[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 14, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28125-28128]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10498]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0393; Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-025-AD;
Amendment 39-17446; AD 2013-09-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Models 690, 690A, and 690B airplanes. This
AD requires inspection for cracking of the outer fuselage attachments,
the lower wing main spar, the vertical channels, the upper picture
window channels, aft cabin pressure web, external wing to fuselage
fillets, and fasteners; repair or replacement of damaged parts as
necessary; and modification of the structure with reinforced parts.
This AD

was prompted by cracks found in the upper picture window frame
channels, left- and right-hand wing main spar frame support channels,
and aft pressure bulkhead web. This condition, if not corrected, could
result in structural failure of the airplane. We are issuing this AD to
correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective May 29, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of May 29, 2013.
    We must receive comments on this AD by June 28, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Twin
Commander Aircraft LLC; 1176 Telecom Drive, Creedmoor, NC 27522;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet:
http://www.twincommander.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vince Massey, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We were notified of cracks found in the left and right wing main
spar frame support channels, the aft pressure bulkhead web, and the
left and right picture window upper frame channels of a Twin Commander
Aircraft LLC Model 690B airplane. Nineteen airplanes were inspected
with one having severe cracking in the left and right wing main spar
frame support channels, the aft pressure bulkhead web, and the left and
right picture window upper frame channels. Five other of the inspected
airplanes had similar but less severe damage. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in structural failure of the aircraft.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Service Bulletin 241, dated
September 26, 2012. The service information describes procedures for
access, disassembly, and inspecting the outer fuselage attachments, the
lower wing main spar, the vertical channels, the upper picture window
channels, aft cabin pressure web, external wing to fuselage fillets,
and fasteners for cracking. The service information also describes
procedures for modifying the structure with reinforced parts and
reassembly.

FAA's Determination

    We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires inspection for cracking of the outer fuselage
attachments, the lower wing main spar, the vertical channels, the upper
picture window channels, aft cabin pressure web, external wing to
fuselage fillets, and fasteners; repair or replacement of damaged parts
as necessary; and modification of the structure with reinforced parts.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
cracking in the upper picture window frame channels, left- and right-
hand wing main spar frame support channels, and/or aft pressure
bulkhead web could result in structural failure of the aircraft.
Therefore, we find that notice and opportunity for prior public comment
are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment
effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2013-0393 and
Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-025-AD at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 280 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disassembly, inspection, and            584 work-hours x $85 per          $8,450         $58,090     $16,265,200
 modification.                           hour = $49,640.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The scope of damage found in the required inspection could vary
significantly from airplane to airplane. We have no way of determining
how much damage may be found on each airplane or the cost to repair
damaged parts on each airplane. The damage could be as minor as
replacing rivets or fasteners or as extensive as a major wing/fuselage
repair or replacement.

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

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.
    To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for
their actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, including
small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. In accordance with Section 608 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, an agency head may waive or delay
completion of some or all of the requirements of Section 603 by
providing a written finding that this final rule is being promulgated
in response to an emergency that makes compliance or timely compliance
with the provisions of Section 603 impracticable.
    We are performing a review to determine whether this final rule AD
action will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities. However, the immediate safety of flight conditions
of this AD action make compliance with the provisions of Section 603
impracticable. Our justification for immediate adoption of this rule,
and therefore of impracticability, is stated in FAA's Justification and
Determination of the Effective Date. After we determine whether this
final rule AD action has a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities or not, we will publish in the Federal
Register our determination and, if required, our final regulatory
flexibility analysis.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    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 airworthiness
directive (AD):

2013-09-05 Twin Commander Aircraft LLC: Amendment 39-17446 ; Docket
No. FAA-2013-0393; Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-025-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 29, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following Twin Commander Aircraft LLC
airplanes, certificated in any category:
    (1) Model 690, all serial numbers except 11057;
    (2) Model 690A, all serial numbers except 11104, 11106, 11129,
11134, 11146, 11159, 11173, 11192, 11220, 11237, 11252, 11263,
11280, 11287, 11298, 11303, 11317, 11339, and 11341; and
    (3) Model 690B, all serial numbers except 11383, 11384, 11401,
and 11436.
    (4) Aircraft equipped with AVIADESIGN, Inc. STC No. SA5740NM
(You may find information on STC No. SA5740NM at Internet: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/FEC5B7544E15F14C85256CC200122B19?OpenDocument&Highlight=sa5740nm)
are not compatible with the modifications contained in Twin
Commander Aircraft LLC Service Bulletin 241, dated September 26,
2012. When an airplane has been modified, altered, or repaired in
the area addressed by the AD action, according to 14 CFR part 39.15,
the AD action still applies to that airplane. Following 14 CFR
39.19, the owner/operator of that airplane must request approval
from the FAA for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
following the instructions in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53; Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by cracks found in the upper picture window
frame channels, left- and right-hand wing main spar frame support
channels, and aft pressure bulkhead web. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in structural failure of the airplane. We
are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these
products.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Inspection

    (1) Inspect the airplane structural components, at the
compliance times specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through
(g)(1)(iv) of this AD following Part I of Twin Commander Aircraft
LLC Service Bulletin 241, September 26, 2012:
    (i) For airplanes with 10,000 or more hours time-in-service
(TIS), inspect within the next 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.

    (ii) For airplanes with 7,500 through 9,999 hours TIS, inspect
within the next 60 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (iii) For airplanes with 5,000 through 7,499 hours TIS, inspect
within the next 6 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (iv) For airplanes with less than 5,000 hours TIS, inspect when
the airplane accumulates a total of 5,000 hours TIS or within the
next 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later.

(h) Repair

    If any damage, cracks, and/or cracks that exceed the allowable
limits specified in the service bulletin are found during the
inspection required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, before further
flight, repair or replace parts as necessary following Twin
Commander Aircraft LLC Service Bulletin 241, dated, September 26,
2012. If Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Service Bulletin 241, dated,
September 26, 2012, does not give procedures for repair of the
damaged area, before further flight, you must contact Twin Commander
Aircraft LLC to obtain repair instructions approved by the Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) specifically for compliance with
this AD and incorporate those instructions. You can find contact
information for Twin Commander Aircraft LLC in paragraph (l)(2) of
this AD.

(i) Modification and Reassembly

    (1) Before further flight after completing the actions in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, modify and reassemble the
airplane using the modification and reassembly procedures in Part II
of Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Service Bulletin 241, dated,
September 26, 2012.
    (2) Although Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Service Bulletin 241,
dated September 26, 2012, states that at least one person on the
modification team must have completed the Twin Commander Aircraft
LLC approved training, the FAA does not require that a mechanic
complete this specialized training to do the modification work
required in this AD. Regulations 14 CFR 65.81(a) and 14 CFR 65.81(b)
provide criteria about qualifications of those performing
maintenance; in this case, the requirements of this AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Vince Massey,
Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference (IBR) under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51:
    (i) Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Service Bulletin 241, dated
September 26, 2012.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Twin
Commander Aircraft LLC; 1176 Telecom Drive, Creedmoor, NC 27522;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet: http://www.twincommander.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<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/cfr/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 25, 2013.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-10498 Filed 5-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 124)]
[Notices]
[Page 36770-36771]
[DOCID:fr28jn06-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the Record Communications; Public Notice

June 19, 2006.
    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e)(1)(v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using

the eLibrary

link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please
contact FERC, Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Exempt:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ One of two e-mails from Laura Dean, Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date
            Docket No.               received   Presenter or  requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CP06-12-000, CP06-13-000.......    6-14-06  Kyle Baker.
2. Project No. 1185-002...........    6-14-06  Jim Fargo.
3. Project No. 2145-060...........    6-14-06  Bryce Bealba.
4. Project No. 2237-013...........    6-14-06  Joseph Mayson.
5. Project Nos. 12597-002, 12598-     6-14-06  Laura Dean.\1\
 002 and 12599-002.
6. Project Nos. 12597-002, 12598-     6-14-06  Stan Wilmoth.
 002 and 12599-002.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-10120 Filed 6-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 31043]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10801]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94916; File No. SR-EMERALD-2022-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX Emerald, LLC; Notice of
Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX Emerald Fee
Schedule To Adopt Fees for the High Precision Network Time Signal
Service

May 16, 2022.
    On March 30, 2022, MIAX Emerald, LLC (``MIAX Emerald'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule
change to amend the Exchange's fee schedule to adopt fees for the High
Precision Network Time Signal Service. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on April 18, 2022.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94697 (April 12,
2022), 87 FR 23000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 5, 2022, the Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change (SR-
EMERALD-2022-12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-10801 Filed 5-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 153 (Tuesday, August 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52718-52721]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18792]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78472; File No. SR-BatsEDGX-2016-35]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule
11.21, Retail Orders, To Conform to the Rules of Bats BZX Exchange,
Inc. and Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.

August 3, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 22, 2016, Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Rule11.21, Retail Orders, to
conform to the rules of Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') and Bats BYX
Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See BYX Rule 11.24 and BZX Rule 11.25. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 68303 (November 27, 2012), 77 FR 71652
(December 3, 2012) (SR-BYX-2012-019); 72730 (July 31, 2014), 79 FR
45857 (August 6, 2014) (SR-BYX-2014-013); 73236 (September 26, 2014)
79 FR 59541 (October 2, 2014) (SR-BYX-2014-024); 76207 (October 21,
2015), 80 FR 65824 (October 27, 2015) (SR-BYX-2015-45); 73237
(September 26, 2014), 79 FR 59537 (October 2, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-
043); 73677 (November 24, 2014), 79 FR 71150 (December 1, 2014) (SR-
BATS-2014-058); and 76205 (October 21, 2015), 80 FR 65828 (October
27, 2015) (SR-BATS-2015-90). The Exchange does not proposes to adopt
paragraphs (e), (f), (g) and (h) of BYX Rule 11.24 concerning the
BYX Retail Price Improvement Program. These paragraph are also not
included in BZX Rule 11.25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.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 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 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
    In early 2014, the Exchange and its affiliate, Bats EDGA Exchange,
Inc. (``EDGA''), received approval to effect a merger (the ``Merger'')
of the Exchange's parent company, Direct Edge Holdings LLC, with Bats
Global Markets, Inc., the parent of BZX and BYX (together with BZX,
EDGA, and EDGX, the ``BGM Affiliated Exchanges'').\6\ In the context of
the Merger, the BGM Affiliated Exchanges are working to align certain
system and regulatory functionality, retaining only intended
differences between the BGM Affiliated Exchanges. Thus, the proposal
set forth below is intended to amend Exchange Rule 11.21, Retail
Orders, to conform to the rules of BZX and BYX in order to provide a
consistent rule set across each of the BGM Affiliated Exchanges.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71449 (January 30,
2014), 79 FR 6961 (February 5, 2014) (SR-EDGX-2013-043; SR-EDGA-
2013-034).
    \7\ The Exchange notes that EDGA does not currently include a
Retail Order rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to amend paragraph (a) of Rule 11.21
to include definitions of ``Retail Member Organization'' and ``Retail
Order''. Subparagraph (a)(1) would define a Retail Member Organization
or RMO as ``a Member \8\ (or a division thereof) that has been approved
by the Exchange under this Rule to submit Retail Orders.'' This
definition is identical to the definition of Retail Member Organization
under BYX Rule 11.24(a)(1) and BZX Rule 11.25(a)(1). The Exchange also
proposes to slightly revise and relocate the definition of Retail Order
under current Rule 11.21(a). Exchange Rule 11.21(a) currently defines a
Retail Order as an agency order or riskless principal order that meets
the criteria of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') Rule 5320.03 that originates from a natural person; (ii) is
submitted to EDGX by a Member, provided that no change is made to the
terms of the order; and (iii) does not originate from a trading
algorithm or any other computerized methodology. The Exchange proposes
to renumber the definition of Retail Order as subparagraph (a)(2) and
revise it to specify that the Retail Order is to be submitted by a
Retail Member Organization. The amended definition of Retail Order
under Exchange Rule 11.21(a)(2) would be identical to BYX Rule
11.24(a)(2) and BZX Rule 11.25(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second the Exchange proposes to consolidate paragraphs (b) and (c)
to Exchange Rule 11.21 into a single paragraph (b) entitled, Retail
Member Organization Qualifications and Application. Proposed Exchange
Rule 11.21(b) would be identical to BYX Rule 11.24(b) and BZX Rule
11.25(b). Rule 11.21(b)(1) would state that to qualify as a Retail
Member Organization, a Member must conduct a retail business or route
retail orders on behalf of another broker-dealer. For purposes of
Exchange Rule 11.21, conducting a retail business shall include
carrying retail customer accounts on a fully disclosed basis.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Exchange Rule 11.21 does not currently state that conducting
a retail business shall include carrying retail customer accounts on
a fully disclosed basis. The Exchange notes that this provision is
currently included in BYX Rule 11.24(b)(1) and BZX Rule 11.25(b)(1)
and the Exchange proposes to add it to Rule 11.21(b)(1) to ensure
this provision of the Exchange, BZX, and BZX rules are fully
harmonized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Current Rule 11.21(b) requires Members to submit a signed written
attestation, in a form prescribed by the Exchange, that they have
implemented policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to
ensure that substantially all orders designated by the Member as a
Retail Order comply with the above requirements. The Exchange proposes
to incorporate this requirement into proposed Rule 11.21(b)(2).
Proposed subparagraph (b)(2) of Rule 11.21 would state that, to become
a Retail Member Organization, a Member must submit: (A) An application
form; (B) supporting documentation, which may include sample marketing
literature, Web site screenshots, other publicly disclosed materials
describing the Member's retail order flow, and any other documentation
and information requested by the Exchange in order to confirm that the
applicant's order flow would meet the requirements of the Retail Order
definition; and (C) an attestation, in a form prescribed by the
Exchange, that substantially all orders submitted as Retail Orders will
qualify as such under this Rule. Proposed Rule 11.21(b)(2) is identical
to BYX Rule 11.24(b)(2) and BZX Rule 11.25(b)(2).
    The Exchange also proposes to adopt subparagraphs (b)(3), (4), (5),
and (6) to Rule 11.21, the content of which is identical to BYX Rule
11.24(b)(3), (4), (5), and (6) and BZX Rule 11.25(b)(3), (4), (5), and
(6). Subparagraph (b)(3) would state that after an applicant submits
the application form, supporting documentation, and attestation, the
Exchange shall notify the applicant of its decision in writing.
Subparagraph (b)(4) would allow a disapproved applicant to: (A) Request
an appeal of such disapproval by the Exchange as provided in proposed
paragraph (d) discussed below; and/or (B) reapply for Retail Member
Organization status 90 days after the disapproval notice is issued by
the Exchange. Subparagraph (b)(5) permits a Retail Member Organization
to voluntarily withdraw from such status at any time by giving written
notice to the Exchange.
    Current Rule 11.21(c) states that if the Member represents Retail
Orders from another broker-dealer customer, the Member's supervisory
procedures must be reasonably designed to assure that the orders it
receives from such broker-dealer customer that it designates as Retail
Orders meet the definition of a Retail Order. The Member must: (i)
Obtain an annual written representation from each broker-dealer
customer that sends it orders to be designated as Retail Orders that
entry of such orders as Retail Orders will be in compliance with the
requirements specified by the Exchange; and (ii) monitor whether its
broker-dealer customer's Retail Order flow continues to meet the
applicable requirements. The Exchange proposes to incorporate this
requirement into proposed Rule 11.21(b)(6). Proposed subparagraph
(b)(6) of Rule 11.21 would state that a Retail Member Organization must
have written policies and procedures reasonably designed to assure that
it will only designate orders as Retail Orders if all requirements of a
Retail Order are met. Such written policies and procedures must require
the Member to: (i) Exercise due diligence before entering a Retail
Order to assure that entry as a Retail Order is in compliance with the
requirements of this Rule; and (ii) monitor whether orders entered as
Retail Orders meet the applicable requirements. Subparagraph (b)(6)
would also require that if a Retail Member Organization does not itself

conduct a retail business but routes Retail Orders on behalf of another
broker-dealer, the Retail Member Organization's supervisory procedures
must be reasonably designed to assure that the orders it receives from
such other broker-dealer that are designated as Retail Orders meet the
definition of a Retail Order. The Retail Member Organization must: (i)
Obtain an annual written representation, in a form acceptable to the
Exchange, from each other broker-dealer that sends the Retail Member
Organization orders to be designated as Retail Orders that entry of
such orders as Retail Orders will be in compliance with the
requirements of this Rule; and (ii) monitor whether Retail Order flow
routed on behalf of such other broker-dealers meets the applicable
requirements. Proposed subparagraph (b)(6) of Rule 11.21 is identical
to BYX Rule 11.24(b)(6) and BZX Rule 11.25(b)(6).
    Proposed paragraph (c) to Rule 11.21 would set forth the process
for disqualifying a Member as a Retail Member Organization and is
identical to BYX Rule 11.24(c) and BZX Rule 11.25(c). Subparagraph
(c)(1) would state that if a Retail Member Organization designates
orders submitted to the Exchange as Retail Orders and the Exchange
determines, in its sole discretion, that such orders fail to meet any
of the requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of Rule 11.21 above, the
Exchange may disqualify a Member from its status as a Retail Member
Organization. Subparagraph (c)(2) would state that the Exchange shall
determine if and when a Member is disqualified from its status as a
Retail Member Organization. When disqualification determinations are
made, the Exchange shall provide a written disqualification notice to
the Member. Subparagraph (c)(3) would state that a Retail Member
Organization that is disqualified may: (A) Appeal such disqualification
as provided in paragraph (d) discussed below; and/or (B) reapply for
Retail Member Organization status 90 days after the date of the
disqualification notice from the Exchange.
    Paragraph (d) of Rule 11.21 would mirror BYX Rule 11.24(d) and BZX
Rule 11.25(d) by setting forth the processes for Retail Member
Organization to appeal a disqualification determination. Subparagraph
(d)(1) would state that if a Member disputes the Exchange's decision to
disapprove it under paragraph (b) of Rule 11.21 or disqualify it under
paragraph (c) of Rule 11.21, the Member (``appellant'') may request,
within five business days after notice of the decision is issued by the
Exchange, that the Retail Attribution Panel (the ``Panel'') review the
decision to determine if it was correct. Pursuant to subparagraph
(d)(2), the Panel will consist of the Exchange's Chief Regulatory
Officer (``CRO''), or a designee of the CRO, and two officers of the
Exchange designated by the Chief Information Officer (``CIO'').
Subparagraph (d)(3) states that the Panel shall review the facts and
render a decision within the time frame prescribed by the Exchange.
Subparagraph (d)(4) would allow the Panel to overturn or modify an
action taken by the Exchange under Rule 11.21 and state that a
determination by the Panel shall constitute final action by the
Exchange.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to renumber current paragraph (d) to
Rule 11.21 as paragraph (e) and current paragraph (e) to Rule 11.21 as
paragraph (f) and to replace references to Member with the term Retail
Member Organization in both of these paragraphs. Under Rule 11.21(e),
Retail Member Organizations will only be able to designate their orders
as Retail Orders on either an order-by-order basis using FIX ports or
by designating certain of their FIX ports at the Exchange as ``Retail
Order Ports.'' Unless otherwise instructed by the Retail Member
Organization, a Retail Order will be identified as Retail when routed
to an away Trading Center. Under Rule 11.21(f), Retail Member
Organizations will continue to be permitted to designate a Retail Order
to be identified as Retail on the EDGX Book Feed on an order-by-order
basis or to identify all its Retail Orders as Retail on a port-by-port
basis where that port is also designated as a Retail Order Port. A
Retail Member Organization that instructs the Exchange to identify all
its Retail Orders as Retail on a Retail Order Port will continue to be
able to override such setting and designate any individual Retail Order
from that port as Attributable or as Non-Attributable, as set forth in
Rule 11.6(a).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\10\
Specifically, the proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act,\11\ because it is designed 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. As mentioned
above, the proposed rule change would allow the Exchange, BYX, and BZX
to provide a consistent set of rules as it relates to Retail Orders and
Retail Member Organizations. Consistent rules, in turn, will simplify
the regulatory requirements for Members of the Exchange that are also
participants on BYX and BZX. The proposed rule change would provide
greater harmonization between rules of similar purpose on the Exchange,
BYX, and BZX, resulting in greater uniformity and less burdensome and
more efficient regulatory compliance and understanding of Exchange
Rules. As such, the proposed rule change would foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities and would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system. Similarly, the
Exchange believes harmonizing these rules across the Exchange, BYX, and
BZX promotes just and equitable principles of trade by providing
consistent rules regarding Retail Member Organizations and Retail
Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Lastly, the Exchange also believes the proposed qualification
standards and review process under Rule 11.21 promote just and
equitable principles and are not unfairly discriminatory because they
are designed to ensure that Members are properly qualified as a Retail
Member Organization and only attribute as Retail those orders that meet
the definition of Retail Orders. The qualification process proposed
herein by the Exchange is not designed to permit unfair discrimination,
but rather ensure that order that are designated to be attributed are
Retail are, in fact, order submitted by a retail customer that satisfy
the proposed definition of Retail Order. Lastly, the Exchange notes
that these qualification and review provisions are substantially
similar to those included in the rules of the BYX, BZX, New York Stock
Exchange, Inc.'s (``NYSE''), and NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT'') that have
been previously approved by the Commission.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See BYX Rule 11.24, BZX Rule 11.25, NYSE Rule 107C, NYSE
MKT LLC NYSE MKT Rule 107C, and NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') Rule
7.44. The Exchange notes that the NYSE, NYSE Arca, and NYSE MKT
programs do not allow members to elect that their retail orders be
identified as Retail on the exchange's proprietary data feeds.

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

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. To the contrary, allowing the
Exchange to implement substantively identical rules across the
Exchange, BYX, and BZX regarding Retail Orders and Retail Member
Organizations does not present any competitive issues, but rather is
designed to provide greater harmonization among the Exchange, BYX, and
BZX rules of similar purpose.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
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: (A)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (B) impose any significant burden on competition; and (C) by
its terms, 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 \13\ and
paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\14\ the Exchange has
designated this rule filing as non-controversial. The Exchange has
given 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (1)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection
of investors; or (3) 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2016-35 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-BatsEDGX-2016-35. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2016-35, and should
be submitted on or before August 30, 2016.

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

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-18792 Filed 8-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 66 (Friday, April 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20637-20638]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07992]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9796-4]

Notification of Public Meeting and a Public Teleconference of the
Hydraulic Fracturing Research Advisory Panel

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory
Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a public meeting and public
teleconference of the Hydraulic Fracturing Research Advisory Panel to
provide an opportunity for independent expert members of the ad hoc
Panel to provide comment on EPA's Study of the Potential Impacts of
Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources: Progress Report,
which was released in December 2012. The meeting will also begin a
broader commitment to provide opportunities to brief the panel on the
last scientific and technical developments in this emerging topic area.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on Tuesday, May 7, 2013, from
9:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and Wednesday, May 8, 2013, from 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time). The public teleconference will be
held on May 16, 2013, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Daylight
Time).

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the Westin Arlington
Gateway Hotel located at 801 North Glebe Road, Arlington, VA, 22203.
The public teleconference will be conducted by telephone only. The
public can also view the May 7-8, 2013 meeting via a non-interactive
webcast that will be broadcast on the internet. The connection
information to view the meeting via webcast will be provided on the SAB
Web site at http://www.epa.gov/sab in advance of the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wants
further information concerning the teleconference and meeting may
contact Mr. Edward Hanlon, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), EPA
Science Advisory Board (1400R), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; via telephone/
voicemail at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>General information concerning the SAB can be
found on the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/sab.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental
Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA),
codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and
technical advice to the Administrator on the technical basis for Agency
positions and regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee
chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C.,
App. 2. The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all
appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Pursuant to FACA and
EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the SAB will hold a public
meeting and public teleconference to receive public comments and to
provide an opportunity for independent expert members of the SAB Panel
to discuss, deliberate, and provide comment on the topics below.
    In response to public concern, Congress directed EPA to study the
relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water. In 2011,
EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) published its Plan to
Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water
Resources. EPA has requested comment from individual ad hoc panel
members on its Study of the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing
on Drinking Water Resources as well as plan future potential activities
of the panel. The Progress Report describes the status of EPA's ongoing
research on the potential

impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources.
    On August 21, 2012, the SAB Staff Office requested public
nominations of experts to serve on a Panel to advise the Agency on
EPA's ongoing research on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing
on drinking water resources (77 FR 50505--50506). On November 27, 2012,
the SAB Staff Office posted a notice on the SAB Web site inviting
public comments by December 19, 2012, on candidates for the Panel.
Information about formation of the Panel can be found at http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/02ad90b136fc21ef85256eba00436459/b436304ba804e3f885257a5b00521b3b!OpenDocument&TableRow=2.1#2.
    The purpose of the May 7-8, 2013, meeting is for individual members
of the Panel to provide expert comments on charge questions associated
with the research described in EPA's Progress Report. The purpose of
the May 16, 2013, teleconference is to provide additional opportunity
for members of the public to submit relevant oral statements on EPA
documents for consideration by the Panel.
    Also, periodic opportunities for the public to provide additional
input for consideration by the Panel will be provided after the May 7-
8, 2013 public meeting and May 16, 2013 public teleconference call.
    Availability of Meeting Materials: The agenda and other materials
in support of the meeting and teleconference call will be available on
the SAB Web site at http://www.epa.gov/sab in advance of the meeting
and teleconference call.
    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for
consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a
different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices.
Therefore, the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory
committee is different from the process used to submit comments to an
EPA program office.
    Federal advisory committees and panels, including scientific
advisory committees, provide independent advice to the EPA. Members of
the public can submit relevant comments for consideration by the Panel.
Input from the public to the SAB will have the most impact if it
provides specific scientific or technical information or analysis for
the SAB to consider or if it relates to the clarity or accuracy of the
technical information. Members of the public wishing to provide comment
should contact the DFO directly.
    Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an
oral presentation at a public meeting will be limited to five minutes.
Persons interested in providing oral statements at the May 7-8, 2013,
meeting should contact Mr. Hanlon at the contact information provided
above by April 30, 2013. If there is insufficient time during the May
7-8, 2013 public meeting call to allow all scheduled public speakers to
provide oral statements, those scheduled public speakers who could not
provide oral statements during the May 7-8, 2013 public meeting will be
provided opportunity to present their oral statements during a
teleconference call scheduled to occur on May 16, 2013.
    Written Statements: Written statements for the May 7-8, 2013,
meeting and May 16, 2013, teleconference call should be received in the
SAB Staff Office by April 30, 2013, so that the information may be made
available to the SAB for its consideration prior to this meeting and
teleconference call. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO
in the following formats: either an electronic copy (preferred), via
email (acceptable file format: Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, WordPerfect,
MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format),
or in hard copy. Submitters are asked to provide electronic versions of
each document submitted without signatures, because the SAB Staff
Office does not publish documents with signatures on its Web sites.
Members of the public should be aware that their personal contact
information, if included in any written comments, may be posted to the
SAB Web site. Copyrighted material will not be posted without explicit
permission of the copyright holder.
    Accessibility: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, please contact Mr. Hanlon, at the phone
number or email address noted above, preferably at least ten days prior
to the meeting and teleconference call, to give the EPA as much time as
possible to process your request.

    Dated: March 25, 2013.
Thomas H. Brennan,
Deputy Director, Science Advisory Board Staff Office.
[FR Doc. 2013-07992 Filed 4-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 10, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 12783-12786]
[DOCID:fr10mr08-107]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57425; File No. SR-ISE-2008-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change to Amend the Quarterly Options Series Pilot Program To Permit
the Listing of Additional Series

March 4, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 3, 2008, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``Exchange'' or ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as non-
controversial under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The ISE proposes to amend Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 504,
Quarterly Options Series Pilot Program, to permit the Exchange to list
strike prices for Quarterly Options Series (``QOS'') in exchange traded
fund (``ETF'') options that fall within a percentage range (30%) above
and below the price of the underlying ETF. Additionally, upon
demonstrated customer interest, the Exchange also will be permitted to
open additional strike prices of QOS in ETF options that are more than
30% above or below the current price of the ETF. Market Makers trading
for their own account will not be considered when determining customer
interest under this provision. In addition to the initial listed
series, the Exchange may list up to sixty (60) additional series per
expiration month for each QOS in ETF options. Further, the proposal
includes a delisting program to be undertaken by the

Exchange in connection with QOS in ETF options.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site (http://www.ise.com), at the Exchange's principal office, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this rule filing is to amend Supplementary Material
.03 to Rule 504, Quarterly Options Series Pilot Program to allow the
Exchange to open additional strike prices of QOS in ETF options that
are within thirty percent (30%) above or below the closing price of the
underlying ETF on the preceding business day. Additionally, upon
demonstrated customer interest, the Exchange also will be permitted to
open additional strike prices of QOS in ETF options that are more than
30% above or below the current price of the underlying ETF. Market
Makers trading for their own account will not be considered when
determining customer interest under this provision. The Exchange will
be permitted to list up to sixty (60) additional series per expiration
month for each QOS in ETF options.
    On May 2, 2006, the Exchange filed with the Commission a pilot
program proposal to permit the listing and trading of QOS in options on
indexes or options on ETFs that satisfy the applicable listing criteria
under ISE rules.\5\ QOS trade based on calendar quarters that end in
March, June, September and December. The Exchange lists QOS that expire
at the end of the next consecutive four calendar quarters, as well as
the fourth quarter of the next calendar year. For example, if the
Exchange were trading QOS in iShares Russell 2000 Index Fund (``IWM'')
in the month of April 2008, it would list series at the end of the
second quarter 2008 (June), third quarter 2008 (September), fourth
quarter 2008 (December) and first quarter 2009 (March) and fourth
quarter 2009 (December).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54113 (July 7,
2006), 71 FR 39694 (July 13, 2006) (SR-ISE-2006-24) (``Pilot Program
Approval Order''). Under the pilot program, the Exchange lists QOS
in up to five currently listed option classes that are either
options on ETFs or indexes. The Exchange also is permitted to list
QOS in any options class that is selected by other securities
exchanges that employ a similar pilot program under their respective
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange lists QOS in five ETF options: (1) Nasdaq-
100 Index Tracking Stock (``QQQQ''); (2) IWM; (3) DIAMONDS Trust,
Series 1 (``DIA''); (4) Standard & Poor's Depository Receipts/SPDRs
(``SPY''); and (5) Energy Select SPDR (``XLE''). The average trading
volume and total volume for QOS in IWM options significantly exceeds
the volumes for QOS in other ETF options that are listed and traded on
the Exchange. The chart below provides trading volume figures for the
fourth quarter in 2007, demonstrating that QOS in IWM options are by
far the most popular and heavily traded QOS on the Exchange.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          October 2007              November 2007             December 2007
                QOS                -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        ADV       Total vol.      ADV       Total vol.      ADV       Total vol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IWM...............................       19,132      440,035       23,529      494,107       28,970      579,399
QQQQ..............................        7,943      182,689       12,510      262,707       18,856      377,123
SPY...............................        3,740       86,022       15,067      316,399       19,984      399,686
DIA...............................          709       16,314        1,671       35,092        2,202       44,043
XLE...............................          778       17,901        6,141      128,966        1,925       38,507
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over time, the Exchange has continually received requests from
market participants to add additional strike prices for QOS in IWM
options that would be outside of the price range for setting strikes as
provided under Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 504 (hereinafter ``+/
-$5 range'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 504 provides that the
Exchange shall list strike prices for a QOS that are within $5 from
the closing price of the underlying on the preceding day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Investors and other market participants have advised the Exchange
that they are buying and selling QOS in IWM options to trade
volatility. In order to adequately replicate the desired volatility
exposure, these market participants need to trade several IWM options
series, many having strike prices that fall outside of the +/-$5 range
currently allowed under the QOS rules.
    In addition, other participants have advised the Exchange that
their investment strategies involve trading options tied to a
particular option ``delta,'' \7\ rather than a particular level of the
underlying security or index. At issue is the fact that delta depends
on both the relative difference between the level of the underlying
security or index and the option strike price, and time to expiration.
For example, with IWM trading at $85 per share, the strike price
corresponding to a ``25-delta'' IWM call (i.e., a call option with a
delta of 25) with one month to expiration would be 89. However, the
strike price corresponding to a ``25-delta'' IWM call with 3 months to
expiration would be 93, and the strike price of a ``25-delta'' IWM call
with 1 year to expiration would be 106. In short, ISE has been advised
that the +/-$5 range for QOS in IWM options is insufficient to satisfy
customer demand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Delta'' is a measure of how an option price will change in
response to a $1 price change in the underlying security or index.
For example, an ABC option with a delta of ``50'' can be expected to
change by $0.50 in response to a $1 change in the price of ABC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to meet customer demand, the Exchange proposes to amend
Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 504, which governs the Quarterly
Options Series Pilot Program. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
revise Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 504 to allow the Exchange to
open

additional strike prices of QOS in ETF options that are within thirty
percent (30%) above or below the closing price of the underlying ETF
Shares as defined in Rule 502(h) on the preceding business day. The
Exchange also will be permitted to open additional strike prices of QOS
in ETF options that are more than 30% above or below the current price
of the underlying ETF, provided that demonstrated customer interest
exists for such series, as expressed by institutional, corporate or
individual customers or their brokers. Market Makers trading for their
own account will not be considered when determining customer interest
under this proposed provision. The Exchange will be permitted to list
up to sixty (60) additional series per expiration month for each QOS in
ETF options.
    The Exchange also is proposing to add new paragraph (g) to
Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 504, which will set forth a
delisting policy. Specifically, with respect to QOS in ETF options, the
Exchange will, on a monthly basis, review series that are outside a
range of five (5) strikes above and five (5) strikes below the current
price of the underlying ETF, and delist series with no open interest in
both the put and the call series having a: (1) Strike higher than the
highest strike price with open interest in the put and/or call series
for a given expiration month; or (2) strike lower than the lowest
strike price with open interest in the put and/or call series for a
given expiration month.
    To illustrate how the proposed delisting program will work, assume
that IWM closed at $70 on the day the Exchange conducts the monthly
review of QOS in ETF options. Series having strike prices above $75 and
below $65 would be reviewed by the Exchange for possible delisting.
Assume that the Exchange lists the following QOS in IWM options that
expire in June 2008:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Calls--Jun 08 exp                                         Puts--Jun 08 exp
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Strike                    Open  Interest?              Strike                Open  Interest?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
62....................................  No                   62.......................  No.
63....................................  No                   63.......................  Yes.
64....................................  Yes                  64.......................  Yes.
*****                                   *****                *****                      *****
76....................................  Yes                  76.......................  Yes.
77....................................  Yes                  77.......................  Yes.
78....................................  Yes                  78.......................  Yes.
79....................................  Yes                  79.......................  Yes.
80....................................  Yes                  80.......................  Yes.
81....................................  Yes                  81.......................  Yes.
82....................................  Yes                  82.......................  Yes.
83....................................  No                   83.......................  No.
84....................................  No                   84.......................  No.
85....................................  No                   85.......................  Yes.
86....................................  Yes                  86.......................  No.
87....................................  Yes                  87.......................  Yes.
88....................................  Yes                  88.......................  Yes.
89....................................  Yes                  89.......................  No.
90....................................  Yes                  90.......................  No.
91....................................  No                   91.......................  No.
92....................................  No                   92.......................  No.
93....................................  No                   93.......................  No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange would delist the first series listed above, as well as
the last three: $62, $91, $92 and $93. The Exchange would not, however,
delist the $83 and $84 series because there are series having open
interest with strike prices higher than these two series. In addition,
the Exchange would not delist the $63 series because there is open
interest in the put series.
    Notwithstanding the proposed delisting policy, customer requests to
add strikes and/or maintain strikes in QOS in ETF options in series
eligible for delisting shall be granted.
    Further, in connection with the proposed delisting policy, if the
Exchange identifies series for delisting, the Exchange shall notify
other options exchanges with similar delisting policies regarding
eligible series for listing, and shall work with such other exchanges
to develop a uniform list of series to be delisted, so as to ensure
uniform series delisting of multiply listed QOS in ETF options. It is
expected that all options exchanges that have a QOS Pilot Program will
adopt the proposed delisting policy.
    The Exchange represents that it has the necessary systems capacity
to support new options series that will result from this proposal.
Further, as proposed, the Exchange notes that this rule change will
become part of the pilot program and, going forward, will be considered
by the Commission when the Exchange seeks to renew or make permanent
the pilot program in the future.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ To the extent the Commission views the proposed rule change
as an expansion of the pilot program, thus triggering the
requirement under the terms of the Pilot Program Approval Order that
the Exchange submit a pilot program report, the Exchange notes that
it submitted a report on June 27, 2007, in connection with its
filing to extend the pilot program through July 10, 2008. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56031 (July 9, 2007), 72 FR
38637 (July 13, 2007) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of SR-ISE-2007-53).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    Because the additional new series can be added without presenting
capacity problems and because the Exchange has proposed a delisting
policy with respect to QOS in ETF options, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder. Specifically, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5)\9\ of the Act's
requirements that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and, in general, to protect investors
and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one that:
(1) Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the
public interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on
competition; and (3) does not become operative for 30 days from the
date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Therefore, the foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\11\ The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change
is based on a similar proposal recently approved by the Commission.\12\
The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the operative delay to
permit the proposed

rule change to become operative prior to the 30th day after filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 provide the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has fulfilled this requirement.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-57410 (March 3,
2008) (SR-CBOE-2007-96).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has determined that waiving the 30-day operative
delay of the Exchange's proposal is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and will promote competition because
such waiver will allow the Exchange to list additional series in
Quarterly Options at the same time as other exchanges.\13\ Therefore,
the Commission designates the proposal operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-ISE-2008-19 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-19. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2008-19 and should be
submitted on or before March 31, 2008.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-4599 Filed 3-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 2)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 226-227]
[DOCID:fr05ja10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0690; Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-6]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Riverside/Rubidoux Flabob
Airport, Riverside, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action will establish Class E airspace at Riverside/
Rubidoux Flabob Airport, Riverside, CA, to accommodate aircraft using a
new VHF Omni-Directional Radio Range (VOR) Standard Instrument Approach
Procedure (SIAP) at Riverside/Rubidoux Flabob Airport. This will
improve the safety of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) aircraft executing
the new VOR SIAPs at the airport. This action also makes an adjustment
to the geographic coordinates of the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, April 8, 2010. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On October 14, 2009, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to establish controlled airspace at
Riverside/Rubidoux Flabob Airport, Riverside, CA (74 FR 52704).
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9T signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15,
2009, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by establishing Class E airspace at Riverside/Rubidoux Flabob
Airport, Riverside, CA. Controlled airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface is necessary to accommodate IFR aircraft
executing new VOR SIAPs at Riverside/Rubidoux Flabob Airport. This
action also adjusts the geographic coordinates of the airport to
coincide with the FAA's National Aeronautical Charting Office.
    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 will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAAs authority to issue
rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code.
Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses 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 establishes
controlled

airspace at Riverside/Rubidoux Flabob Airport, Riverside, CA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 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 the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15,
2009 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AWP CA E5 Riverside/Rubidoux Flabob Airport, CA [New]

Flabob Airport, CA
    (Lat. 33[deg]59'20'' N., long. 117[deg]24'36'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Flabob Airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on December 10, 2009.
H. Steve Karnes,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. E9-30319 Filed 1-4-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 163 (Monday, August 24, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51151-51152]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20773]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0556; FRL-9932-94-Region 7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Missouri; Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the State of Missouri in a letter dated March 30, 2015. This SIP
revision provides Missouri's state-determined allowance allocations for
existing electric generating units (EGUs) in the state for the 2016
control period and replaces certain allowance allocations for the 2016
control periods established by EPA under the Cross-State Air Pollution
Rule (CSAPR). The CSAPR addresses the ``good neighbor'' provision of
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) that requires states to reduce the
transport of pollution that significantly affects downwind air quality.
In this action EPA is proposing to approve Missouri's SIP revision,
incorporating the state-determined allocations for the 2016 control
periods into the SIP, and amending the regulatory text of the CSAPR
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to reflect this approval and
inclusion of the state-determined allocations. EPA is proposing to take
direct final action to

approve Missouri's SIP revision because it meets the requirements of
the CAA and the CSAPR requirements to replace EPA's allowance
allocations for the 2016 control periods. This action is being proposed
pursuant to the CAA and its implementing regulations. EPA's allocations
of CSAPR trading program allowances for Missouri for control periods in
2017 and beyond remain in place until the State submits and EPA
approves state-determined allocations for those control periods through
another SIP revision. The CSAPR FIPs for Missouri remain in place until
such time as the State decides to replace the FIPs with a SIP revision.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
September 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2015-0556, by mail to Lachala Kemp, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Comments may also be submitted electronically or
through hand delivery/courier by following the detailed instructions in
the ADDRESSES section of the direct final rule located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lachala Kemp, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state's SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse
comments to this action. A detailed rationale for the approval is set
forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are
received in response to this action, no further activity is
contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA receives relevant
adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this
action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts 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.

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, Sulfur
dioxides.

    Dated: August 12, 2015.
Mark Hague,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2015-20773 Filed 8-21-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P