[Federal Register: September 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 173)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46313-46317]
[DOCID:fr09se09-5]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0264; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-174-AD;
Amendment 39-16017; AD 2009-18-20]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330-300, A340-200, and
A340-300 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    One Long Range operator experienced a failure of one spoiler
servo-control, associated with surface deflection in flight and
hydraulic leak. On ground, this servo-control Part Number (P/N)
MZ4306000-02X was found with the maintenance cover broken.
Investigations showed that the rupture of the maintenance cover was
due to pressure pulse fatigue.
    * * * The rupture of the maintenance cover in flight may result
in the deflection of the associated spoiler surface up to the null-
hinge position (loss of the hydraulic locking).

It may also result in the loss of the associated hydraulic system
(external leakage). In the worst case, the three hydraulic systems
may be affected, which constitutes an unsafe condition.
* * * * *
    Loss of the three hydraulic systems could result in reduced
controllability of the airplane. We are issuing this AD to require
actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective October 14, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 14,
2009.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2009 (74
FR 13148). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    One Long Range operator experienced a failure of one spoiler
servo-control, associated with surface deflection in flight and
hydraulic leak. On ground, this servo-control Part Number (P/N)
MZ4306000-02X was found with the maintenance cover broken.
Investigations showed that the rupture of the maintenance cover was
due to pressure pulse fatigue.
    The maintenance cover allows switching the servo-control from
``Operational'' to ``Maintenance'' modes. The same cover is
installed on all standard MZ spoiler servo-controls except on P/N
MZ4339390-12 and MZ4306000-12, which have a reinforced maintenance
cover. The rupture of the maintenance cover in flight may result in
the deflection of the associated spoiler surface up to the null-
hinge position (loss of the hydraulic locking). It may also result
in the loss of the associated hydraulic system (external leakage).
In the worst case, the three hydraulic systems may be affected,
which constitutes an unsafe condition.
    For the reasons described above, this EASA (European Aviation
Safety Agency) AD requires the identification and the modification
of all standard MZ spoiler servo-controls with initial maintenance
cover (P/N MZ4339390-01X, -02X, -10X for position 1 and P/N
MZ4306000-01X, -02X, -10X for positions 2 to 6) into standard MZ
servo-controls with reinforced maintenance cover (P/N MZ4339390-12
for position 1 and P/N MZ4306000-12 for positions 2 to 6).

    Loss of the three hydraulic systems could result in reduced
controllability of the airplane. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Revised Service Information

    We have reviewed Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 03,
dated September 3, 2008. We referred to Airbus Service Bulletin A330-
27-3110, Revision 02, dated March 2, 2007, as the appropriate source of
service information for accomplishing certain actions specified in the
NPRM. We have determined that the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 03, dated September 3, 2008, are
essentially the same as the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 02, dated March 2, 2007. Therefore, we
find that no additional work will be required for airplanes that have
done the requirements of this AD in accordance with Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 02, dated March 2, 2007. We have
changed paragraphs (f)(2) through (f)(6) of this AD to refer to
Revision 03, dated September 3, 2008, of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-
27-3110. We have also changed paragraph (f)(7) of this AD to give
credit to operators who have accomplished the actions in accordance
with Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 02, dated March 2,
2007, as well as the earlier versions of the service bulletin.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Clarify Proposed Applicability

    Airbus asks that the applicability specified in paragraph (c) of
the NPRM be clarified. Airbus notes that the language ``* * * except
those identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD'' is
misleading, because the exceptions are already included in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of the AD.
    We agree with Airbus. We have changed paragraph (c) of this AD as
follows: ``This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-300, A340-200, and
A340-300 series airplanes; certificated in any category; as identified
in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.''

Request To Clarify Paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2)(i), and (f)(2)(ii) of the
NPRM

    Airbus also asks that the words ``of the aircraft'' be added to the
applicable paragraphs after the words ``since first flight'' for
clarification. Airbus notes that the missing text is confusing to
operators, who are asking Airbus if ``since first flight'' refers to
flight hours on the equipment or flight hours on the airplane.
    We agree with Airbus. It was our intent that the phrase ``since
first flight'' apply to the subject airplanes, not equipment.
Therefore, we have changed all applicable references in paragraphs
(f)(1) through (f)(6) of this AD to specify ``since first flight of the
airplane.''

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a note within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD affects
16 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it takes 1 work-
hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of the AD on U.S. operators to be $1,280, or $80 per
product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of

the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,'' describes
in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2009-18-20 Airbus: Amendment 39-16017. Docket No. FAA-2009-0264;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-174-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective October
14, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A330-300, A340-200, and
A340-300 series airplanes; certificated in any category; as
identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -
342, and -343 airplanes, manufacturer serial numbers (MSNs) up to
and including MSN 588, except those on which Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-27-3110 has been embodied in service.
    (2) Airbus Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313
airplanes, MSNs up to and including MSN 598, except those on which
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115 has been embodied in service.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27: Flight
controls.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    One Long Range operator experienced a failure of one spoiler
servo-control, associated with surface deflection in flight and
hydraulic leak. On ground, this servo-control Part Number (P/N)
MZ4306000-02X was found with the maintenance cover broken.
Investigations showed that the rupture of the maintenance cover was
due to pressure pulse fatigue.
    The maintenance cover allows switching the servo-control from
``Operational'' to ``Maintenance'' modes. The same cover is
installed on all standard MZ spoiler servo-controls except on P/N
MZ4339390-12 and MZ4306000-12, which have a reinforced maintenance
cover. The rupture of the maintenance cover in flight may result in
the deflection of the associated spoiler surface up to the null-
hinge position (loss of the hydraulic locking). It may also result
in the loss of the associated hydraulic system (external leakage).
In the worst case, the three hydraulic systems may be affected,
which constitutes an unsafe condition.
    For the reasons described above, this EASA (European Aviation
Safety Agency) AD requires the identification and the modification
of all standard MZ spoiler servo-controls with initial maintenance
cover (P/N MZ4339390-01X, -02X, -10X for position 1 and P/N
MZ4306000-01X, 02X, -10X for positions 2 to 6) into standard MZ
servo-controls with reinforced maintenance cover (P/N MZ4339390-12
for position 1 and P/N MZ4306000-12 for positions 2 to 6).
    Loss of the three hydraulic systems could result in reduced
controllability of the airplane.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For airplanes that have accumulated more than 8,500 total
flight cycles since first flight of the airplane as of the effective
date of this AD: Do the actions required by paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.
    (i) Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD:
Identify the part number of spoiler servo-controls installed on the
airplane at all positions in order to determine the number of
affected hydraulic circuits in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-27A3154,
Revision 01; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-27A4154,
Revision 01; both dated July 25, 2008; as applicable. If there is no
spoiler servo-control installed with a part number identified in
Table 1 of this AD, no further action is required by this paragraph.
    (ii) If there is any spoiler servo-control installed with a part
number identified in Table 1 of this AD, do all applicable actions
required by paragraph (f)(2), (f)(3), or (f)(4) of this AD, as
applicable.

               Table 1--Spoiler Servo-Control Part Numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Position 1                      Positions 2 through 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MZ4339390-01X.............................  MZ4306000-01X
MZ4339390-02X.............................  MZ4306000-02X
MZ4339390-10X.............................  MZ4306000-10X
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (2) If three affected hydraulic circuits are identified during
the inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, do the
actions required by paragraphs (f)(2)(i), (f)(2)(ii), and
(f)(2)(iii) of this AD, at the time specified.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 10,400 total flight cycles since
first flight of the airplane, or within 3 months after accomplishing
the requirements of paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD, whichever occurs
later: Modify the affected spoiler servo-controls on one hydraulic
circuit in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 03, dated September 3, 2008;
or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115, Revision 01, dated March 2,
2007; as applicable.
    (ii) Before the accumulation of 10,800 total flight cycles since
first flight of the airplane, or within 6 months after accomplishing
the requirements in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD, whichever occurs
later: Modify the affected spoiler servo-controls on the second
hydraulic circuit in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110,
Revision 03, dated September 3, 2008; or Airbus Service Bulletin
A340-27-4115, Revision 01, dated March 2, 2007; as applicable.
    (iii) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD:
Modify the remaining affected spoiler servo-controls in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-27-3110, Revision 03, dated September 3, 2008; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-27-4115, Revision 01, dated March 2, 2007; as
applicable.
    (3) If two affected hydraulic circuits are identified during the
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, do the actions
required by paragraphs (f)(3)(i) and (f)(3)(ii) of this AD, at the
time specified.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 10,800 total flight cycles since
first flight of the airplane, or within 6 months after accomplishing
the requirements specified in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD,
whichever occurs later: Modify the affected spoiler servo-controls
on one hydraulic circuit in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 03,
dated September 3, 2008; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115,
Revision 01, dated March 2, 2007; as applicable.
    (ii) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD:
Modify the remaining affected spoiler servo-controls in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-27-3110, Revision 03, dated September 3, 2008; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-27-4115, Revision 01, dated March 2, 2007; as
applicable.
    (4) If one affected hydraulic circuit is identified during the
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD: Within 18 months
after the effective date of this AD, modify the affected spoiler
servo-controls in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 03, dated September
3, 2008; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115, Revision 01, dated
March 2, 2007; as applicable.
    (5) For airplanes that have accumulated less than or equal to
8,500 total flight cycles since first flight of the airplane as of
the effective date of this AD: Do the actions required by paragraphs
(f)(5)(i) and (f)(5)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.
    (i) Within 9 months after the effective date of this AD: Do the
actions specified in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD. If there is no
spoiler servo-control installed with a part number identified in
Table 1 of this AD, no further action is required by this paragraph.
    (ii) If there is any spoiler servo-control installed with a part
number identified in Table 1 of this AD: Within 18 months after the
effective date of this AD, modify all the affected spoiler servo-
controls in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 03, dated September
3, 2008; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115, Revision 01, dated
March 2, 2007; as applicable.
    (6) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install
any spoiler servo-control with a part number identified in Table 1
of this AD on any airplane as a replacement part, unless the part
has been modified in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110, Revision 03, dated
September 3, 2008; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115, Revision
01, dated March 2, 2007; as applicable.
    (7) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the service bulletins specified in Table 2 of this
AD are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements of this AD.

                                       Table 2--Credit Service Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Service Bulletin                     Revision level                           Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110....  Original...................  November 28, 2003.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110....  01.........................  March 26, 2004.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110....  02.........................  March 2, 2007.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115....  Original...................  November 28, 2003.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to EASA Airworthiness Directive 2008-0160, dated
August 22, 2008, and the service bulletins specified in Table 3 of
this AD, for related information.

                                      Table 3--Related Service Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Service Bulletin                 Revision level                         Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-                      01  July 25, 2008.
 27A3154.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-                      01  July 25, 2008.
 27A4154.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110.........                03  September 3, 2008.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115.........                01  March 2, 2007.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the service information contained in Table 4 of
this AD to do the actions required by this AD, as applicable, unless
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80, e-mail

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

                                   Table 4--Material Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Service Bulletin                 Revision level                         Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-                      01  July 25, 2008.
 27A3154, excluding Appendix 1.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-                      01  July 25, 2008.
 27A4154, excluding Appendix 1.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3110.........                03  September 3, 2008.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4115.........                01  March 2, 2007.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 26, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-21408 Filed 9-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 36 (Tuesday, February 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9731-9732]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03694]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-D-0235]

Evaluating the Effectiveness of New Animal Drugs for the
Reduction of Pathogenic Shiga Toxin-Producing Escherichia coli in
Cattle; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a draft guidance for industry (GFI #229) entitled
``Evaluating the Effectiveness of New Animal Drugs for the Reduction of
Pathogenic Shiga Toxin-Producing E. coli in Cattle.'' The purpose of
this document is to provide recommendations to industry relating to
study design and describe criteria the Center for Veterinary Medicine
(CVM) thinks are the most appropriate for the evaluation of the
effectiveness of new animal drugs that are intended to reduce
pathogenic Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) in cattle.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by April 27, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to
the Communications Staff (HFV-12), Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food
and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua R. Hayes, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-133), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
(GFI #229) entitled ``Evaluating the Effectiveness of New Animal Drugs
for the Reduction of Pathogenic Shiga Toxin-Producing E. coli in
Cattle.'' This draft guidance provides recommendations to industry
relating to study design and describes criteria CVM thinks are the most
appropriate for the evaluation of the effectiveness of new animal drugs
that are intended to reduce pathogenic STEC in cattle. It discusses
general considerations regarding the development of protocols, study
conduct, animal welfare, substantial evidence of effectiveness,
experimental parameters, nutritional content of experimental diets, and
the assessment of drug concentrations in experimental diets. It also
discusses the studies and analyses CVM recommends for sponsors

to substantiate the effectiveness of pathogenic STEC reduction drugs.

II. Significance of Guidance

    This level 1 draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's
good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance,
when finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on this
topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and
does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may
be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 514 have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0032.

IV. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

V. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: February 17, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-03694 Filed 2-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32644-32647]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13985]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75098; File No. SR-NSX-2015-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Provide an Expedited Process for Former Equity Trading Permit Holders
To Apply for Reinstatement and Register Associated Persons

June 3, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'' or ``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on May 27, 2015, the National Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``NSX'' or the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change, as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
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

    The Exchange is proposing to amend Exchange Rule 2.5 (Application
Procedures for an ETP Holder or to become an Associated Person of an
ETP Holder)\3\ to add new Interpretations and Policies section .01,
entitled ``Expedited Process for Reinstatement as an ETP Holder.'' The
Exchange is proposing this amendment to allow the use of an expedited
process to facilitate the reinstatement, subject to certain conditions,
of former ETP Holders of NSX \4\ and to register their Associated
Persons.\5\ The Exchange's proposal is

designed to facilitate an efficient reinstatement process in connection
with a subsequent reopening of trading on the Exchange, after all
regulatory approvals are obtained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``ETP Holder'' refers to the holder of an Equity
Trading Permit, or ``ETP,'' issued by the Exchange for effecting
approved securities transactions on the Exchange's trading
facilities. An ETP may be issued to a sole proprietor, partnership,
corporation, limited liability company or other organization which
is a registered broker or dealer pursuant to section 15 of the Act
(See Exchange Rule 1.5E.(1)).
    \4\ Pursuant to a rule filing with the Commission, the Exchange
ceased trading operations as of the close of business on May 30,
2014. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72107 (May 6, 2014),
79 FR 27017 (May 12, 2014) (SR-NSX-2014-14). NSX continued to be
registered as a national securities exchange and retained its status
as a self-regulatory organization. All NSX rules remained in full
force and effect after trading on the NSX's trading system ceased.
    \5\ The terms ``person associated with an ETP Holder'' or
``associated person of an ETP Holder'' mean any partner, officer,
director, or branch manager of an ETP Holder (or any person
occupying a similar status or performing similar functions), any
person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with an ETP Holder, or any employee of such ETP
Holder, except that any person associated with an ETP Holder whose
functions are solely clerical or ministerial shall not be included
in the meaning of such terms. See Exchange Rule 1.5P.(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has designated this rule proposal as ``non-
controversial'' pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \6\ and
provided the Commission with the notice required by Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act.\7\ The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nsx.com, at the Exchange's
principal office, and at the Commission's public reference room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and statutory basis for,
the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 2.5 to implement, on a
temporary basis, an expedited procedure to permit approved ETP Holders
in good standing as of the close of business on May 30, 2014, when the
Exchange ceased trading operations, to reinstate their ETP Holder
status and register with the Exchange each Associated Person of such
ETP Holder. As proposed, the Exchange will require that: (i) The ETP
Holder using the expedited process is a member of another self-
regulatory organization (``SRO''); and (ii) each proposed Associated
Person holds an active and recognized securities industry
registration.\8\ Former ETP Holders seeking reinstatement under the
proposed expedited process would use a short-form application to
reinstate their ETP Holder status and register Associated Persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See footnote 4, supra. As provided in the Exchange's rule
filing to cease trading operations on the Exchange as of May 30,
2014, all ETPs terminated automatically as of that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes that the expedited procedure for
reinstatement as an ETP Holder and registering Associated Persons would
be effective for 90 days from the date on which the rule amendment
permitting the use of expedited procedure becomes effective. The short-
form application that the Exchange proposes for use in connection with
the expedited reinstatement process will include an agreement
conforming with Rule 2.5(a)(1) through (a)(5).\9\ The short form
application will also include the Exchange's standard routing
agreement. The Exchange may request further documentation, in addition
to the short-form application, in order to confirm that a former ETP
Holder using the expedited process and any proposed Associated Persons
meet the qualification standards set forth in Exchange Rule 2.4
(Restrictions). As part of the expedited application process, the
Exchange will review the records of the prospective ETP Holder and each
proposed Associated Person maintained by the Central Registration
Depository System (``CRD'').\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Exchange Rule 2.5 (a)(1) through (a)(5) require [sic] that
applications for an ETP contain certain agreements, including, inter
alia: an agreement by the applicant to adhere to the provisions of
the Exchange's amended certificate of incorporation, its by-laws,
the Exchange Rules, the policies, interpretations and guidelines of
the Exchange and all orders and decisions of the Exchange's Board of
Directors; an agreement to pay dues, assessments and other charges
in the manner and amount fixed by the Exchange; an agreement that
the Exchange, its officers, employees and members of the Board and
of any committee shall not be liable, except for willful
malfeasance, to the applicant or to any other person for any action
taken by such director, officer of member in his official capacity,
or by any employee while acting within the scope of his employment,
in connection with the administration or enforcement of any of the
provisions of the Exchange's by-laws, its Rules, policies,
interpretations or guidelines of the Exchange or of any penalty
imposed by the exchange, its Board or any duly authorized committee;
an agreement to maintain and make available to the Exchange, its
authorized employees and its Board or committee members such books
and records as may be required to be maintained by the Commission or
the Exchange Rules; and such other reasonable information with
respect to the applicant as the Exchange may require.
    \10\ The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'')
operates the CRD System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After the expiration of the 90-day period, the expedited process
would no longer be available and any former ETP Holder and Associated
Person seeking reinstatement after that date would be required to
complete a full application. The expedited process will not be
available to new ETP applicants (i.e., an applicant that was not an
approved ETP Holder in good standing as of May 30, 2014) or to ETP
Holders that ceased to be members of another SRO after May 30, 2014.
The Exchange will not approve any application unless the prospective
ETP Holder is a member of another SRO.
    The Exchange's proposal is intended to allow former ETP Holders to
reinstate their status and register Associated Persons in an efficient
manner that will enable the Exchange to progress toward a reopening of
trading as soon as practicable after the Exchange has obtained all of
the necessary regulatory approvals to do so. Reinstating ETP Holders
and registering their Associated Persons is a critical element of this
process from both an organizational and operational standpoint. Before
trading on the Exchange can resume, ETP Holders will need to re-
establish and test their connectivity. The Exchange will need to test
its systems to confirm that the functionality to process, route and
execute orders and issue reports to customers, which has not been
modified since May 30, 2014, will continue to operate without incident
upon a resumption of trading on the Exchange. Given these imperatives,
the Exchange believes that it is important to effectuate the
reinstatement of qualified former ETP Holders and the registration of
their Associated Persons as quickly and efficiently as possible.
    The Exchange submits that its proposal does not present any
significant regulatory risk. Prior to May 30, 2014, every ETP Holder
was a member of another SRO with oversight responsibility, and the
Exchange will not approve any ETP Holder application unless the
applicant is a current member of another SRO. The short form
application requires each prospective ETP Holder to identify its
Designated Examining Authority (``DEA''). The expedited process
proposed in this filing will only be available to approved ETP Holders
in good standing as of May 30, 2014, each of which had previously been
approved by the Exchange through its regular application process
pursuant to Rule 2.5. Further, the Exchange will not approve any
proposed Associated Person unless such person holds an active and
recognized securities industry registration and meets the requirements
of Rule 2.4 (Restrictions).
    The Exchange notes that the Commission has approved the use of an
expedited membership approval process and a short-form application in
other

situations where the facts and circumstances did not justify the time
and administrative costs inherent in completing and processing the
regular application to become a member of a national securities
exchange. In the past, such situations have involved the formation of a
new exchange that is an affiliate of an existing exchange and the
members of the existing exchange are permitted to become members of the
newly-formed exchange through an expedited process, using a short-form
application.\11\ Use of an expedited process in that circumstance was
appropriate since the applicants for membership on the new exchange had
already been approved as members of the affiliated exchange. The
Exchange submits that using an expedited process and a short-form
application is similarly appropriate in this case, where the Exchange
is seeking to employ an efficient and cost-effective means of
reinstating previously-approved ETP Holders and registering their
Associated Persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See, e.g., In the Matter of the Applications of EDGX
Exchange, Inc., and EDGA Exchange, Inc. for Registration as National
Securities Exchanges: Findings, Opinion, and Order of the
Commission, Exchange Act Release No. 61698 (March 12, 2010), 75 FR
13151 (March 18, 2010) (File Nos. 10-194 and 10-196); In the Matter
of the Application of BATS Exchange, Inc. for Registration as a
National Securities Exchange; Findings, Opinion, and Order of the
Commission, Exchange Act Release No. 58375 (August 18, 2008), 73 FR
49498 (August 21, 2008) (File No. 10-182).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to
the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of section 6(b) of
the Exchange Act.\12\ Pursuant to section 6(b)(2) of the Act,\13\ and
subject to the conditions set forth in section 6(c) of the Act,\14\ in
its capacity as a registered national securities exchange, NSX's rules
must provide that any registered broker-dealer may become an ETP Holder
and any person may become an Associated Person thereof. Under section
6(c) of the Act, the Exchange must deny ETP Holder status to any
person, other than a natural person, that is not a registered broker or
dealer, any natural person that is not, or is not associated with, a
registered broker or dealer, and registered broker-dealers that do not
satisfy certain standards, such as financial responsibility or
operational capacity. As a registered national securities exchange, NSX
must independently determine if an applicant satisfies the standards
set forth in the Act and in the Exchange's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(2).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange submits that its proposal for an expedited approval
process for former ETP Holders and Associated Persons thereof is
consistent with its obligations as a registered national securities
exchange under the Exchange Act. The expedited process would only be
available to ETP Holders that were in good standing as of May 30, 2014;
all of such ETP Holders had previously been approved by the Exchange
under its regular application process as set forth in Rule 2.5.\15\ As
part of its review process in connection with submitted ``waive-in''
applications, the Exchange will review the CRD records for both the ETP
Holder applicant and proposed Associated Persons, and will request
additional information as necessary to assure that they continue to
meet the eligibility requirements set forth in the Ace [sic] and in the
Exchange's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See footnote 9, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes that its proposal is consistent with
the requirements of section 6(b)(5) \16\ that the rules of an exchange
be designed, among other things, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Additionally, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the section
6(b)(5) requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed expedited process will
operate to reduce the time and administrative costs normally incurred
by both ETP Holders and the Exchange in processing applications to
become ETP Holders and registering their Associated Persons. The
Exchange further believes that its proposal will thus promote just and
equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. The
Exchange's proposal will be available to all ETP Holders in good
standing as of May 30, 2014 that seek to reinstate their status as ETP
Holders of NSX, thus meeting the requirement of section 6(b)(5) that
the Exchange's rules not be designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
    Additionally, the Exchange notes that its proposed expedited
procedure for reinstatement will have duration of 90 days from the date
that the instant rule change becomes effective. This is consistent with
the approach in other instances where national securities exchanges
used an expedited application process for a limited purpose and a
similar time frame, after which the expedited process was no longer
available. The Exchange believes that by utilizing an expedited process
that has precedent in both its application and its time duration with
the process used by other national securities exchanges, it is
fulfilling the requirement of section 6(b)(5) of the Act that its rules
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in, among
other things, regulating and processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in securities.

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b)(8) of the Act \17\ in that it will not impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange's proposed
expedited process will only be available to broker-dealers that were
registered ETP Holders as of the date the Exchange ceased trading
operations. Allowing for an expedited and efficient process for
reinstatement of ETP Holders and registering their Associated Persons
will facilitate the process of preparing the Exchange for a resumption
of trading, thereby providing another competitive trading venue for
market participants. The Exchange notes that new ETP Holder applicants
would not be eligible for the expedited process, nor would any
otherwise eligible former ETP Holder that sought reinstatement after
the 90-day time period for use of the expedited process had elapsed.
Associated Persons that an ETP Holder seeks to register through the
expedited process must hold an active and recognized securities
industry registration and meet the requirements of Rule 2.4(e) [sic].
The Exchange submits that these factors indicate that its proposal will
not impose any unnecessary or inappropriate burden on competition and
therefore is consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).

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

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

    The Exchange has not solicited or received comments on the proposed
rule change from market participants or others.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \18\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \20\ to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSX-2015-02 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-NSX-2015-02. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing will also 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-NSX-2015-02 and should be
submitted on or before June 30, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Robert W. Errett,
 Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-13985 Filed 6-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 185 (Wednesday, September 23, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59729-59732]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19587]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0418; FRL-10013-74-Region 9]

Air Quality Implementation Plan; California; Northern Sierra Air
Quality Management District; Stationary Source Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management
District (NSAQMD or ``District'') portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). In this action, we are proposing to approve
a rule submitted by the NSAQMD that governs the issuance of permits for
stationary sources, which focuses on the preconstruction review and
permitting of major sources and major modifications under part D of
title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act''). We are taking
comments on this proposal and a final action will follow.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 23, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2020-0418 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the 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 the disclosure of which 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. The 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, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI and multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in
a language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber Batchelder, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105; by phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation
    A. What is the background for this proposal?
    B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
III. Proposed Action and Public Comment
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal, including the
date on which it was adopted by the District and the date on which it
was submitted to the EPA by the California Air Resources Board (CARB or
``the State''). The Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District
(NSAQMD) is the air pollution control agency for Nevada, Sierra, and
Plumas Counties.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           District                Rule No.                Rule title                 Adopted      Submitted\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSAQMD........................             428  NSR Requirements for New and            11/25/19        02/19/20
                                                 Modified Major Sources in
                                                 Nonattainment Areas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For areas designated nonattainment for one or more National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the applicable SIP must include
preconstruction review and permitting requirements for new or modified
major stationary sources of such nonattainment pollutant(s) under part
D of title I of the Act, commonly referred to as Nonattainment New
Source Review (NNSR). The rule listed in Table 1 contains the
District's NNSR permit program applicable to new and modified major
sources located in areas within the District that are designated
nonattainment for any NAAQS for ozone or particulate matter equal to or
less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The submittal was transmitted to the EPA via a letter from
CARB dated February 6, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We find that the submittal for Rule 428 meets the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal
EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There are no previous versions of NSAQMD Rule 428 in the California
SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    NSAQMD Rule 428 is intended to address the CAA's statutory and
regulatory requirements for NNSR permit programs for major sources
emitting nonattainment air pollutants and their precursors.

II. The EPA's Evaluation

A. What is the background for this proposal?

    Because a part of Nevada County(``the western part'') is a federal
ozone nonattainment area and part of Plumas County (``the Portola
area'') is a federal PM2.5 nonattainment area,\2\ the CAA
requires the NSAQMD to have a SIP-approved NNSR program for new and
modified major sources in the ozone and PM2.5 nonattainment
areas that are under its jurisdiction. Below, we provide the area's
nonattainment designation history for the ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS, which forms the basis for the District's NNSR program needed to
satisfy the NNSR requirements applicable to Serious ozone nonattainment
areas and Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ While the NSAQMD includes all of Nevada, Sierra, and Plumas
Counties, only the western part of Nevada County is nonattainment
for ozone, and only a specific part of Plumas County is
nonattainment for PM2.5. See 40 CFR part 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 18, 1997, the EPA issued a final rule revising the primary
and secondary NAAQS for ozone to establish new 8-hour standards of 0.08
ppm.\3\ On April 30, 2004, the EPA issued a final rule designating the
western part of Nevada County as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.\4\ On May 14, 2012, this area was reclassified as Moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.\5\ On December 3, 2012, the EPA
issued a final rule that determined that the western part of Nevada
County had attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS by the extended attainment
date.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 40 CFR 50.10; see 62 FR 38856, 38894-38895.
    \4\ 69 FR 23858, 23889.
    \5\ 77 FR 28424; see also 77 FR 43521 (July 25, 2012); 40 CR
81.305.
    \6\ 77 FR 71551.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 27, 2008, the EPA issued a final rule revising the NAAQS
for ozone, reducing the standards to a level of 0.075 ppm.\7\ On May
21, 2012, the EPA issued a final rule designating the western part of
Nevada County as nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, with a
Marginal classification.\8\ On May 4, 2016, the EPA issued a final rule
that determined that the western part of Nevada County had not attained
the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the attainment date and was therefore
reclassified as a Moderate nonattainment area.\9\ On August 23, 2019,
the EPA issued a final rule that determined that the western part of
Nevada County had not attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the attainment
date and was therefore reclassified as a Serious ozone nonattainment
area.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 40 CFR 50.15; see 73 FR 16436, 16511.
    \8\ 77 FR 30088, 30103.
    \9\ 81 FR 26697.
    \10\ 84 FR 44238; see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 26, 2015, the EPA issued a final rule revising the NAAQS
for ozone, reducing the standards to a level of 0.070 ppm.\11\ On June
4, 2018, the EPA issued a final rule designating the western part of
Nevada County as nonattainment for the 2015 8-hour

ozone NAAQS, with a Moderate classification.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 40 CFR 50.19; see 80 FR 65292, 65452-53.
    \12\ 83 FR 25776, 25788; see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 15, 2013, the EPA issued a final rule revising the NAAQS
for PM2.5, reducing the primary annual standard to 12.0
micrograms per cubic meter.\13\ On January 15, 2015, the EPA issued a
final rule designating the Portola area as nonattainment for the 2012
primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS, with a Moderate
classification.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 40 CFR 50.18; see 78 FR 3086, 3277.
    \14\ 80 FR 2206, 2218; see 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The designations of the western part of Nevada County as a federal
ozone nonattainment area and the Portola area as a federal
PM2.5 nonattainment area triggered the requirement for the
NSAQMD to develop and submit an NNSR program to the EPA for approval
into the California SIP.\15\ The District's NNSR program must satisfy
the NNSR requirements applicable to Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment areas and Serious ozone nonattainment areas, as these are
the highest PM2.5 and ozone nonattainment classifications to
which the District is subject.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 40 CFR 51.1003(a)(1), 51.1100(o)(14), 51.1105(a) and (f),
51.1114, 51.1314. We note that, as a result of the EPA's
determination that an area has attained a NAAQS by the attainment
date, those SIP elements related to attaining the NAAQS are
suspended for so long as the area continues to attain the standard;
however, the requirement for an NNSR program is not one of the SIP
elements suspended as a result of such a determination. See, e.g.,
40 CFR 51.1118.
    \16\ See 40 CFR 51.1003(a)(1), 51.1105(f), 51.1114.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 19, 2020, CARB submitted to the EPA for SIP approval,
via correspondence dated February 6, 2020, NSAQMD Rule 428, ``NSR
Requirements for New and Modified Major Sources in Nonattainment
Areas,'' which was adopted by the District on November 25, 2019.

B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    The EPA reviewed NSAQMD Rule 428 for compliance with CAA
requirements for: (1) Stationary source preconstruction permitting
programs as set forth in CAA part D, including CAA sections 172(c)(5)
and 173; (2) the review and modification of major sources in accordance
with 40 CFR 51.160-51.165 as applicable in Serious ozone and Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment areas; (3) the review of new major
stationary sources or major modifications in a designated nonattainment
area that may have an impact on visibility in any mandatory Class I
Federal Area in accordance with 40 CFR 51.307; (4) SIPs in general as
set forth in CAA section 110(a)(2), including 110(a)(2)(A) and
110(a)(2)(E)(i); \17\ and (5) SIP revisions as set forth in CAA section
110(l) \18\ and 193.\19\ Our review evaluated the submittals for
compliance with the NNSR requirements applicable to nonattainment areas
designated Serious for ozone and nonattainment areas designated
Moderate for PM2.5, and ensured that the submittals
addressed the NNSR requirements for the 1997, 2008 and 2015 ozone
NAAQS, and the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations
submitted to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally
enforceable, and CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires that states
have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to
carry out their proposed SIP revisions.
    \18\ CAA section 110(l) requires SIP revisions to be subject to
reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption and submittal
by states to EPA and prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision
that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
    \19\ CAA section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-
approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990 in a
nonattainment area, unless the modification ensures equivalent or
greater emission reductions of the relevant pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    With respect to procedural requirements, CAA sections 110(a)(2) and
110(l) require that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the state after
reasonable notice and public hearing. Based on our review of the public
process documentation included in the February 19, 2020 submittal of
NSAQMD Rule 428, we find that the NSAQMD has provided sufficient
evidence of public notice, opportunity for comment and a public hearing
prior to adoption and submittal of these rules to the EPA.
    With respect to the substantive requirements found in CAA sections
172(c)(5) and 173, and 40 CFR 51.160-51.165, we have evaluated NSAQMD
Rule 428 in accordance with the applicable CAA and regulatory
requirements that apply to NNSR permit programs under part D of title I
of the Act for all relevant ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, including
the 2015 ozone NAAQS. We find that NSAQMD Rule 428 satisfies these
requirements as they apply to sources subject to NNSR permit program
requirements for ozone nonattainment areas classified as Serious and
PM2.5 nonattainment areas classified as Moderate. We have
also determined that this rule satisfies the related visibility
requirements in 40 CFR 51.307. In addition, we have determined that
Rule 428 satisfies the requirement in CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) that
requires regulations submitted to the EPA for SIP approval to be clear
and legally enforceable, and have determined that the submittal
demonstrates in accordance with CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) that the
District has adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law
to carry out these proposed SIP revisions.
    Our Technical Support Document, which can be found in the docket
for this rule, contains a more detailed discussion of our analysis of
Rule 428.

III. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is proposing
to approve the submitted rule because it fulfills all relevant CAA
requirements. We have concluded that our approval of the submitted rule
would comply with the relevant provisions of CAA sections 110(a)(2),
110(l), 172(c)(5), 173, and 193, and 40 CFR 51.160-51.165 and 40 CFR
51.307.
    In support of this proposed action, we have concluded that our
action would comply with section 110(l) of the Act because approval of
NSAQMD Rule 428 will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other CAA
applicable requirement. In addition, our approval of Rule 428 will not
relax any pre-November 15, 1990 requirement in the SIP, and therefore
changes to the SIP resulting from this action ensure greater or
equivalent emission reductions of ozone, PM2.5, and their
respective precursors in the District; accordingly, we have concluded
that our action is consistent with the requirements of CAA section 193.
    If we finalize this action as proposed, our action will be codified
through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220a (Identification of plan-in part).
    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until
October 23, 2020.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the rule listed in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, this document available electronically
through https://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region
IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     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 the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: August 28, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-19587 Filed 9-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66900-66902]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27130]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68130; File No. SR-OCC-2012-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Revise the Method for
Determining the Minimum Clearing Fund Size To Include Consideration of
the Amount Necessary To Draw on Secured Credit Facilities

November 1, 2012.
    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 18, 2012, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared primarily by OCC. 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

    OCC proposes to revise the method for determining the minimum
clearing fund size to include consideration of the amount necessary for
OCC to draw on its secured credit facilities.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC 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. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.

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

    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to implement a minimum
clearing fund size equal to 110% of the amount of committed credit
facilities secured by the clearing fund to ensure that the amount of
the clearing fund likely will exceed the required collateral value that
would be necessary for OCC to be able to draw in full on such credit
facilities. OCC's clearing fund is primarily intended to provide a high
degree of assurance that market integrity will be maintained in the
event that one or more clearing members or other specified entities to
which OCC has credit exposure fails to meet its obligations.\3\ This
includes the potential use of the clearing fund as a source of
liquidity should it ever be the case that OCC is unable to obtain
prompt delivery of, or convert promptly to cash, any

asset credited to the account of a suspended clearing member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Under Article VIII, Section 1 of OCC's By-Laws, the clearing
fund may be used to pay losses suffered by OCC: (1) As a result of
the failure of a clearing member to perform its obligations with
regard to any exchange transaction accepted by OCC; (2) as a result
of a clearing member's failure to perform its obligations in respect
of an exchange transaction or an exercised/assigned options
contract, or any other contract or obligations in respect of which
OCC is liable; (3) as a result of the failure of a clearing member
to perform its obligations in respect of stock loan or borrow
positions; (4) as a result of a liquidation of a suspended clearing
member's open positions; (5) in connection with protective
transactions of a suspended clearing member; (6) as a result of a
failure of any clearing member to make any other required payment or
to render any other required performance; or (7) as a result of a
failure of any bank or securities or commodities clearing
organization to perform its obligations to OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 23, 2011, the Commission approved a proposed rule
change by OCC to establish the size of OCC's clearing fund as the
amount that is required, within a confidence level selected by OCC, to
sustain the maximum anticipated loss under a defined set of scenarios
as determined by OCC, subject to a minimum clearing fund size of $1
billion.\4\ OCC implemented this change in May 2012. Until that time,
the size of OCC's clearing fund was calculated each month as a fixed
percentage of the average total daily margin requirement for the
preceding month, provided that the calculation resulted in a clearing
fund of $1 billion or more.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-65386 (September 23,
2011), 76 FR 60572 (September 29, 2011) (SR-OCC-2011-10).
    \5\ If the calculation did not result in a clearing fund size of
$1 billion or more, then the percentage of the average total daily
margin requirement for the preceding month that resulted in a fund
level of at least $1 billion would be applied. However, in no event
was the percentage permitted to exceed 7%. With the rule change
approved in September 2011, this 7% limiting factor on the minimum
clearing fund size was eliminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the formula that is implemented for determining the size of
the clearing fund as a result of the May 2012 change, OCC's Rules
provide that the amount of the fund is equal to the larger of the
amount of the charge to the fund that would result from (i) a default
by the single ``clearing member group'' \6\ whose default would be
likely to result in the largest draw against the clearing fund or (ii)
an event involving the near-simultaneous default of two randomly-
selected ``clearing member groups'' in each case as calculated by OCC
with a confidence level selected by OCC.\7\ The size of the clearing
fund continues to be recalculated monthly, based on a monthly averaging
of daily calculations for the previous month, and it is subject to a
requirement that its minimum size may not be less than $1 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``clearing member group'' is defined in OCC's By-
Laws to mean a clearing member and any member affiliates of the
clearing member.
    \7\ The confidence levels employed by OCC in calculating the
charge likely to result from a default by OCC's largest ``clearing
member group'' and the default of two randomly-selected ``clearing
member groups'' were approved by the Commission at 99% and 99.9%,
respectively. However, the Commission approval order notes that OCC
retains discretion to employ different confidence levels in these
calculations provided that OCC will not employ confidence levels of
less than 99% without first filing a proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This minimum dollar size for OCC's clearing fund is the subject of
this proposed rule change. OCC maintains committed credit facilities
that are secured by the clearing fund in order to provide a source of
liquidity in the event of a default by a clearing member or one of
OCC's settlement banks. The proposed rule change arises out of a
regular review that OCC conducts in order to determine the appropriate
aggregate amount of such committed credit facilities. In addition to
its liquidity exposure to the potential failure of a clearing member,
OCC also evaluates its liquidity exposure to settlement banks in
respect of their ability to wire net settlement proceeds in time for
OCC to meet its settlement obligations at one or more of OCC's other
settlement banks as well as OCC's credit exposure to banks that issue
letters of credit on behalf of clearing members as a form of margin.
    OCC's committed credit facilities are secured by assets in the
clearing fund and certain margin deposits of suspended clearing
members. In light of the uncertainty regarding the amount of margin
assets of a suspended clearing member that might be eligible at any
given point to support borrowing under the secured credit facilities,
OCC has considered the availability of funds based on a consideration
of the amount of the clearing fund deposits available as collateral. To
draw on the full amount of its credit facilities secured by the
clearing fund, the size of the clearing fund would need to be
approximately $2.2 billion. The $2.2 billion figure reflects a 10%
increase above the total size of such credit facilities, which is meant
to account for the percentage discount applied to collateral pledged by
OCC in determining the amount available for borrowing.
    Based on monthly recalculation information, the size of OCC's
clearing fund during the period from July 2011 to July 2012 was less
than $2.2 billion on eight occasions. Therefore, to address the risk
that the assets in the clearing fund might at any time be insufficient
to enable OCC to meet potential liquidity needs by fully accessing its
committed credit facilities that are secured by the clearing fund, the
proposed rule change would amend the requirement that the minimum size
of the clearing fund cannot be less than $1 billion by providing
instead that the minimum clearing fund size would be equal to the
greater of either $1 billion or 110% of the amount of such committed
credit facilities. OCC proposes to denote the credit facility component
of the minimum clearing fund requirement as a percentage of the total
amount of the credit facilities that OCC actually secures with clearing
fund assets because OCC negotiates these credit facility agreements,
including size and other terms, on an annual basis and the total size
is therefore subject to change.
    OCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 17A of the Act \8\ and the rules and regulations thereunder
because the proposed modifications would help ensure that the Rules of
OCC are designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions \9\ by requiring a minimum
clearing fund size that is designed to enable OCC to draw in full on
its committed credit facilities that are secured by the clearing fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any
burden on competition.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
    The proposals contained in this proposed rule change shall not take
effect until all regulatory actions required with respect to the
proposals are completed.\10\ The clearing agency

shall post notice on its Web site of proposed changes that are
implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ OCC also filed the proposed rule change as an advance
notice under Section 806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and
Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (``Clearing Supervision Act'').
12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). Proposed changes filed under the Clearing
Supervision Act may be implemented either: (i) At the time the
Commission notifies the clearing agency that it does not object to
the proposed rule change and authorizes its implementation, or, if
the Commission does not object to the proposed rule change within
sixty days of the later of: (i) the date the advance notice was
filed with the Commission or (ii) the date that any additional
information requested by the Commission is received. 12 U.S.C.
5465(e)(1)(G).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-OCC-2012-19 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-OCC-2012-19. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC and
on OCC's Web site at http://www.optionsclearing.com/components/docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/sr_occ_12_19.pdf. 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-OCC-2012-19 and should be submitted on
or before November 28, 2012.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-27130 Filed 11-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 192)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 58571-58572]
[DOCID:fr04oc06-25]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 281

[EPA-RO1-UST-2006-0622; FRL-8226-6]

New Hampshire: Final Approval of Underground Storage Tank Program
Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The State of New Hampshire has applied to EPA for approval of
the changes to its underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has determined
that these amendments satisfy all requirements needed for program
approval and proposes to approve the State's changes. In the ``Rules
and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving
the changes by an immediate final rule. EPA did not make a proposal
prior to the immediate final rule because we believe this action is not
controversial and do not expect comments that oppose it. We have
explained the reasons for this approval in the preamble to the
immediate final rule. Unless we get written comments which oppose this
approval during the comment period, the immediate final rule will
become effective on the date it establishes, and we will not take
further action on this proposal. If we receive comments that oppose
this action, we will withdraw the immediate final rule and it will not
take effect. We will then respond to public comments in a later final
rule based on this proposal. You may not have another opportunity for
comment. If you want to comment on this action, you must do so at this
time.

DATES: Send your written comments by November 3, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
UST-2006-0622, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Susan Hanamoto, Office of Underground Storage Tanks,
EPA Region I, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (Mail Code: HBO), Boston,
MA 02114-2023.
     Hand Delivery: Susan Hanamoto, Office of Underground
Storage Tanks, EPA Region I, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (Mail
Code: HBO), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the EPA's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-UST-
2006-0622. EPA's policy is that all comments received 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 information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov,

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 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. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID No. EPA-R01-UST-2006-0622. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some

information may not be publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically through
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Region I Library, One

Congress Street, 11th Floor, Boston, MA 02114-

2023; business hours Tuesday through Thursday 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.,
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or the New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services, Public Information Center, 29 Hazen Drive,
Concord, NH 03302-0095; Phone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Business hours: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday-Friday. Records in these
dockets are available for inspection and copying during normal business
hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Hanamoto, Office of Underground
Storage Tanks, EPA Region I, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (Mail
Code: HBO), Boston, MA 02114-2023, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information, please see the
immediate final rule published in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section
of this Federal Register.

    Dated: September 20, 2006.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region I.
 [FR Doc. E6-16376 Filed 10-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P