, or email at [email protected]. General information about
the SAB, as well as any updates concerning the meetings announced in
this notice can be found on the SAB website at https://sab.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental
Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA),
codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and
technical advice to the EPA Administrator on the scientific and
technical basis for agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a
Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. The SAB will comply with the
provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural
policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that
the chartered Science Advisory Board will hold a public meeting to
discuss and deliberate on the following topics.
    Under the SAB's authorizing statute, the SAB ``may make available
to the Administrator, within the time specified by the Administrator,
its advice and comments on the adequacy of the scientific and technical
basis'' of proposed rules. The SAB Work Group for Review of Science
Supporting EPA Decisions is charged with identifying EPA planned
actions that may warrant SAB review. The SAB will discuss the
scientific and technical basis of the proposed rule titled Emission
Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions
Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate
Review (available at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2021-0317) and also discuss recommendations received from the SAB
Work Group for Review of Science Supporting EPA Decisions with regard
to SAB review of other EPA planned actions.
    Availability of Meeting Materials: All meeting materials, including
the agenda, will be available on the SAB web page at https://sab.epa.gov.
    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for
consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a
different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices.
Therefore, the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory
committee is different from the process used to submit comments to an
EPA program office. Federal advisory committees and panels, including
scientific advisory committees, provide independent advice to the EPA.
Members of the public can submit relevant comments pertaining to the
committee's charge or meeting materials. Input from the public to the
SAB will have the most impact if it provides specific scientific or
technical information or analysis for the SAB to consider or if it
relates to the clarity or accuracy of the technical information.
Members of the public wishing to provide comment should follow the
instructions below to submit comments.
    Oral Statements: Individuals or groups requesting an oral
presentation during the public meeting will be limited to three
minutes. Each person making an oral statement should consider providing
written comments as well as their oral statement so that the points
presented orally can be expanded upon in writing. Persons interested in
providing oral statements should contact the DFO, in writing
(preferably via email) at the contact information noted above by
January 13, 2023, to be placed on the list of registered speakers.
    Written Statements: Written statements will be accepted throughout
the advisory process; however, for timely consideration by SAB members,
statements should be submitted to the DFO by January 13, 2023, for
consideration at the public meeting on January 20, 2023. Written
statements should be supplied to the DFO at the contact information
above. It is the SAB Staff Office general policy to post written
comments on the web page for the advisory meeting or teleconference.
Submitters are requested to provide an unsigned version of each
document because the SAB Staff Office does not publish documents with
signatures on its websites. Copyrighted material will not be posted
without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.
    Accessibility: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, please contact the DFO, at the contact
information noted above, preferably at least ten days prior to the
meeting, to give the EPA as much time as possible to process your
request.

V. Khanna Johnston,
Deputy Director, Science Advisory Board Staff Office.
[FR Doc. 2022-26858 Filed 12-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Come on people.  You have to have something more useful to do than invent non-existant problems to regulate.  The Sport Pilot initiative is a forward thinking and important contribution to aviation in this county.  In the opposite sense, this proposal is as pointless, anti-aviation, and pure bureaucratic falderal as there ever was.

There is no justification for this regulation:

-  There is no statistically significant record of accident or loss of life that demands action

-  This is not a rapidly expanding general aviation operation that suddenly popped up on the radar

-  It does not promote general aviation

-  It actively harms otherwise benign operations with no apparent benefit.

Let's face it; if you can justify allowing businesses setup specifically for commercial operations to fly a FalconJet or G5 under part 91K where they incure tremendous exposure and liability, you can't claim that someone taking the neighbor for a ride in exchange for gas money is a threat to air safety.

Take the folks that have time to think this sort of thing up and redirect their efforts toward finding the next Sport Pilot-like initiative.  How about addressing the roadblocks one encounters when attempting to get field approvals or STCs for adding safety enhancements to older aircraft?


[Federal Register: May 19, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 97)]
[Notices]
[Page 29192]
[DOCID:fr19my06-92]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53797; File No. SR-Amex-2005-112]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Relating
to the Prohibition of Trade Shredding by Members

 May 12, 2006.

I. Introduction

    On November 1, 2005, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change relating to the prohibition of trade shredding. On
March 27, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change. The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for comment
in the Federal Register on April 12, 2006.\3\ The Commission received
no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule
change, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(l).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240. 19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53597 (April 4,
2006), 71 FR 18789.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposed to amend Amex Rule 3 (``General Prohibitions
and Duty to Report'') by adding a new paragraph (i) to prohibit a
member or member organization from splitting trading interest into
multiple orders for any purpose other than seeking the best execution
of the entire order.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission has reviewed carefully the proposed rule change, as
amended, and finds that it is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange,\4\ particularly Section 6(b)(5) of the Act which,
among other things, requires that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating securities transactions, to remove impediments to and to
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.\5\ The Commission believes that the proposed rule change, as
amended, should help eliminate the distortive practice of trade
shredding, and, therefore, promote just and equitable principles of
trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\6\ that the proposed rule change, as amended, (File No. SR-Amex-
2005-112), be and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-7640 Filed 5-18-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: September 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 46828-46829]
[DOCID:fr11se09-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60624; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-057]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Section 1(c) of Schedule A to the FINRA By-Laws To Amend the Personnel
Assessment and Gross Income Assessment

September 3, 2009.
    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 August 20, 2009, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. 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

    FINRA is proposing to change Section 1(c) of Schedule A to the
FINRA By-Laws (``Schedule A'') to amend the Personnel Assessment and
Gross Income Assessment paid by each FINRA member.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA 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, FINRA 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. FINRA 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
    FINRA's primary member regulatory pricing structure consists of the
following fees: the Personnel Assessment (``PA''); the Gross Income
Assessment (``GIA''); the Trading Activity Fee; and the Branch Office
Assessment. These fees are used to fund FINRA's regulatory activities,
including rulemaking and FINRA's examination and enforcement programs.
    The proposed rule change would amend the PA and GIA to achieve a
more consistent and predictable funding stream to carry out FINRA's
regulatory mandate. The economic and industry downturns experienced in
2008 and 2009 have strained FINRA's resources, yet its regulatory
responsibilities remain constant and its programs robust. FINRA
believes the proposed rule change is needed to stabilize its revenues
and provide protection against future industry downturns.
    To those ends, the proposed rule change first would increase the PA
for all members. The PA is currently assessed on a three-tiered rate
structure: members with one to five registered representatives and
principals are assessed $75 for each such registered person; 6-25
registered persons, $70 each; and 26 or more registered persons, $65
each. The proposed rule change would increase those rates to $150, $140
and $130, respectively, based on the same tiered structure. This
proposal would represent the first PA rate increase in over five years.
Moreover, given the correlation between the cost of FINRA's regulatory
programs and the number of registered persons within a firm, FINRA
notes that the population of registered persons has remained fairly
stable, even throughout the recent economic downturn.\3\ Accordingly,
FINRA believes an increase of the PA is both a fair and appropriate
means to achieve a more consistent and reliable foundation to fund its
regulatory operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For example, FINRA records show that since 2000, the average
number of registered persons per year has been approximately 667,680
and that for each of the past three years the population has been
669,626 (2009), 676,927 (2008) and 662,742 (2007) (based on numbers
at the end of the preceding calendar year).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Even with the proposed increase of the PA, the GIA remains the most
important component of FINRA's regulatory funding. The GIA is currently
assessed through a seven-tier rate structure with a minimum GIA of
$1,200.00. Under the existing GIA rate structure, members are required
to pay an annual GIA as follows:
    (1) $1,200.00 on annual gross revenue up to $1 million;
    (2) 0.1215% of annual gross revenue greater than $1 million up to
$25 million;
    (3) 0.2599% of annual gross revenue greater than $25 million up to
$50 million;
    (4) 0.0518% of annual gross revenue greater than $50 million up to
$100 million;
    (5) 0.0365% of annual gross revenue greater than $100 million up to
$5 billion;
    (6) 0.0397% of annual gross revenue greater than $5 billion up to
$25 billion; and
    (7) 0.0855% of annual gross revenue greater than $25 billion.
    For 2010, the current year GIA would be subject to the cap set
forth in Regulatory Notice 08-07 (February 2008), which describes the
new funding structure that resulted from the consolidation of NASD's
and the New York Stock Exchange's member regulation operations. FINRA
states in the Notice that it will apply a ten-percent cap on any
increase or decrease to a firm's 2010 current year GIA resulting from
the new pricing structure implemented in January 2008.

    Since the GIA is assessed based on a member's annual gross revenue
for the preceding calendar year,\4\ FINRA's revenues derived from the
GIA are subject to the year-to-year volatility of member revenues. In
years where industry revenues are significantly down, FINRA's operating
revenues can drop precipitously: in 2009, for example, GIA revenues are
down approximately 37 percent due to 2008 fourth quarter write-offs
taken by members, particularly the largest securities firms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Gross revenue for assessment purposes is set out in Section
2 of Schedule A, which defines gross revenue as total income as
reported on FOCUS form Part II or IIA excluding commodities income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change thus seeks to ameliorate this
vulnerability by not only shifting some of FINRA's revenue generation
to the more consistent PA stream, but also by smoothing out the
volatility inherent in the GIA. To that end, the proposed rule change
would further amend Schedule A to assess a GIA of the greater of (1)
the amount that would be the GIA based on the existing rate structure
(``current year GIA'') or (2) a three-year average of the GIA to be
calculated by adding the current year GIA plus the GIA assessed on the
member over the previous two calendar years, divided by three. For a
newer firm that has only been assessed in the prior year, FINRA would
compare the current year GIA to the two-year average and assess the
greater amount. The existing GIA rate structure and phase-in
implementation through 2010 would remain the same.\5\ Accordingly, the
proposed rule change would preserve the current rate structure, while
building a buffer against industry downturns. FINRA notes that it has a
long history of providing rebates to members when revenues exceed the
expenditures necessary to discharge its regulatory obligations and is
committed to continuing that practice in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The actual amount of GIA assessed in any given year--e.g.,
the current year GIA (including a cap, if applicable) or the three-
year average--will be used to calculate subsequent three-year
average determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes the proposed rule change will stabilize its
operating cash flows by augmenting revenues based on the registered
person population, where FINRA's costs are more closely aligned, and
reducing dependency on, and exposure to, less predictable industry
revenues. FINRA estimates that if the proposed rule change had been in
effect for 2009, it would have replaced about 90% of the revenue
shortfall that resulted primarily from the significant drop in GIA
revenues. In general, those replacement revenues would come from
several larger firms whose steep income declines in 2008 primarily
account for FINRA's current revenue deficit.
    As noted in Item 2 of this filing, FINRA will announce the proposed
rule change and subsequent approval in a Regulatory Notice. The
proposed rule change will become effective January 1, 2010.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and
other persons using any facility or system that FINRA operates or
controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA 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.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization 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-FINRA-2009-057 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-FINRA-2009-057. 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 FINRA. 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-FINRA-2009-057 and should be
submitted on or before October 2, 2009.
    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. E9-21885 Filed 9-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: August 22, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 162)]
[Notices]
[Page 46980-46981]
[DOCID:fr22au07-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-575-000]

High Island Offshore System L.L.C.; Notice of Tariff Filing

August 15, 2007.
    Take notice that on August 14, 2007, High Island Offshore System
L.L.C. (HIOS) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third
Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheets, with an
effective date of April 1, 2007:

Second Revised Sheet No. 225.
Second Revised Sheet No. 228.
First Revised Sheet No. 229.

    HIOS states that the purpose of the filing is to amend Article V--
Settlements, as included in the NGL Bank Agreement of its tariff. The
amendments were all recommended and approved by the HIOS NGL Bank
Advisory Group and include a revised index used for the annual
escalator applied to the monthly fees charged by the administrator and
revised BTU's of fuel per gallon used to determine the fuel costs
calculated in the banking process.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone

filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or
protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons
other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of 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.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-16521 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 234)]
[Notices]
[Page 64786-64788]
[DOCID:fr08de09-115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61095; File No. SR-Phlx-2009-99]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.
Regarding the Obligations of Streaming Quote Traders

December 2, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on November 25, 2009, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``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 is filing with the Commission a proposal to amend its
Rule 1014 (Obligations and Restrictions Applicable to Specialists and
Registered Options Traders) to indicate that certain market makers on
the Exchange, specifically Streaming Quote Traders, Remote Streaming
Quote Traders, Directed Streaming Quote Traders, and Directed Remote
Streaming Quote Traders, will be deemed not to be assigned in Quarterly
Option Series and adjusted option series.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXPHLX/
Filings/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposal is to amend Rule 1014 to indicate that
certain market makers on the Exchange, specifically Streaming Quote
Traders, Remote Streaming Quote Traders, Directed Streaming Quote
Traders, and Directed Remote Streaming Quote Traders, will [sic] deemed
not to be assigned in Quarterly Option Series and adjusted option
series; and to propose a definition of adjusted options series.
    Rule 1014 discusses the obligations and restrictions that are
applicable to specialists and Registered Option Traders (``ROTs'').
ROTs are market makers on the Exchange that include Streaming Quote
Traders (``SQTs'');\3\

Remote Streaming Quote Traders (``RSQTs'');\4\ and Directed Streaming
Quote Traders (``DSQTs'') and Directed Remote Streaming Quote
Traders\5\ (``DRSQTs'') (together the ``Streaming Quote Traders'').
Rule 1014 states that, in addition to other requirements, on a daily
basis Streaming Quote Traders are responsible to quote two-sided
markets in not less than a specified percentage of options assigned by
the Exchange at the request of such Streaming Quote Traders, unless
specifically exempted from such quoting responsibility.\6\ This
exemption from quoting responsibilities, which is in Rule
1014(b)(ii)(D)(4), currently states that Streaming Quote Traders are
deemed not to be assigned, and as such do not have quoting
responsibilities, in options series with an expiration of nine months
or greater (the ``Exemption'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ An SQT is an ROT who has received permission from the
Exchange to generate and submit option quotations electronically in
eligible options to which such SQT is assigned. An SQT may only
submit such quotations while such SQT is physically present on the
floor of the Exchange. See Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 59995 (May 28, 2009), 74 FR 26750 (June 3,
2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-32) (approval order regarding enhancements to
opening, linkage and routing, quoting, and order management
processes in the Exchange's electronic options order entry, trading,
and execution system PHLX XL II).
    \4\ An RSQT is an ROT that is a member or member organization
with no physical trading floor presence who has received permission
from the Exchange to generate and submit option quotations
electronically in eligible options to which such RSQT has been
assigned. An RSQT may only submit such quotations electronically
from off the floor of the Exchange. See Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B).
    \5\ A DSQT is an SQT and a DRSQT is an RSQT that receives a
Directed Order. Exchange Rule 1080(l)(i)(A) defines Directed Order
as any customer order (other than a stop or stop-limit order as
defined in Rule 1066) to buy or sell which has been directed to a
particular specialist, RSQT, or SQT by an Order Flow Provider and
delivered to the Exchange via its electronic quoting, execution and
trading system.
    \6\ Rule 1014(b)(ii)(D) states in part: (1) In addition to the
other requirements for ROTs set forth in this Rule 1014, except as
provided in sub-paragraph (4) below, an SQT and an RSQT shall be
responsible to quote two-sided markets in not less than 60% of the
series in which such SQT or RSQT is assigned, provided that, on any
given day, a Directed SQT (``DSQT'') or a Directed RSQT (``DRSQT'')
(as defined in Rule 1080(l)(i)(C)) shall be responsible to quote
two-sided markets in the lesser of 99% of the series listed on the
Exchange or 100% of the series listed on the Exchange minus one
call-put pair, in each case in at least 60% of the options in which
such DSQT or DRSQT is assigned. Whenever a DSQT or DRSQT enters a
quotation in an option in which such DSQT or DRSQT is assigned, such
DSQT or DRSQT must maintain until the close of that trading day
quotations for the lesser of 99% of the series of the option listed
on the Exchange or 100% of the series of the option listed on the
Exchange minus one call-put pair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange hereby proposes to amend the Exemption. Specifically,
the Exchange proposes to incorporate into the Exemption two additional
types of options series: Quarterly Option Series \7\ and adjusted
option series.\8\ As a result, Streaming Quote Traders would not be
assigned in and would not have quoting obligations in respect of
options that are longer that [sic] nine months in length, Quarterly
Option Series, and adjusted option series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Quarterly Options Series (``QOS'') are series in an options
class that is approved for listing and trading on the Exchange in
which the series is opened for trading on any business day and
expires at the close of business on the last business day of a
calendar quarter. See Rule 1000(b)43. QOS are traded pursuant to the
QOS Program set forth in Commentary .08 to Rule 1012 and Rule
1101A(b)(v).
    \8\ For purposes of the Exemption, an adjusted option series is
defined as an option series wherein one option contract in the
series represents the delivery of other than 100 shares of
underlying stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Shares. See Rule
1014(b)(ii)(D)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has recently noticed a reduction in liquidity in
certain options classes that include adjusted option series and
Quarterly Options Series, emanating from withdrawals from assignments
in these classes. Streaming Quote Traders that have withdrawn from
assignments in these classes have informed the Exchange that the
withdrawals were based in part on the obligation to continuously quote
adjusted options series and Quarterly Option Series, whereby the
quoting obligations on these often less frequently traded option series
impacted the risk parameters acceptable to the Streaming Quote Traders.
By withdrawing from assignments, liquidity (as well as volume) has been
negatively impacted in the affected options classes listed on the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that its rule change proposal will
ameliorate the liquidity impact by allowing Streaming Quote Traders to
continue assignment in option classes.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In that Streaming Quote Traders would not be deemed to be
assigned in QOS and adjusted options series, they also would not
enjoy any benefits stemming from being assigned in these series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change should
incentivize Streaming Quote Traders to continue assignments and thereby
expand liquidity in options classes listed on the Exchange to the
benefit of the Exchange and its members and public customers.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \10\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \11\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of
a free and open market and a national market system. The Exchange
believes that the proposal to exempt Quarterly Option Series and
adjusted option series from assignments will enhance liquidity in
assigned option classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 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 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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The Exchange believes that the foregoing proposed rule change may
take effect upon filing with the Commission pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \12\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\13\
because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (1) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). 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 the 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 satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx 2009-99 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2009-99. 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 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-Phlx 2009-99 and should be
submitted on or before December 29, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-29204 Filed 12-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 222 (Thursday, November 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 71349]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29682]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0805]

Dermatologic and Ophthalmic Drugs 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: Dermatologic and Ophthalmic Drugs 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 February 27, 2012, from
9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Addresses: FDA is opening a docket for public comment on this
meeting. The docket number is FDA-2011-N-0805. The docket will open for
public comment on November 17, 2011. The docket will close on March 5,
2012. Interested persons may submit electronic or written comments
regarding this meeting. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments received will be posted
without change, including any personal information provided. Submit a
single copy of electronic comments or a paper copy of any mailed
comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy. Comments
are to be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this meeting notice. Received comments may be seen in the
Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday. Comments received on or before February 10, 2012, will
be provided to the committee before the meeting.
    Location: Hilton Washington DC/Silver Spring (scheduled to be
renamed in January 2012 to DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Washington DC/
Silver Spring), 8727 Colesville Rd., Silver Spring, MD. The hotel phone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Person: Yvette Waples, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
31, rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax: (301)
847-8533, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee
Information Line, 1-(800) 741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC
area), and follow the prompts to the desired center or product area.
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: The committee will be asked to comment on the following
topics related to the use of ophthalmic drug products (products
intended for use in the eye): (1) Appropriate types of clinical
evidence for developing anti-inflammatory drugs for the treatment of
postoperative inflammation and reduction of ocular (eye) pain in
patients who have undergone ocular surgery. This will include a
discussion of the definition and scope of this indication as well as
the types of clinical trials needed to support approval; and (2)
appropriateness of marketing a single bottle of ophthalmic product for
use in both eyes for postsurgical indications as it relates to the
potential risk for infection. FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research would like the advisory committee to provide advice on the
potential risk and approaches to mitigating that risk, including limits
to fill size where appropriate.
    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.
All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see the
ADDRESSES section of this document) on or before February 10, 2012,
will be provided to the committee. Oral presentations from the public
will be scheduled between approximately 11 a.m. and 12 noon. Those
individuals interested in making 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
February 2, 2012. 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 February 3,
2012.
    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 Yvette Waples 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: November 10, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-29682 Filed 11-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105-2498

OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Heavy-Duty Hybrid Onboard Diagnostics

FROM:		Amy Kopin

TO:		The Docket

DATE:		July 19, 2011

	On May 10th, 2011 we held a conference call with Odyne Systems, LLC to
discuss concerns raised by hybrid manufacturers regarding heavy-duty
onboard diagnostic (OBD) requirements and timing. Hybrid manufacturers,
engine manufacturers, and industry trade groups raised concerns during
the comment period for the heavy-duty greenhouse gas notice of proposed
rulemaking that heavy-duty hybrid applications may not be able to meet
the 2013 heavy-duty OBD regulations that were published in the 2009 OBD
Final Rulemaking.,  Attendees from the EPA and Odyne are shown in the
table below.  The agenda for this meeting is shown on the following page
of this memo.

Attendee 	Affiliation

Cleophas Jackson 	EPA – Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division

Anthony Neam 	EPA – Assessment and Standards Division

Amy Kopin 	EPA – Assessment and Standards Division

Joe Dalum	Odyne - President and CEO

Dr. Phillip Eidler	Odyne – VP Operations

Matt Jarmuz	Odyne – Applications Engineer and Sales

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105-2498

OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

EPA-Odyne Heavy-Duty Hybrid OBD Discussion

3pm-4pm EST  	May 10, 2011

Agenda

EPA’s Questions for Odyene:

1. How does Odyne handle warranty issues today?

2. Does Odyne buy engines or vehicles – What’s Odyne’s role in
vehicle assembly process today?

3. Based on Odyne’s comments, EPA understands that they do not believe
they should be responsible for vehicle/engine warranty.  Does Odynes
position in the vehicle creation process support this?

As noted in Odyne’s comments, in 2013 OBD is required on heavy duty
vehicles.  Hybrid systems will be considered part of the engine system
and be required to comply with the comprehensive component portion of
the EPA’s OBD regulation assuming they interact with the engine.
Through the road hybrid system (where there is no interaction with the
engine system) will not be required to have OBD.

4. How does your hybrid system interact with the engine?

Does it shut off the engine?

Can it add torque to the crank shaft?

Does it supply a load to the engine?

Does it have communication with the engine system?

5. Does Odyne believe their hybrid system will be required to have OBD?

6. If so, what has Odyne done to prepare for 2013?

Odyne’s Questions for the EPA:

1. Why would Odyne’s system need OBD based on the
operation/interaction with the vehicle and engine today?

2. Are there different regulations (OBD, GHG) for PTO based operation
different than hybrid operation?

Attachment:

Comprehensive Component Regulations – can be found starting on page
8391 of the final heavy-duty OBD rulemaking.  Note they are also
discussed in other parts of the final rule, but this is the main text on
‘comprehensive components’ – the entire rule can be accessed here:

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/im/obd/regtech/hd-obd-frm-02-24-09-notice-
74-fr-8310.pdf"
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/im/obd/regtech/hd-obd-frm-02-24-09-notice-7
4-fr-8310.pdf

(double click on file to open .pdf file that contains the regs)

 U.S. EPA, NHTSA, and DOT, “Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Fuel
Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles,”
republished December 29, 2010.  Available here:
http://origin.www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12-29/html/2010-32726.htm

 U.S. EPA, “Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles and New
Motor Vehicles Engines; Final Rule Regulations Requiring Onboard
Diagnostic Systems on 2010 and Later Heavy-Duty Engines Used in Highway
Applications Over 14,000 Pounds; Revisions to Onboard Diagnostic
Requirements for Diesel Highway Heavy-Duty Vehicles Under 14,000
Pounds,” published February 24, 2009.  Available here:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/im/obd/regtech/hd-obd-frm-02-24-09-notice-7
4-fr-8310.pdf