[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 26, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66091-66094]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20812]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98456; File No. SR-CBOE-2023-020]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To Make the Nonstandard
Expirations Pilot Program Permanent

September 20, 2023.

I. Introduction

    On April 11, 2023, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to make permanent the operation of its pilot
program (``Program'') that permits the Exchange to list broad-based
index options with nonstandard expirations. The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on May 1, 2023.\3\ On
June 9, 2023, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the
Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the
proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine

whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\ On July 27, 2023,
the Commission instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve
or disapprove the proposed rule change.\6\ The Commission did not
receive any comment letters and is approving the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97371 (April 25,
2023), 88 FR 26621 (``Notice'').
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97679, 88 FR 3931
(June 15, 2023). The Commission designated July 30, 2023, as the
date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove,
the proposed rule change.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98008, 88 FR 50921
(August 2, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

    When cash-settled \7\ index options were first introduced in the
1980s, they generally utilized closing-price settlement procedures
(i.e., p.m. settlement).\8\ The Commission became concerned with the
impact of p.m.-settled, cash-settled index options on the underlying
cash equities markets, and in particular, added market volatility and
sharp price movements near the close on expiration days.\9\ These
concerns were heightened during the ``triple-witching'' hour on the
third Friday of March, June, September, and December when index
options, index futures, and options on index futures expired
concurrently.\10\ Academic research at the time provided at least some
evidence suggesting that futures and options expirations contributed to
excess volatility and reversals around the close on those days.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The seller of a ``cash-settled'' index option pays out the
cash value of the applicable index on expiration or exercise. A
``physical delivery'' option, like equity and ETF options, involves
the transfer of the underlying asset rather than cash. See
Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options, available at:
https://www.theocc.com/Company-Information/Documents-and-Archives/Options-Disclosure-Document.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65256 (September 2,
2011), 76 FR 55969, at 55972 (September 9, 2011) (SR-C2-2011-008)
(Order approving proposed rule change to establish a pilot program
to list and trade p.m.-settled third Friday-of-the-month S&P 500
stock index (``SPX'') options (``SPXPM'') on the C2 Options
Exchange, Incorporated (``C2'')) (``C2 SPXPM Approval''). SPXPM was
traded on a pilot basis on C2 until the introduction of SPXPM
trading on Cboe Options. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
68888 (February 8, 2013), 78 FR 10668, at 10668 (February 14, 2013)
(SR-CBOE-2012-120) (``SPXPM Approval Order'').
    \9\ See C2 SPXPM Approval, 76 FR at 55972.
    \10\ See id.
    \11\ See Securities and Exchange Commission, Division of
Economic Risk and Analysis, Memorandum dated February 2, 2021 on
Cornerstone Analysis of PM Cash-Settled Index Option Pilots
(September 16, 2020) (``Pilot Memo'') at 5, available at: https://www.sec.gov/files/Analysis_of_PM_Cash_Settled_Index_Option_Pilots.pdf (citing, among
other papers, Stoll, Hans R., and Robert E. Whaley, ``Expiration day
effects of index options and futures,'' Monograph Series in Finance
and Economics, no. 3 (1986)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the concerns with p.m. settlement and to help
ameliorate the price effects associated with expirations of p.m.-
settled, cash-settled index products, in 1987, the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission approved a proposed rule change by the Chicago
Mercantile Exchange (``CME'') to provide for a.m. settlement \12\ for
index futures, including futures on the S&P 500 Index (``S&P
500'').\13\ The Commission subsequently approved a proposed rule change
by Cboe Options to list and trade a.m.-settled options on the S&P
500.\14\ In 1992, the Commission approved Cboe Options' proposal to
transition all of its European-style cash-settled options on the S&P
500 to a.m. settlement.\15\ However, in 1993, the Commission approved a
proposed rule change allowing Cboe Options to list p.m.-settled options
on certain broad-based indexes, including the S&P 500, expiring at the
end of each calendar quarter (since approved as permanent).\16\
Starting in 2006, the Commission approved a number of proposals, on a
pilot basis, permitting Cboe Options to introduce other index options,
including SPX options, with p.m.-settlement. These include p.m.-settled
index options expiring weekly (other than the third Friday) and at the
end of each month,\17\ SPXPM, as well as p.m.-settled Mini-S&P 500
Index (``XSP'') and Mini-Russell 2000 Index (``MRUT'') options expiring
on the third Friday of the month.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The exercise settlement value for an a.m.-settled index
option is determined by reference to the reported level of the index
as derived from the opening prices of the component securities on
the business day before expiration.
    \13\ See Proposed Amendments Relating to the Standard and Poor's
500, the Standard and Poor's 100 and the Standard Poor's OTC Stock
Price Index Futures Contract, 51 FR 47053 (December 30, 1986)
(notice of proposed rule change from the CME). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 24367 (April 17, 1987), 52 FR 13890 (April
27, 1987) (SR-CBOE-87-11) (noting that the CME moved the S&P 500
futures contract's settlement value to opening prices on the
delivery date).
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 24367 (April 17,
1987), 52 FR 13890 (April 27, 1987) (SR-CBOE-87-11).
    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 30944 (July 21,
1992), 57 FR 33376 (July 28, 1992) (SR-CBOE-92-09). The Commission
also approved proposals by other options markets to transfer most of
their cash-settled index products to a.m. settlement. See, e.g.,
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 25804 (June 15, 1988), 53 FR
23475 (June 22, 1988) (SR-NYSE-87-11 and 88-04).
    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 31800 (February 1,
1993), 58 FR 7274 (February 5, 1993) (SR-CBOE-92-13). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 54123 (July 11, 2006), 71 FR
40558 (July 17, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-65); and 60164 (June 23, 2009),
74 FR 31333 (June 30, 2009) (SR-CBOE-2009-029).
    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 62911 (September
14, 2010), 75 FR 57539 (September 21, 2010) (SR-CBOE-2009-075);
76529 (November 30, 2015), 80 FR 75695 (December 3, 2015) (SR-CBOE-
2015-106); and 78531 (August 10, 2016), 81 FR 54643 (August 16,
2016) (SR-CBOE-2016-046).
    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 70087 (July 31,
2013), 78 FR 47809 (August 6, 2013) (SR-CBOE-2013-055) (approving
options on XSP); and 91067 (February 5, 2021) 86 FR 9108 (February
11, 2021) (SR-CBOE-2020-116) (approving options on MRUT).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the course of approving the various pilots, the Commission
reiterated its concern about the potential impact on the market at
expiration for the underlying component stocks for a p.m.-settled,
cash-settled index option.\19\ However, the Commission also recognized
the potential impact was unclear.\20\ The Commission approved the
Program on a pilot basis to allow the Exchange and the Commission to
monitor for and assess any potential for adverse market effects.\21\ In
order to facilitate this assessment, the Exchange committed to provide
the Commission with data and analysis in connection with the Program
\22\ and to make such data publicly available.\23\ In addition to the
Exchange's data and analysis, Cornerstone Research also conducted an
analysis at the direction of Staff from the Commission's Division of
Economic and Risk Analysis. The analysis utilizes the level of expiring
p.m.-settled index options open interest and the measures of volatility
and price reversals for the corresponding index futures, the underlying
cash index, and index component securities in the minutes leading up to
and immediately following the market close to study the effects of
pilot programs allowing p.m.-settled index options. The Pilot Memo is
discussed in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See, e.g., SPXPM Approval Order, 78 FR at 10669. See also
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 64599 (June 3, 2011), 76 FR
33798, 33801-02 (June 9, 2011) (order instituting proceedings to
determine whether to approve or disapprove a proposed rule change to
allow the listing and trading of SPXPM options on the C2 Options
Exchange, Incorporated); and C2 SPXPM Approval, 76 FR at 55972-76.
    \20\ See, e.g., SPXPM Approval Order, 78 FR at 10669.
    \21\ See e.g., Nonstandards Approval Order, 75 FR at 57549; and
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94682 (April 12, 2022), 87 FR
22993 at 22995 (SR-CBOE-2022-005).
    \22\ Id.
    \23\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97446 (May
5, 2023), 88 FR 30365, at 30366 (May 11, 2023) (SR-CBOE-2023-024)
(stating the Exchange is making public on its website data and
analyses previously submitted to the Commission under the Program
and committing to make public any data or analyses submitted in the
future).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Description of the Proposal

    The Program permits the listing of p.m.-settled options on broad-
based indexes that expire (1) on any Monday, Wednesday, or Friday
(other than the third Friday-of-the-month or days that

coincide with an end-of-month (``EOM'') expiration) and, with respect
to SPX and XSP options, on any Tuesday or Thursday (other than days
that coincide with an EOM expiration) (``Weekly Expirations'') and (2)
on the last day of the trading month. In September 2010, the Commission
approved a rule change that established the Program under which the
Exchange was permitted to list P.M.-settled options on broad-based
indexes to expire on any Friday of the month, other than the third
Friday-of-the-month, and the last trading day of the month.\24\ The
Commission subsequently approved proposed rule changes to amend the
Program to allow the Exchange to also list: (1) p.m.-settled Monday
\25\ and Wednesday \26\ expirations on broad-based indexes, and (2)
p.m.-settled Tuesday and Thursday expirations on SPX \27\ and XSP.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62911 (September
14, 2010), 75 FR 57539 (September 21, 2010) (SR-CBOE-2009-075)
(``Nonstandards Approval Order'').
    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78531 (August 10,
2016), 81 FR 54643 (August 16, 2016) (SR-CBOE-2016-046).
    \26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76909 (January 14,
2016), 81 FR 3512 (January 21, 2016) (SR-CBOE-2015-106).
    \27\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94682 (April 12,
2022), 87 FR 22993 (SR-CBOE-2022-005).
    \28\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95795 (September
21, 2022) (order approving SR-CBOE-2022-039).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has filed to extend the operation of the pilot on
multiple occasions \29\ and it is currently set to expire on the
earlier of November 6, 2023, or the date on which the Program is
approved on a permanent basis.\30\ Now, the Exchange proposes to make
the Program permanent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 65741
(November 14, 2011), 76 FR 72016 (November 21, 2011); and 96223
(November 3, 2022), 87 FR 67728 (November 9, 2022).
    \30\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97445 (May 5,
2023), 88 FR 30368 (May 11, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the Program's inception in 2010, the Exchange has submitted
reports to the Commission regarding the Program that detail the
Exchange's experience with the Program, pursuant to the various
approval orders.\31\ The Exchange states that, during the course of the
Program, it also provided the Commission with any additional data or
analyses the Commission requested if the Commission deemed such data or
analyses necessary to determine whether the Program was consistent with
the Act.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See supra notes 24-28. The Exchange has made public on its
website data and analyses previously submitted to the Commission
under the Program. See https://www.cboe.com/aboutcboe/legal-regulatory/national-market-system-plans/pm-settlement-spxpm-data.
    \32\ See Notice, 88 FR at 26624.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\33\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\34\ which requires, among
other things, that the Exchange's rules be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. In its
proposal to make the Program permanent, the Exchange addressed whether
the Program negatively impacts markets or impacted options market
quality. Each of these elements is discussed in greater detail below.
As stated above, no comments were received on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Market Impact Considerations

    The Exchange states it has not identified any evidence from the
pilot data indicating that the trading of Weekly and EOM options has
any adverse impact on fair and orderly markets on expiration Fridays
for the underlying indexes or the underlying securities comprising the
underlying indexes, nor have there been any observations of abnormal
market movements attributable to Weekly and EOM options from any market
participants that have come to the attention of the Exchange.\35\ In
order to support its overall assessment of the Program, the Exchange
included a review and analysis of pilot data.\36\ Among other things,
the Exchange's analysis includes end of day volatility as well as a
comparison of the impact of quarterly index rebalancing versus p.m.-
settled expirations.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Notice, 88 FR at 26624.
    \36\ See id. at 26623-27.
    \37\ See id. at 26626. The Exchange states that although this
analysis specifically evaluated SPX options, the Exchange believes
it is appropriate to extrapolate the data to apply to the Weekly and
EOM options (which include SPX options). See Notice, 88 FR at 26627.
The Commission agrees it is appropriate to extrapolate the data to
Weekly and EOM options, as the Exchange's analysis examines
liquidity and volatility dynamics around the market close, which may
be associated with typical hedging activities tied to expiring p.m.-
settled index options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to reviewing the data and analysis provided by the
Exchange, the Commission reviewed the analysis in the Pilot Memo, which
evaluates whether higher levels of expiring open interest in p.m.-
settled index options results in increased volatility and price
reversals around the close. The Pilot Memo shows that the market share
for p.m.-settled options on the S&P 500 (including quarterly, Weekly,
EOM and third Friday expirations) has grown substantially since
2007.\38\ The Exchange's review of pilot data also showed this trend
continuing from 2019 through 2021.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Pilot Memo at 2.
    \39\ See Notice, 88 FR at 26624. Specifically, since 2007, p.m.-
settled SPX options grew from 0.1% of open interest to 30% of open
interest in 2021. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Pilot Memo examines whether and to what extent expiring open
interest in p.m.-settled index options is empirically related with the
tendency of the corresponding index futures, the underlying index, or
index components to experience increased transitory volatility and
price reversals around the time of market close on expiration dates.
The Pilot Memo concludes that, although expiring p.m.-settled index
option open interest may have a statistically significant relationship
with volatility and price reversals of the underlying index, index
futures, and index component securities around the market close, the
magnitude of the effect is economically very small.\40\ For example,
the largest settlement event that occurred during the time period
studied in the Pilot Memo (a settlement of $100.4 billion of notional
on December 29, 2017) had an estimated impact on the futures price of
only approximately 0.02% (a predicted impact of $0.54 relative to a
closing futures price of $2,677).\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Pilot Memo at 3. The Pilot Memo also examined options
on the Russell 2000 Index and the Nasdaq-100 Index. However, during
the time period covered by the study (2007-2018), the markets for
both a.m.- and p.m.-settled options on these indexes were very small
compared to the size of that for S&P 500 Index options. See id. at
4.
    \41\ See id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further reviewed a sample of pilot data from 2019
through 2021, and measured the volatility of the S&P 500 over the final
fifteen minutes of each trading day and compared expiration days to
non-expiration days.\42\ Generally volatility was slightly higher on
expiration days, but in cases where overall market volatility
increased, the normalized impact on expiration days versus non-
expiration days remained consistent.\43\ The

Exchange further analyzed volatility on days when the S&P 500 was
rebalanced, and states its results suggest more closing volatility on
rebalance dates compared to non-rebalance expiration dates, indicating
that rebalancing of the S&P 500 may have a greater impact on S&P 500
volatility than p.m.-settled option expirations.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See Notice, 88 FR at 26625.
    \43\ See id.
    \44\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also reviewed a sample of post-2018 pilot data for
potential correlation between excess market volatility and price
reversals and the hedging activity of liquidity providers.\45\ To
determine whether there is a correlation, the Exchange calculated an
estimate of the amount of market-on-close (``MOC'') volume in the S&P
500 component markets attributable to expected hedging activity as a
result of expiring in-the-money options.\46\ The Exchange states its
results indicate that other sources of MOC share volume generally
exceed the volume resulting from hedging activity for p.m.-settled SPX
options.\47\ Further, the Exchange also compared hedging futures
positions that would correspond to expiring in-the-money p.m.-settled
SPX options and concludes the data indicate negligible capacity for
hedging activity to increase volatility in the underlying markets.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See id. at 26625-26.
    \46\ See id. at 26626.
    \47\ See id.
    \48\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange states that the significant changes in the
closing procedures of the primary markets in recent decades, including
considerable advances in trading systems and technology, have
significantly minimized risks of any potential impact of Weekly and EOM
options on the underlying cash markets.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See id. at 26627.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Market Quality Considerations

    The Exchange also completed an analysis intended to evaluate
whether the Program impacted the quality of the a.m.-settled options
market. Specifically, the Exchange compared values of key market
quality indicators (specifically, the bid-ask spread \50\ and effective
spread \51\) in p.m.-settled SPX weekly (``SPXW'') options both before
and after the introduction of Tuesday expirations and Thursday
expirations for SPXW options on April 18 and May 11, 2022,
respectively.\52\ The Exchange concludes from this analysis that the
introduction of SPX options with Tuesday and Thursday options had no
significant impact on the market quality of SPXW options with Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday expirations.\53\ For a majority of the series
analyzed, the Exchange observed no statistically significant difference
in bid-ask spread or effective spread.\54\ The Exchange states that
analyzing whether the introduction of new SPXW p.m.-settled expirations
(i.e., SPXW options with Tuesday and Thursday expirations) impacted the
market quality of then-existing SPXW p.m.-settled expirations (i.e.,
SPXW options with Monday, Wednesday, and Friday expirations) provides a
reasonable substitute to evaluate whether the introduction of Weekly
and EOM options impacted the market quality of any corresponding a.m.-
settled options when the Program began.\55\ Therefore, the Exchange
believes the results of its analysis permit the Exchange to extrapolate
that it is unlikely the introduction of any other Weekly or EOM options
significantly impacted the market quality of corresponding a.m.-settled
options when the Program began.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ The Exchange calculated for each of SPXW options (with
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday expirations) and SPY Weekly options
(with Monday, Wednesday, and Friday expirations) the daily time-
weighted bid-ask spread on the Exchange during its regular trading
hours session, adjusted for the difference in size between SPXW
options and SPY options (SPXW options are approximately ten times
the value of SPY options).
    \51\ The Exchange calculated the volume-weighted average daily
effective spread for simple trades for each of SPXW options (with
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday expirations) and SPY Weekly options
(with Monday, Wednesday, and Friday expirations) as twice the amount
of the absolute value of the difference between an order execution
price and the midpoint of the national best bid and offer at the
time of execution, adjusted for the difference in size between SPXW
options and SPY options.
    \52\ For purposes of comparison, the Exchange paired SPXW
options and SPY options with the same moneyness and same days to
expiration.
    \53\ See Notice, 88 FR at 26626-27.
    \54\ See id. at 26627.
    \55\ See id. at 26626.
    \56\ See id. at 26628.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the evidence contained in the
Exchange's filing, the Exchange's pilot data and reports, and the Pilot
Memo analysis demonstrate that the Program has benefitted investors and
other market participants by providing more flexible trading and
hedging opportunities while also having no disruptive impact on the
market. The market for the options in the Program has grown
significantly in size over the course of the Program, and analysis of
the pilot data did not identify any significant economic impact on the
underlying component securities surrounding the close as a result of
expiring p.m.-settled options, nor did it indicate a deterioration in
market quality (as measured by bid-ask and effective spreads) for an
existing product when a new p.m.-settled expiration was introduced.
Further, significant changes in closing procedures in the decades since
index options moved to a.m. settlement may also serve to mitigate the
potential impact of p.m.-settled index options on the underlying cash
markets.
    Accordingly, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act \57\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\58\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2023-020) be, and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \59\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\59\
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-20812 Filed 9-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 38)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 8888-8889]
[DOCID:fr26fe10-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0044; FRL-9111-1]

Delegation of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Categories; State of Arizona, Maricopa County Air
Quality Department; State of Nevada, Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection, Washoe County District Health Department

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112(l) of the 1990 Clean Air Act, EPA
granted delegation of specific national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) to the Maricopa County Air Quality
Department on April 28, 2009, to the Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection on December 1, 2008, and to the Washoe County District
Health Department, Air Quality Management Division on February 26,
2009. EPA is proposing to revise the Code of Federal Regulations to
reflect the current delegation status of NESHAP in Arizona and Nevada.

DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by March 29, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2010-0044, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured

and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4124<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    This document concerns the delegation of unchanged NESHAP to the
Maricopa County Air Quality Department, the Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection, and the Washoe County District Health
Department, Air Quality Management Division. In the Rules and
Regulations section of this Federal Register, EPA is amending
regulations to reflect the current delegation status of NESHAP in
Arizona and Nevada. EPA is taking direct final action without prior
proposal because the Agency believes this action is not controversial.
If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in
subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of Section
112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 7412.

    Dated: January 20, 2010.
Deborah Jordan,
Director, Air Division, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010-4077 Filed 2-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 163 (Monday, August 24, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51156-51157]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20769]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0805; FRL-9932-64-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Michigan and Wisconsin; 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS PSD and Visibility Infrastructure SIP Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve elements of state implementation plan (SIP) submissions from
Michigan regarding Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
Wisconsin regarding visibility infrastructure requirements of section
110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2006 fine particulate matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The infrastructure requirements
are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's
air quality management program are adequate to meet the state's
responsibilities under the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2009-0805 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the States' SIP submittals as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views these as
noncontroversial submittals and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and public comments received will
be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For
additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in
the Rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: August 10, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015-20769 Filed 8-21-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 22 (Wednesday, February 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5915-5918]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02076]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94075; File No. SR-NYSE-2022-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to
Adopt a Listing Standard for Rights

January 27, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on January 13, 2022, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''
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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to adopt a listing standard for rights. The
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and

at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Listed companies sometimes seek to raise capital from their
existing shareholders by granting rights to subscribe for additional
shares of the issuer's listed securities to all shareholders of record.
The issuer may elect to make its rights either transferrable or non-
transferable and may wish to have transferrable rights traded on the
Exchange. Historically, the Exchange has traded short-term rights
(i.e., rights with a subscription period of less than 90 days) pursuant
to Section 703.03 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual (``Manual'') on an
unlisted basis.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ When trading unlisted short-term rights under Section 703.03
of the Manual, the Exchange relies on the exemption from Exchange
Act Section 12(a) registration requirements provided under Exchange
Act Rule 12a-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While Section 703.03 provides for the unlisted trading of short-
term rights, it does not enable the issuer to list such rights on the
Exchange. Nor does the Manual currently provide any mechanism for the
trading or listing of rights with a life of 90 days or longer. The
Exchange proposes to amend Section 703.12 of the Manual, which
currently provides for the listing of warrants, to create a proposed
Part (II) of that rule. Part (I) of Section 703.12, as amended, would
consist of the current warrant listing provisions, while proposed Part
(II) would set forth new listing requirements for rights.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange proposes to change a reference in Part (I) of
Section 703.12 from ``Para. 312.00'' to ``Section 312.00'' to
conform to references elsewhere within the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For purposes of proposed Section 703.12(II), the term ``rights''
refers to the privilege offered to holders of record of issued equity
securities to subscribe (usually on a pro rata basis) for additional
securities of the same class.
    Under proposed Section 703.12(II), to be listed on the Exchange,
rights must be issued to purchase or receive a security that is already
listed on the Exchange or that will be listed concurrent with the
rights. The rights holders would not be entitled to any privileges of
the holders of common stock (e.g., dividends, preemptive rights, or
voting rights). If the rights are exercisable into listed common stock,
the listing of the rights and the underlying common stock would be
subject to the NYSE shareholder approval policy as set forth in Section
312.00 of the Manual.
    For initial listing, rights would need to meet the following
requirements under proposed Section 703.12(II):
    (1) At least 400,000 issued;
    (2) The underlying security must be listed on the Exchange; and
    (3) At least 100 public holders of round lots.
    The proposed rule would state that, for purposes of such rule,
``public holders'' excludes holders that are directors, officers, or
their immediate families and holders of other concentrated holdings of
10 percent or more of the company's total outstanding shares.
    The Exchange notes that the numerical requirements set forth above
are identical to those included in Nasdaq's rule for the listing of
rights on Nasdaq Capital Market.\6\ The Exchange also notes that the
Nasdaq listing provisions for rights would currently enable an NYSE-
listed company to list its rights on Nasdaq, while such a company would
not currently be able to list its rights on the NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Nasdaq Marketplace Rule 5515.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Section 703.12(II) would provide that the continued
listing of rights is contingent on the underlying security remaining
listed on the Exchange. If the security underlying a listed right
ceased to be listed on the Exchange, the Exchange would promptly
initiate suspension and delisting procedures with respect to the listed
rights.\7\ In such case, the issuer of the listed rights would not be
eligible to avail itself of the provisions of Sections 802.02 and
802.03, and any such listed rights would be subject to delisting
procedures as set forth in Section 804.00.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Specifically, the Exchange would immediately suspend trading
in the rights upon delisting of the underlying security and would
not trade the rights pending completion of any appeal by the issuer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed listing standard would note that the general
instructions for preparation and filing of a listing application are
described in Section 703.01. The proposed listing standard would also
note that the form of listing application and information regarding
supporting documents required in connection with the listing of rights
are available on the Exchange's website or from the Exchange upon
request.
    The Exchange notes that its proposed listing standards for rights
differ from the those of Nasdaq Capital Market in two respects:
    First, Nasdaq Marketplace Rules 5515 and 5560 require,
respectively, a listed right to have at least three registered and
active market makers at the time of initial listing and a continued
listing requirement to have at least two registered and active market
makers, one of which may be a market maker entering a stabilizing bid.
The Exchange has not included these requirements, as they are not
applicable to our market model, in which the rights would be allocated
to a Designated Market Maker for trading.
    Second, the applicable Nasdaq Capital Market rules provide that a
right may be listed if the underlying security is listed on Nasdaq or
is a Covered Security and will be subject to delisting if that ceases
to be the case. The Exchange's proposal provides that rights may only
be listed as an initial matter (and remain listed) if the underlying
security is listed on the NYSE and not if it is a Covered Security. The
Exchange has taken this approach to be consistent with its existing
requirements for the listing of warrants and also because Covered
Securities listed on other exchanges are subject to lower initial and
continued listing standards than are applicable to NYSE listed
securities.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') generally.\8\
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requires, among other things, that exchange rules
are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect the public interest and the interests of
investors, promote just and equitable principles of trade and that they
are not designed to

permit unfair discrimination between issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal is designed to protect the
public interest and the interests of investors, by providing a listed
trading market for the shareholders of NYSE listed companies who
receive transferable rights from the issuer and who would otherwise not
have the ability to list the rights on the same exchange as the
underlying securities.
    The Exchange notes that the requirements of the proposed rule are
identical to those for the listing of rights on Nasdaq Capital Market
as set forth in Sections 5515 and 5560 of the Nasdaq Marketplace rules,
with the exception of the provisions described above with respect to
market makers and the ability to list rights where the underlying
security is a Covered Security not listed on the exchange listing the
rights. The Exchange believes that these differences are consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest because: (i)
The market maker requirement is irrelevant to the NYSE market model, in
which the rights will be allocated to a Designated Market Maker for
trading; and (ii) as other exchanges have continued listing standards
for equity securities that are less stringent than those of the NYSE,
the approach of excluding rights with respect to Covered Securities
listed on other markets ensures that rights can only be listed with
respect to underlying securities that are qualified for listing on the
NYSE. Furthermore, the Exchange believes that it is not unfairly
discriminatory to limit the listing of rights to those with respect to
NYSE listed equities, as the purpose is not to discriminate among
issuers, but rather to enhance investor protection by ensuring that
rights can only be listed if the underlying security meets the more
stringent continued listing standards applied by the NYSE.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposal would impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. There would be no burden on competition among
companies listed on the NYSE, as all NYSE-listed companies would be
able to list their rights under the same rule provisions. Similarly,
the proposed rule would not impose any burden on intermarket
competition, as any rights that could be listed under the proposed rule
would also be eligible for listing on Nasdaq. The Exchange believes the
proposal enhances competition for listing by providing issuers with a
choice of listing venues between the NYSE and Nasdaq when they list
their rights. The Exchange believes that limiting the listing of rights
to those with respect to NYSE listed equities does not impose a burden
on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act, as the purpose is not to discriminate among
issuers, but rather to enhance investor protection by ensuring that
rights can only be listed if the underlying security meets the more
stringent continued listing standards applied by the NYSE.

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

    Because the foregoing 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, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \12\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\13\ the
Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay to
allow the Exchange to list rights that would qualify for listing under
the proposed rule prior to the expiration of the 30-day operative
delay. The Exchange states that such waiver would be consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest because the
proposed rule change is substantially similar to the rules of another
national securities exchange.\14\ For this reason, the Commission
believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the
Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the
proposed rule change operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \14\ See supra note 6, and accompanying text.
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission 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 to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2022-03 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-NYSE-2022-03. 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 website (https://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 website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2022-03, and should be
submitted on or before February 23, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-02076 Filed 2-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 213 (Monday, November 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65981-65982]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26342]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9902-42-OA; EPA-HQ-OA-2013-0124]

Good Neighbor Environmental Board; Notification of Public
Advisory Committee Teleconference

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Public Advisory Committee Teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-
463, notice is hereby given that the Good Neighbor Environmental Board
(GNEB) will hold a public teleconference on Friday, November 15, 2013.
The meeting will take place from 12 p.m. to 2 p.m. Eastern Standard
Time. Due to the government shutdown resulting in administrative
backlogs, EPA is announcing this teleconference with less than 15
calendar days public notice. The meeting is open to the public. For
further information regarding the teleconference and background
materials, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at the number listed below.

DATES: Friday, November 15, 2013. The meeting will take place from 12
p.m. to 2 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: GNEB is a federal advisory committee chartered under
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92463. GNEB provides
advice and recommendations to the President and Congress on
environmental and infrastructure issues along the U.S. border with
Mexico.
    Purpose of Meeting: The purpose of this teleconference is to
discuss the Good Neighbor Environmental Board's Sixteenth Report and
preliminary advice letter. The report and advice letter will focus on
ecological restoration in the U.S.-Mexico border region.
    General Information: The agenda and meeting materials will be
available at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OA-
2013-0124.

General information about GNEB can be found on its Web site at
www.epa.gov/ofacmo/gneb.
    If you wish to make oral comments or submit written comments to the
Board, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at least five days prior to the
meeting. Written comments should be submitted at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2013-0124.
    Meeting Access: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at
(202) 564-4330 or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request
accommodation of a disability, please contact Ann-Marie Gantner at
least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible
to process your request.

    Dated: October 23, 2013.
Ann-Marie Gantner,
Acting Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-26342 Filed 11-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 76)]
[Notices]
[Page 20836-20837]
[DOCID:fr21ap10-55]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2009-0420; FRL-9140-5]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Flexible Vinyl and
Urethane Coating and Printing (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1157.09, OMB
Control Number 2060-0073

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 21, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2009-0420, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2)
OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Schaefer, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-
05), Measurement Policy Group, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919)
541-0296; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On July 8, 2009 (74 FR 32581), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2009-0420, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NSPS for Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and Printing
(Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1157.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0073.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2010. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: This Information Collection Request (ICR) renewal is
being

submitted for the NSPS for Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and
Printing (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart FFF) (Renewal), which were proposed
on January 18, 1983 and promulgated on June 29, 1984. These standards
apply to the following facilities in subpart FFF: Each rotogravure
printing line used to print or coat flexible vinyl or urethane
products, and for which construction, modification or reconstruction
commenced after the proposed date of the rule. The affected entities
are subject to the General Provisions of the NSPS at 40 CFR part 60
subpart A and any changes, or additions to the Provisions specified at
40 CFR part 60, subpart FFF.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Initially, occasionally, and semi-
annually.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 20.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, occasionally, and semi-annually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 594.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $242,431 which includes $55,831 in
labor costs, $6,600 in capital/startup costs, and $180,000 in operation
and maintenance (O&M) costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: The regulations have not changed over the
past three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years. However, a slight increase in labor hours for respondents and
small decrease in labor hours for the Agency occurred due to an
incorrect calculation of the number of hours in the previous ICR. There
was also an increase in O&M costs due to an error in the number of
affected facilities in the previous ICR.

    Dated: April 15, 2010.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2010-9170 Filed 4-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46869-46870]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19612]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64983; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2011-098]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to
Adopt an ``All-or-None'' Order Type

July 28, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on July 22, 2011, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (the ``Exchange''
or ``NASDAQ'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposal for the NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') to
amend Chapter VI, Trading Systems, Section 1, Definitions, and Section
6, Acceptance of Quotes and Orders, to adopt an ``All-or-none'' order
type, as described further below. The Exchange also proposes to amend
the definition of ``Immediate or Cancel'' to accommodate market orders.
    This change is scheduled to be implemented on NOM on or about
September 1, 2011; the Exchange will announce the implementation
schedule by Options Trader Alert, once the rollout schedule is
finalized.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/, at NASDAQ's principal office, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to introduce a new order
type to NOM and permit market orders to be designated as Immediate or
Cancel orders. Specifically, an All-or-None order is a limit or market
order that is to be executed in its entirety or not at all. All-or-None
Orders will be treated as having a time-in-force designation of
Immediate or Cancel, as described further below.\3\ All-or-None Orders
received prior to the opening cross or after market close will be
rejected. The Exchange proposes to add this definition to its rules as
new Section 1(e)(10). The Exchange also proposes to refer to All-or-
None Orders in Section 6(a)(2) of its rules. Many options markets
currently have all-or-none orders, and the definition of this new order
type is consistent with the definitions contained in other exchanges'
rules.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VI, Section 1(g)(2).
    \4\ See e.g., CBOE Rule 6.53(i); C2 Rule 6.10(c)(1) and ISE Rule
715(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The new All-or-None Order type is similar to the existing Minimum
Quantity Order currently available on the Exchange. Minimum Quantity
Orders are orders that require that a specified minimum quantity of
contracts be obtained, or the order is cancelled.\5\ Similar to the
All-or-None Orders proposed herein, Minimum Quantity Orders may only be
entered with a time-in-force designation of Immediate or Cancel. Today,
a Minimum Quantity Order with the minimum set at the full size of the
order would function the same as the proposed All-or-None Order.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VI, Section 1(e)(3).
    \6\ A Minimum Quantity Order for 100 contracts with the minimum
set at 100 contracts has the same result as an All-or-None Order for
100 contracts, because both can only trade against an order for 100
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Immediate or Cancel designation is currently only
available to limit orders. The Exchange proposes to amend the
definition of Immediate or Cancel in Section 1(g)(2) to delete the word
``limit'' in order to cover market orders; accordingly, market orders,
including the proposed new All-or-None Orders, can now be Immediate or
Cancel.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VI, proposed Section 1(g)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \9\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest, by mitigating risks to market
participants. The Exchange believes that the proposal is appropriate
and reasonable, because it offers an additional order type on NOM and
Immediate or Cancel functionality for market orders. The Exchange
believes that this should offer investors new trading opportunities on
the Exchange and enhance the Exchange's competitive position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing 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, it has become effective pursuant to
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \11\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file 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.
NASDAQ has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-098 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-NASDAQ-2011-098. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NASDAQ-2011-098 and should be submitted on or before August 24, 2011.

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

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-19612 Filed 8-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 82 (Wednesday, April 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23709-23710]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09870]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0793; Airspace Docket No. 15-AEA-3]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Baltimore, MD

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D Airspace at Baltimore, MD, bringing
current the regulatory text under the designation for Martin State
Airport by adding the words ``and Restricted Area R-4001C, which is
continuously active up to 10,000 feet AGL''. This is an administrative
change to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 25, 2015. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/airtraffic/publications/. The Order is also available for
inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-
741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15. For further
information, you can contact the Airspace Policy and Regulations Group,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    In a review of the airspace, the FAA found the airspace description
for Martin State Airport, Baltimore, MD, Class D Airspace, in FAA Order
7400.9Y, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, did not match the
FAA's charting information. This administrative change coincides with
the FAA's aeronautical database.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Y, airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014, and effective September 15,
2014. FAA Order 7400.9Y is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this final rule. FAA Order 7400.9Y lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by referencing Restricted Area R-4001C in the regulatory text
of the Class D airspace area at Martin State Airport, MD, adding the
words ``and Restricted Area R-4001C, which is continuously active up to
10,000 feet AGL''. This is an administrative change amending the
description for Martin State Airport, Baltimore, MD, to be in concert
with the FAAs aeronautical database, and does not affect the
boundaries, or operating requirements of the airspace, therefore,
notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it further clarifies the description of controlled airspace at
Martin State Airport, Baltimore, MD.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120, E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Y,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2014,
effective September 15, 2014, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO MD D Baltimore, MD [Amended]

Martin State Airport, MD
    (Lat. 39[deg]19'32'' N., long. 76[deg]24'50'' W.)
Baltimore VORTAC
    (Lat. 39[deg]10'16'' N., long. 76[deg]39'41'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
2,500 feet MSL within a 5.2-mile radius of Martin State Airport and
within 4.4 miles each side of a 14.7-mile radius arc of the
Baltimore VORTAC extending clockwise from the Baltimore VORTAC
030[deg] radial to the VORTAC 046[deg] radial, excluding that
airspace within the Washington Tri-Area Class B airspace area and
Restricted Areas R-4001A and R-4001B when they are in effect, and
Restricted Area R-4001C, which is continuously active up to 10,000
feet AGL. This Class D airspace area is effective during the
specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously
published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 21, 2015.
Gerald E. Lynch,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2015-09870 Filed 4-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P