[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18054-18055]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08607]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2018-N-2027; FDA-2012-N-0961; FDA-2018-N-3037; FDA-
2014-N-1721; FDA-2005-N-0101; FDA-2012-N-0294; FDA-2011-N-0449; FDA-
2018-N-3404; FDA-2018-N-3552; and FDA-2018-N-2969]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approvals

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is publishing a list of
information collections that have been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a list of FDA information
collections recently approved by OMB under section 3507 of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507). The OMB control
number and expiration date of OMB approval for each information
collection are shown in table 1. Copies of the supporting statements
for the information collections are available on the internet at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 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.

        Table 1--List of Information Collections Approved By OMB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            OMB control    Date approval
           Title of collection                  No.           expires
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Survey of Current Manufacturing                0910-0867       3/31/2020
 Practices for the Cosmetic Industry....
Environmental Impact Considerations.....       0910-0322       2/28/2022
Generic Clearance for Quantitative             0910-0865       2/28/2022
 Testing of the Development of Food and
 Drug Administration....................
Investigational New Drug Regulations....       0910-0014       3/31/2022
Prescription Drug User Fee Program......       0910-0297       3/31/2022
Food Additives, Food Contact Substance         0910-0495       3/31/2022
 Notification System....................
SPF Labeling and Testing Requirements          0910-0717       3/31/2022
 for OTC Sunscreen Products.............
Generic Drug User Fee Program...........       0910-0727       3/31/2022
Experimental Study of Cigarette Warnings       0910-0866       3/31/2022
Assessment of Combination Product Review       0910-0868       3/31/2022
 Practices..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: April 24, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-08607 Filed 4-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24100-24101]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11179]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP18-483-000]

Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization: WBI Energy
Transmission, Inc.

May 18, 2018.
    Take notice that on May 10, 2018, WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
(WBI Energy), 1250 West Century Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota 58503,
filed a prior notice application pursuant to sections 157.205(b), and
157.208(f)(2) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's
(Commission) regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and WBI
Energy's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-487-000. WBI
Energy requests authorization to increase the maximum allowable
operating pressure (MAOP) of its 6-inch-diameter Garland to Powell
Lateral located in Park and Big Horn Counties, WY from the Garland
Transfer Station to Valve No. 3. The increase in the MAOP on this
portion of pipeline is required to meet an increase in capacity to the
Powell, WY town border station requested by Montana Dakota Utilities
Co., all as more fully set forth in the application, which is open to
the public for inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Lori
Myerchin, Manager, Regulatory Affairs, WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.,
1250 West Century Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota 58503 or phone (701)
530-1563 or by email [email protected].
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time

for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an
application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenter will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-11179 Filed 5-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P


Fw: Revised EGU GHG NSPS proposal

Peter Tsirigotis

to:

Dominic_J._Mancini, nathan_j._frey

02/29/2012 09:35 AM

Cc:

RobertJ Wayland, Kevin Culligan, Mary Johnson, Tsirigotis.Peter

Hide Details

 From:Peter<EMAIL_ADDRESS>nathan_j._frey@omb.eop.govCc:RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Mary Johnson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Hi (again) Dom and Nathan.  The previous redline/strikeout file I sent you was off an interim version of the preamble instead of the correct, 11-04-11 version.  Attached is the corrected redline version.  We also corrected a typo (a "The" was missing on pg 72) so I have appended the "clean" version with the typo corrected. Sorry for any confusion.

Clean Version:

EO 12866 EGU GHG NSPS proposal FR notice 02_28_12.docx

Redline Version (02-28-12 version versus 11-04-11 version):

EO 12866 EGU GHG NSPS preamble_02_28_12_v_11_04_11 redline.docx


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 31, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46395-46399]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18347]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70039; File No. SR-CBOE-2013-071]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Technical Disconnect Functionality

July 25, 2013.
    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 12, 2013, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``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. The Commission notes that the Exchange
filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii)
of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii)) and Rule 19b-4(f)(5)
thereunder (17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(5)), which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is proposing to amend its rules to codify the
Technical Disconnect Mechanism. The text of the proposed rule change is
also available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of
the Secretary, 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 Exchange is proposing to amend CBOE Rules to codify a Technical
Disconnect functionality which is designed to assist CBOE Trading
Permit Holders (``TPHs'') in the event that they lose communication
with a CBOE Application Server (``CAS'') due to a loss of connectivity
between their designated CBOE Client Application and a CAS.
    By way of background, CBOE TPHs currently enter quotes and orders
into a CAS via Client Applications. For purposes of this discussion, a
``Client Application'' is the system component, such as a CBOE-
supported workstation or a TPH's custom trading application, through
which a TPH communicates its quotes and/or orders to a CAS,\3\ which
sits between the Client Application and the trading platform for the
CBOE Hybrid Trading System. Messages are passed between a Client
Application and a CAS. The quotes a Market-Maker enters on the Exchange
may be sent by a Market-Maker from one or more Client Applications.
Similarly, the orders a TPH enters on the Exchange may be sent by the
TPH from one or more Client Applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ CBOE currently has numerous CASs serving TPHs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When a CAS loses communication with a Client Application such that
the CAS does not receive an appropriate response to a Heartbeat Request
within ``x'' period of time (``Heartbeat Response Time''), the
Technical Disconnect Mechanism will automatically logoff the TPH's
affected Client Application and, if applicable, will automatically
cancel any Market-Maker quotes posted through the affected Client
Application. For purposes of this rule, a ``Heartbeat Request'' refers
to a message from a CAS to a Client Application to check connectivity
and which requires a response from the Client Application in order to
avoid logoff. The Heartbeat Request acts as a virtual pulse between a
CAS and a Client Application and allows a CAS to continually monitor
its connection with a Client Application. Failure to receive a response
to a Heartbeat Request within the Heartbeat Response Time is indicative
of a technical or system issue. This function of automatically logging
off a Client Application, and if applicable automatically cancelling
Market-Maker quotes posted through the affected Client Application,
when there is no response to a Heartbeat Request within the Heartbeat
Response Time is intended to help to mitigate the potential risks
associated with a loss of communication with a Client Application
(e.g., erroneous or unintended executions due to stale quotes that
remained in the CBOE Book). This serves to assist a TPH when such a
technical or system issue occurs, and also assist the Exchange in
maintaining a fair and orderly market generally.
    A CAS will generate a Heartbeat Request to a Client Application
after a specified interval (``Heartbeat Interval'' or `` `n' period of
time''). Additionally as noted above, a CAS will disconnect a Client
Application, and if applicable cancel any Market-Maker quotes posted
through the affect Client Application, after a specified period of time
if it does not receive a appropriate response to a Heartbeat Request
(Heartbeat Response Time or `` `x' period of time''). The Exchange
notes that the Heartbeat Interval and the Heartbeat Response Time
depend upon the Application Programming Interface (``API'') a TPH is
using.\4\ Currently, the Exchange offers two APIs: CBOE Market
Interface (``CMi'') API and Financial Information eXchange (``FIX'')
Protocol. CMi currently has two versions available: CMi and CMi 2. A
TPH may determine which of the available APIs, and if applicable, which
version, it would like to use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An API is a computer interface that allows market
participants with authorized access to interface electronically with
the Exchange. Multiple versions of each API may exist and other APIs
may be supported from time-to-time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, a CAS on the CMi API will generate a Heartbeat Request to a
Client Application after every ``n'' period of time. The Value of ``n''
is currently set by the Exchange at two (2) seconds. Depending upon the
interface version of CMi a TPH is using, the value of ``x'' is either
set at twenty (20) seconds by the Exchange or the TPH may determine the
value of ``x'' at logon, so long as it is not less than three (3)
seconds and does not exceed twenty (20) seconds.
    A CAS on the CMi 2 API will generate a Heartbeat Request to a
Client Application (i) after the CAS does not receive any messages from
a particular Client Application for ``n'' period of time or (ii) after
every ``n'' period of time. A TPH using CMi 2 will determine whether
Heartbeat Requests are generated every ``n'' period of time or only if
no messages are received for ``n'' period of time. A TPH using the CMi
2 API will also determine the value of ``n'' at logon. In no event
shall ``n'' be less than three (3) seconds or exceed twenty (20)
seconds. If a CAS generates a Heartbeat Request only after it does not
receive any messages from a particular Client Application for ``n''
period of time, the value of ``x'' (Heartbeat Response Time) will be
set at a half (.5) second. If a CAS generates a Heartbeat Request every
``n'' period of time, the value of ``x'' shall be equal to the value of
``n.'' For example, if a TPH using CMi 2 chooses to receive a Heartbeat
Request every ``n'' period of time and sets the value of ``n'' to 6
seconds, then the TPH's Client Application must respond to a Heartbeat
Request within 6 seconds or the Client Application will be
disconnected.
    A CAS on the FIX API will generate a Heartbeat Message to a Client
Application after the CAS does not receive any messages from a
particular Client Application for ``n'' period of time. If the CAS does
not receive a response to the ``Heartbeat Message'' from the Client
Application for ``n'' period of time, the CAS shall generate a
Heartbeat Request to the Client Application. For purposes of this rule,
a ``Heartbeat Message'' refers to a message from a CAS to a Client
Application to check connectivity. Failure to respond to a Heartbeat
Message within ``n'' period of time will trigger the generation of a
Heartbeat Request. A TPH using the FIX API will determine the value of
``n'' at logon. In no event shall ``n'' be less than five (5) seconds.
The value of ``x'' (Heartbeat Response Time) will be set equal to the
value of ``n.'' For example, if a TPH using FIX sets the value of ``n''
to 6 seconds, then the TPH's Client Application must respond to a
Heartbeat Request within 6 seconds or the Client Application will be
disconnected.
    The following example illustrates the manner in which the Technical
Disconnect Mechanism functions on CMi. For purposes of this example
only, the TPH will be a Market-Maker and ``n'' will be set at 2 seconds
and ``x'' is set at 20 seconds:

(1) 10:00:000--Heartbeat Request sent to Client Application after logon
    10:00:020--CAS generates Heartbeat Request to Client Application
    10:00:030--CAS receives message from Client Application
    10:00:040--CAS generates Heartbeat Request
    10:00:040-10:00:240--No messages received from Client Application
    10:00:240--No messages received from Client Application within 20
seconds
    -- Client Application automatically logged off and pending Market-
Maker quotes previously entered from the Client Application
automatically canceled

    The following example illustrates the manner in which the Technical
Disconnect Mechanism functions on CMi2 when a TPH chooses to have the
CAS generate a Heartbeat Request every ``n'' period of time. For
purposes of this example only, the TPH will be a non-Market-Maker and
``n'' will be set by the TPH at 5 seconds:

(1) 10:00:000--Heartbeat Request sent to Client Application after logon
    10:00:020--CAS receives a message from Client Application
    10:00:050--Heartbeat Request sent to Client Application
    10:00:100 -No response to Heartbeat Request received by CAS within
5 seconds
    --Client Application automatically logged off and pending orders
previously entered from the Client Application remain in the Hybrid
Trading System

    The following examples illustrate the manner in which the Technical
Disconnect Mechanism functions on CMi 2 when a TPH chooses to have the
CAS generate a Heartbeat Request only when the CAS does not receive any
messages from the Client Application for ``n'' period of time. For
purposes of these examples only, the TPH will be a Market-Maker and
``n'' will be set by the TPH at 5 seconds:

(1) 10:00:000--Heartbeat Request sent to Client Application after logon
    10:00:020--CAS receives a message from Client Application
    --Counter re-starts
    10:00:070--No messages received from Client Application within 5
seconds
    --CAS generates Heartbeat Request
    10:00:073--CAS receives a message from Client Application
    --Counter restarts
(2) 10:00:000--Heartbeat Request sent to Client Application within
login
    10:00:020--CAS receives a message from Client Application
    --Counter re-starts
    10:00:070--No messages received from Client Application within 5
seconds
    --CAS generates Heartbeat Request
    10:00:075--No messages received from Client Application within .5
seconds
    --Client Application automatically logged off and pending Market-
Maker quotes previously entered from the Client Application
automatically canceled

    Lastly, the following example illustrates the manner in which the
Technical Disconnect Mechanism functions on FIX. For purposes of this
example only, the TPH will be a Market-Maker and ``n'' will be set by
the TPH at 5 seconds:

(1) 10:00:000--Heartbeat Request sent to Client Application after logon
    10:00:020--CAS receives a message from Client Application
    --Counter restarts
    10:00:070--No messages received from Client Application within 5
seconds
    --CAS generates Heartbeat Message
    10:00:120--No messages received from Client Application within 5
seconds
    --CAS generates Heartbeat Request
    10:00:170--No messages received from Client Application within 5
seconds
    --Client Application automatically logged off and pending Market-
Maker quotes previously entered from the Client Application
automatically canceled

    As demonstrated above, a Heartbeat Request may be generated (i)
every ``n'' period of time or (ii) when the CAS does not receive any
messages from a Client Application for a specified period of time
(``n'' period of time) depending upon the API being used. Regardless of
the API being used however, if an appropriate response message to a
Heartbeat Request is not received by the CAS from the Client
Application within a specified period of time (``x'' period of time or
Heartbeat Response Time), the Technical Disconnect Mechanism is
triggered and the Client Application is automatically logged off and,
if applicable, a Market-Maker's quotes through that Client Application
are automatically canceled.
    The Exchange notes that any non-connectivity is event- and Client
Application-specific. Therefore, the cancellation of a Market-Maker's
quotes entered into a CAS via a particular Client Application will
neither impact nor determine the treatment of the quotes of the same or
other Market-Makers entered into a CAS via a separate and distinct
Client Application. The Technical Disconnect Mechanism will not impact
or determine the treatment of orders previously entered into a CAS. As
discussed above, the function of automatically cancelling a Market-
Maker's quotes posted through an affected Client Application is
intended to help to mitigate the potential risks associated with a loss
of communication with a Client Application. For example, in today's
market, Market-Makers' quotes are rapidly changing and can have a
lifespan of only milliseconds. Additionally, under the Hybrid Trading
System, trades are automatically effected against the Market-Maker's
then current quote. Therefore, if a TPH's Client Application is
disconnected for any period of time, it is very possible that any
quotes posted through that Client Application would be stale by the
time the TPH reestablished connectivity. Consequently, any resulting
execution of such quotes is more likely to be erroneous or unintended.
Conversely, the Exchange notes that orders tend to be static in nature
and often rest in the book. Indeed, certain order types, such as
Market-on-Close orders, are intended to rest in the book for a period
of time. As such, there is a lower risk of erroneous or unintended
executions resulting from orders that remained in the Hybrid Trading
System during and after an affected Client Application was logged off.
    The Exchange next notes that the CAS will send a logout message to
an affected Client Application that confirms that the Client
Application connection has been terminated. Once connectivity to the
Client Application is reestablished, a Market-Maker affected by the
mechanism is able to send messages to the CAS to reestablish the
Market-Maker's quotes. Any Market-Maker affected by the Technical
Disconnect Mechanism is not relieved of its obligation to provide
continuous electronic quotes under the Exchange rules.\5\ The Exchange
finally notes that

the Technical Disconnect Mechanism is enabled for all TPHs and may not
be disabled by TPHs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ With respect to a Market-Maker who is obligated to provide
continuous electronic quotes on the Hybrid Trading System (``Hybrid
Market-Maker''), CBOE Rule 1.1(ccc) Continuous Electronic Quotes
provides that the Exchange may consider other exceptions to the
Hybrid Market-Maker's continuous electronic quote obligation based
on demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or other mitigating
circumstances. As provided in SR-CBOE-2005-93, Amendment 1 (See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54250 (July 31, 2006), 71 FR
44729 (August 7, 2006)), mitigating circumstances that may be
considered by the Exchange may include, but is not limited to,
instances where a technical failure or limitation in a Hybrid
Market-Maker's system prevents the Hybrid Market-Maker from
maintaining, or communicating to the Exchange, timely and accurate
electronic quotes. However, a pattern or practice of technical
failures or limitations, or the excessive frequency of technical
failures or limitations, may also be considered by the Exchange in
determining whether to except the period of time from the continuous
electronic quoting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that while information relating to
connectivity and the Technical Disconnect Mechanism are already
available to TPHs via technical specifications, codifying this
information within the rule text will provide additional transparency
and further reduce potential confusion.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\6\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \7\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
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 regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes that codifying in the rules
how the Technical Disconnect Mechanism works provides additional
transparency in the rules and provides an additional avenue to easily
understand CBOE's system and processes. The Exchange believes this will
also reduce any potential confusion, thereby removing a potential
impediment to and perfecting the mechanism for a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, protecting investors and
the public interest.
    Additionally, the Technical Disconnect Mechanism is a valuable tool
that is designed to help maintain a fair and orderly market. The
Exchange believe that the Technical Disconnect Mechanism assists with
the maintenance of fair and orderly markets by helping to mitigate the
potential risks associated with a loss in communication with a Client
Application, especially risk associated with a loss in communication
with a Client Application of a Market-Maker that is providing quotes
across a multitude of series and classes.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is
designed to not permit unfair discrimination among market participants.
The Exchange notes that the Technical Disconnect Mechanism automatic
logoff function is applicable to all TPHs and may not be disabled by
any TPH. The Exchange believes that the Technical Disconnect Mechanism
benefits the marketplace because it designed to help alert a TPH to a
potential technical or system issue and automatically logoff a TPH's
Client Application within certain prescribed parameters. With respect
to the Technical Disconnect Mechanism's automatic cancellation of
Market-Maker quotes, the Exchange also believes it is not unfair to
cancel only Market-Maker quotes and not orders. Particularly, the
automatic cancellation of Market-Maker quotes benefits the marketplace
because it is designed to help reduce the risk of stale quotes
remaining on the CBOE Book in the event that a CAS loses connectivity
with a Client Application (e.g., potentially resulting in erroneous or
unintended executions). Furthermore, the functionality provides for the
protection of Market-Makers, who must bear the burden of market risk
for stale quotes, as well as for the protection of investors and the
efficiency and fairness of the markets as a whole. Conversely, because
orders tend to be static in nature and often rest in the book, the
Exchange believes there is a lower risk of erroneous or unintended
executions resulting from orders that remain in the Hybrid Trading
System during and after an affected Client Application is logged off.
The Exchange believes this functionality enhances the overall market
quality for options traded on CBOE.

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange does
not believe the proposed rule change will cause any burden on
intramarket competition because it applies to all TPHs. Even though the
functionality treats Market-Makers' quotes differently than orders, the
Exchange notes again that it believes that the Technical Disconnect
Mechanism benefits all market participants because it reduces the risk
of stale quotes on the CBOE Book, which can result in erroneous or
unintended trades. Further, the Exchange does not believe that such
change will impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The
Exchange notes that, should the proposed changes make CBOE more
attractive for trading, market participants trading on other exchanges
are welcome to become TPHs and trade at CBOE if they determine that
this proposed rule change has made CBOE more attractive or favorable.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \9\
thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 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-CBOE-2013-071 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-CBOE-2013-071. 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-CBOE-2013-071 and should be
submitted on or before August 21, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-18347 Filed 7-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 70714]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29353]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 3043-016]

Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation and The Bank of New
York Mellon, as Owner Trustee; Notice of Application for Partial
Transfer of License, and Soliciting Comments and Motions To Intervene

    On October 27, 2011, Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation
(AECC) and The Bank of New York Mellon, as Owner Trustee (co-licensee)
filed an application for transfer of license for the Arkansas River
Lock and Dam No. 13, Hydroelectric Project No. 3043, located on the
Arkansas River in Crawford County, Arkansas.
    Applicants seek Commission approval to transfer the license for the
Arkansas River Lock and Dam No. 13 Hydroelectric Project from The Bank
of New York Mellon, as Owner Trustee, co-licensee to AECC as sole
licensee.
    Applicants' Contact: AECC: Robert M. Lyford, Senior Vice President
and General Counsel, Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation, P.O.
Box 194208, Little Rock, AR 72219-4208,<PHONE_NUMBER> and Sean T.
Beeny, Jeffrey K. Janike, Miller, Balis & O'Neill, P.C., 1015 15th
Street, NW., 12th Floor, Washington, DC 20005,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Co-
licensee: The Bank of New York Mellon, c/o the Bank of Mellon Trust
Company, N.A., 700 South Flower Street, Suite 500, Los Angeles, CA
90019, Attention: Corporate Unit.
    FERC Contact: Patricia W. Gillis<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments and motions to intervene: 20 days from
the issuance date of this notice. Comments and motions to intervene may
be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. If unable to be filed electronically, documents may be paper-
filed. To paper-file, an original plus seven copies should be mailed
to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. More information about
this project can be viewed or printed on the eLibrary link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-3043) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-(866) 208-3372.

    Dated: November 7, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-29353 Filed 11-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


VISTA PÚBLICA SOBRE ENMIENDAS AL

REGLAMENTO DE ESTÁNDARES DE CALIDAD DE AGUA DE PUERTO RICO

La Junta de Calidad Ambiental, a tenor con la facultad que le confiere
su Ley Orgánica, Ley Número 9 del 18 de junio de 1970, según
enmendada, Ley sobre Política Pública Ambiental, y la Ley Número 170
del 12 de agosto de 1988, Ley de Procedimiento Administrativo Uniforme,
según enmendada, se propone revisar y enmendar el Reglamento de
Estándares de Calidad de Agua de Puerto Rico (RECA).

Se proponen las siguientes enmiendas:

Se modifican los Artículos y Secciones del RECA conforme a la
codificación que tiene el mismo en el Código de Reglamentos
Ambientales de la Junta de Calidad Ambiental.

Se modifican los estándares de calidad de agua de los siguientes
parámetros en la Regla 1303.1 (I) (4) y la Regla 1303.1 (I) (5) para
cumplir con los requisitos de la Sección 303 de la Ley Federal de Agua
Limpia de forma tal que quedemos excluidos de la Regla Nacional de
Tóxicos promulgada por la Agencia Federal de Protección Ambiental el
22 de diciembre de 1992, (National Toxic Rule):

Diclorobromometano

Benzo(a)antraceno

Benzo(a)pireno

Benzo(b)fluoranteno

Benzo(k)fluoranteno

Criseno

Dibenzo(a,h)antraceno

Ideno(1,2,3-cd)pirina

Isoforano

Se elimina la clasificación SC de la Regla 1302 (Artículo 2) para
cumplir con las metas nacionales de la Ley Federal de Agua Limpia.

Se corrigen varios errores tipográficos y de traducción entre las
versiones de inglés y español del RECA.

Se incorporan las correcciones incluidas en el RECA del 1990 como Fe de
Errata.

Se incorpora el Procedimiento para la Implantación de la Política de
Anti-degradación.

Se incorpora un estándar como valor simple para coliformes fecales y
enterococo en la Regla 1303.

Se modifican los estándares de calidad de agua para los siguientes
parámetros en la Regla 1303 para mantener consistencia entre las
clasificaciones SD y SG1, en términos de su uso como una fuente de agua
potable:

Antimonio

Endrin

Benceno

Tetracloroetileno

Tricloroetileno

1,2,2-Tricloroetano

1,2,4-Triclorobenceno

Clorobenceno

Diclorobromometano

Etilbenceno

Hexacloroxiclopentadina

Tolueno

La vista pública sobre este reglamento será celebrada en la Junta de
Calidad Ambiental, Avenida Ponce de León 431, Salón de Vistas
Públicas, Piso 6, Edifico Nacional Plaza. Hato Rey, Puerto Rico.

FECHA:	14 DE ENERO DE 2005

HORA:	8:30 AM – 4:30 PM

Cualquier persona que desee comentar las acciones propuestas, deberá
comparecer a la Vista Pública mediante la solicitud de turno a la
División de Vistas Públicas de la Oficina de Secretaría de la Junta
de Calidad Ambiental al teléfono<PHONE_NUMBER> ó<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extensiones 2624, 3624 ó 2628 o remitir sus comentarios sobre las
enmiendas por escrito durante los próximos treinta (30) días a partir
de la publicación de este aviso a la siguiente dirección:

JUNTA DE CALIDAD AMBIENTAL

APARTADO 11488

SAN JUAN PUERTO RICO  00910

ATENCIÓN:  OFICINA DE SECRETARIA

Copias de las enmiendas propuestas están disponibles en la Biblioteca
(Lobby), Salón de Vistas Públicas (Piso 6), del Edificio Nacional
Plaza ubicado en la Avenida Ponce de León 431, Hato Rey y en las
Oficinas regionales de la Junta de Calidad Ambiental:

Oficina Regional de Ponce

Centro de Distribución, Suite 404

Avenida Santiago de los Caballeros 3199

Ponce, Puerto Rico	Oficina Regional de Arecibo

Calle Delfín Olmo 156

Arecibo, Puerto Rico

	Oficina Regional de Mayagüez

Avenida Hostos 828, Suite 201

Mayagüez, Puerto Rico

	Oficina Regional de Guayama

Carretera 43 Km. 134.7

Barrio Algarrobo

Guayama, Puerto Rico

	Oficina Regional de Humacao

Ave. Boulevard del Río, Ramal 3

Humacao, Puerto Rico

Las copias de las enmiendas propuestas al Reglamento de Estándares de
Calidad de Agua de Puerto Rico estarán a la venta de lunes a viernes
entre las 8:00 am y 4:30 pm, en las oficinas antes mencionadas a un
costo de $0.20 por cada página.

Lcdo. Esteban Mujica Cotto

Presidente

Este aviso se emite en conformidad con el Artículo 14(h) de la Ley
Número 9 del 18 de junio de 1970, según enmendad, Ley sobre Política
Pública Ambiental, y la Sección 2.1 de la Ley Número 170 del 12 de
agosto de 1988, Ley de Procedimiento Administrativo Uniforme, según
enmendada.

Anuncio Aprobado por la Comisión Estatal de Elecciones

CEE-C-04-118

ENVIRONMENTAL NOTICE

PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

PUERTO RICO WATER QUALITY STANDARDS REGULATION

The Environmental Quality Board, pursuant to the powers conferred by Law
Number 9 of June 18, 1970, Environmental Public Policy Act, as amended,
and the Law Number 170 of August 12, 1988, Uniform Administrative
Procedure Act, as amended, intends to revise and amend the Puerto Rico
Water Quality Standards Regulation (WQSR).

These proposed amendments are the following:

The codification of the Articles and Sections of the WQSR is modified
according to the corresponding Rules established for it on the Code of
Environmental Regulations.

The water quality standards established in Rule 1303.1 (I) (4) and Rule
1303.1 (I) (5) for the following parameters are modified in order to
comply with Section 303 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and be excluded of
the National Toxic Rule promulgated by the Environmental Protection
Agency on December 22, 1992.

Dichlorobromomethane

Benzo(a)Anthracene

Benzo(a)Pyrene

Benzo(b)Fluoranthene

Benzo(k)Fluoranthene

Chrysene

Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene

Indeno(1,2,3-dd)Pyrene

Isophorone

The classification of SC of Rule 1302 (Article 2) is deleted in order to
comply with national goals of the CWA.

Several typographical errors and translation errors between the English
and Spanish versions of the Regulation are corrected.

The corrections indicated by Fe de Errata in the WQSR of 1990 are
incorporated.

The Procedure for the Implementation of the Anti-degradation Policy is
incorporated.

A standard as a single value for fecal coliforms and enterococci is
incorporated in Rule 1303.

The water quality standards established in Rule 1303 for the following
parameters are modified in order to maintain the consistency between SD
and SG1 classifications in terms of their use as a source of drinking
water:

Antimony

Endrin

Benzene

Tetrachloroethylene

Trichloroethylene

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

Chlorobenzene

Dichlorobromomethane

Ethylbenzene

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

Toluene

The Public Hearing for these amendments will be held in the
Environmental Quality Board, 431 Ponce de León Avenue, Public Hearings
Hall, 6th Floor, National Plaza Building, Hato Rey, Puerto Rico.

DATE:		JANUARY 14, 2005

TIME:		8:30 AM – 4:30 PM

Any person that wishes to comment the proposed actions should attend the
public hearing and solicit a turn in the Division of Public Hearings at
the Office of the Secretary of the Environmental Quality Board by
calling telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or (787) 8181, extensions 2624, 3624 or
2628 or by submitting written comments regarding the proposed amendments
during the following thirty (30) days from the publication of this
notice to the following address:

ENVIROMENTAL QUALITY BOARD

P O BOX 11488

SAN JUAN PUERTO RICO  00910

ATTENTION:  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

Copies of the proposed amendments will be available at the Library
(Lobby), Public Hearing Hall (6th Floor) at the National Plaza Building,
431 Ponce de León Avenue, Hato Rey and at the Regional Offices of the
Environmental Quality Board:

Ponce Regional Office

Distribution Center, Suite 404

3199 Santiago de los Caballeros Avenue

Ponce, Puerto Rico	Arecibo Regional Office

156 Delfín Olmo Street

Arecibo, Puerto Rico

Mayagüez Regional Office

828 Hostos Avenue, Suite 201

Mayagüez, Puerto Rico	Guayama Regional Office

Road 43 Km. 134.7 Algarrobo Ward

Guayama, Puerto Rico

	Humacao Regional Office

Boulevard del Río Avenue

Humacao, Puerto Rico

The copies of the proposed amendments to the Puerto Rico Water Quality
Regulation will be on sale from Monday to Friday at the aforementioned
offices at $0.20 per page.

Esteban Mujica Cotto, Esq.

Chairman

This notice has been issued pursuant to Article 14(h) of Law Number 9 of
June 18, 1970, Environmental Public Policy Act, as amended, and Section
2.1 of Law Number 170 of August 12, 1988, Uniform Administrative
Procedure Act, as amended.

Notice Approved by the Commonwealth Elections Commission of Puerto Rico

CEE-C-04-118


[Federal Register: May 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 87)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 21249-21251]
[DOCID:fr07my09-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1239; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-131-AD;
Amendment 39-15894; AD 2009-09-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Boeing Model 747 airplanes. This AD requires repetitive external
surface high frequency eddy current inspections to detect cracks in the
radius detail of the upper lobe doubler on both sides of the airplane,
and applicable corrective action. This AD results from reports of
cracks in the radius detail of the upper lobe doublers. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct cracks in the upper lobe doublers. Such
cracks could result in significant degradation of the fuselage
structure and reduce its ability to carry flight loads from the
vertical stabilizer, which could adversely affect the controllability
of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective June 11, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of June 11,
2009.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

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 address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
certain Boeing Model 747 airplanes.

That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on November 26, 2008
(73 FR 71963). That NPRM proposed to require repetitive external
surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections to detect cracks
in the radius detail of the upper lobe doubler on both sides of the
airplane, and applicable corrective action.

Comments

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

Support for Proposed AD

    Boeing concurs with the contents of the proposed AD. Northwest
Airlines (NWA) has no technical objection to the initial and repetitive
HFEC inspections and corrective actions specified in the proposed AD.

Request To Include Service Bulletin Information Notice

    NWA requests that the information in Boeing Service Bulletin
Information Notice (IN) 747-53A2651 IN 01, dated November 6, 2008, be
acknowledged and accounted for in the final rule.
    We partially agree. Changes to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2651, dated June 12, 2008, are discussed below, along with our
response to the commenter about these changes.
     The IN notes that in Figures 1 and 2, footnote (b), of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June 12, 2008, the
existing probe part number ``MMP950-50'' should be ``MMP905-50.'' The
existing part number of the probe (for the HFEC inspection) in the
service bulletin has a typographical error. The part number is provided
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June 12, 2008, only
as an example of an acceptable probe, and is not mandated by this AD.
Therefore, we have not changed this AD regarding this issue.
     The IN also notes that in Figures 1 and 2, footnote (b),
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June 12, 2008,
additional examples of the small diameter probe part numbers ``MMP901-
50'' and ``MMP-60'' should be added, and that Boeing wants to provide
the operators with more examples of acceptable probes. As use of a
specific small diameter probe is not mandated, this AD has not been
changed regarding this issue.
     The IN also notes that in Paragraph 3.B., Work
Instructions, PART 3, Step 1, of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2651, dated June 12, 2008, the existing text ``from STA 2520 to STA
2521'' should be ``from STA 2491 to STA 2521.'' The existing text is a
typographical error in ``Part 3--Restoration'' of the Work Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June 12, 2008, and
it is related to the location of a sealant application. The service
bulletin does define the inspection area as ``between STA 2491 and STA
2521'' in the Action paragraph and the service bulletin shows the same
area to be inspected in the figures. It is Boeing's intent in the
service bulletin to apply sealant to the inspected area. We have
clarified this issue by adding a new paragraph (g) to this final rule
and re-identified subsequent paragraphs accordingly.

Request To Change Work Hours

    NWA requests that we change the work-hour estimate provided in the
proposed AD to include the time to remove and restore the sealant--for
a total of 25 work hours.
    We disagree. The cost information describes only the direct costs
of the specific actions required by this AD. Based on the best data
available, the manufacturer provided the number of work hours necessary
to do the required actions. This number represents the time necessary
to perform only the actions actually required by this AD. Removing the
sealant is addressed in paragraph 3.B. ``Part 1--Access,'' of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June 12, 2008, and
restoration of the sealant is addressed in paragraph 3.B. ``Part 3--
Restoration,'' in the Work Instructions of the service bulletin. We
recognize that, in doing the actions required by an AD, operators might
incur incidental costs in addition to the direct costs. The cost
analysis in AD rulemaking actions, however, typically does not include
incidental costs such as the time required to gain access and close up.
Those incidental costs, which might vary significantly among operators,
are almost impossible to calculate. This AD has not been changed
regarding this issue.

Explanation of Change to Paragraph (f) of This AD

    We have revised paragraph (f) of this AD to clarify that there is
an initial inspection that must be done for all airplanes and that the
repetitive inspections must be done for airplanes on which no cracking
is found.

Conclusion

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 164 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take 9 work-hours per product
to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S.
operators to be $118,080, or $720 per product, per inspection cycle.

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (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) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2009-09-08 Boeing: Amendment 39-15894. Docket No. FAA-2008-1239;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-131-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective June 11,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B
SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-
400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, certificated in any
category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2651, dated June 12, 2008.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of cracks in the radius detail
of the upper lobe doublers. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracks in the upper lobe doublers. Such cracks could result
in significant degradation of the fuselage structure and reduce its
ability to carry flight loads from the vertical stabilizer, which
could adversely affect the controllability of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Inspection(s) and Corrective Action

    (f) At the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated
June 12, 2008, except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, do an
external surface high frequency eddy current inspection to detect
cracks in the radius detail of the upper lobe doubler on both sides
of the airplane, and the applicable corrective action, by
accomplishing all the applicable actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin, except as
required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD. The applicable
corrective action must be done before further flight. As applicable,
repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified
in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2651, dated June 12, 2008.
    (g) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June
12, 2008, paragraph 3.B., Work Instructions, PART 3, Step 1,
specifies a sealant application ``from STA 2520 to STA 2521,'' this
AD requires a sealant application ``from STA 2491 to STA 2521'' on
both sides of the airplane.
    (h) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June
12, 2008, specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions
instead of repairing or replacing any cracked upper lobe doubler in
accordance with the service bulletin, this AD requires, before
further flight, repairing any cracked upper lobe doubler using a
method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (j) of this AD.
    (i) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651, dated June
12, 2008, specifies a compliance time after the date on the service
bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(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. Send information to
ATTN: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2651,
dated June 12, 2008, to do the actions required by this AD, unless
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 22, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-9925 Filed 5-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 108 (Monday, June 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34328-34329]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12020]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-412, OMB Control No. 3235-0469]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 17Ad-17

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 17Ad-17, (17 CFR
240.17Ad-17), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a
et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of
information to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for
extension and approval.
    Rule 17Ad-17 requires certain transfer agents and broker-dealers to
make two searches for the correct address of lost securityholders using
an information database without charge to the lost securityholders. In
addition, paying agents are required to attempt to notify lost payees
at least once. In addition, the entities also are required to maintain
records relating to the searches and notifications. The Commission
staff estimates that the rule applies to approximately 496 broker
dealers and transfer agents, and 3,113 paying agent entities, including
carrying firms, transfer agents, indenture trustees, custodians, and
approximately 10% of issuers. The Commission staff estimates that the
total annual burden for searches is approximately 183,813 hours and the
total annual burden for paying agent notifications is approximately
38,913 hours. In addition, approximately 5,968 burden hours are
associated with recordkeeping, representing an annual burden of 4,411
hours for the broker-dealers and transfer agents, and 1,557 for paying
agents. The Commission staff estimates that the aggregate annual burden
is therefore approximately

228,694 hours (183,813 + 38,913 + 5,968).
    In addition, the Commission staff estimates that covered entities
will incur costs of approximately $6,617,298 annually, primarily as
payment to third party data base providers that will search for the
missing securityholders.
    The retention period for the recordkeeping requirement under Rule
17Ad-17 is not less than three years. The recordkeeping requirement
under this rule is mandatory to assist the Commission in monitoring
compliance with the rule. This rule does not involve the collection of
confidential information.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted by
August 5, 2022.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: David Bottom, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: May 31, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-12020 Filed 6-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 61)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16048-16051]
[DOCID:fr30mr06-14]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2005-0482; FRL-8050-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Iowa

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a revision to the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submitted by the state of Iowa. The purpose of this revision is
to approve the 2005 update to the Polk County Board of Health Rules and
Regulations, Chapter V, Air Pollution. These revisions will help to
ensure consistency between the applicable local agency rules and
Federally-approved rules, and ensure Federal enforceability of the
applicable parts of the local agency air programs.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective May 30, 2006, without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 1, 2006. If
adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2005-0482, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Heather
Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2005-0482. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI

or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an

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

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

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

Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street,
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding
Federal holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine these
documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours
in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following questions:

What is a SIP?
What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?
What is being addressed in this document?
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
What action is EPA taking?

What is a SIP?

    Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop
air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state
air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards
established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under
section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria
pollutants. These pollutants are: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide,
ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
    Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to
us for approval and incorporation into the Federally-enforceable SIP.
    Each Federally-approved SIP protects air quality primarily by
addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be
extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents
and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring
networks, and modeling demonstrations.

What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?

    In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the
Federally-enforceable SIP, states must formally adopt the regulations
and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements.
This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public
comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking
body.
    Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the
state submits it to us for inclusion into the SIP. We must provide
public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed
Federal action on the state submission. If adverse comments are
received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by
us.
    All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA
under section 110 of the CAA are incorporated into the Federally-
approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at title 40, part 52, entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans.'' The actual state regulations
which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR
outright but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that we
have approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date.

What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?

    Enforcement of the state regulation before and after it is
incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP is primarily a state
responsibility. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, we
are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens
are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in
section 304 of the CAA.

What is being addressed in this document?

    The Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) requested EPA
approval of the 2005 revisions to the Polk County Board of Health Rules
and Regulations, Chapter V, Air Pollution, as a revision to the Iowa
SIP. The changes were adopted by the Polk County Board of Health
Supervisors on August 16, 2005, and became effective August 24, 2005.
    The definitions for AQD (Air Quality Division) and Health Officer
are being revised to include the updated title, Air Quality Division of
Polk County. Definitions for EPA reference method and Volatile Organic
Compounds are being updated to include recent CFR amendment dates.
Additional definitions being added to Chapter V are Hazardous air
pollutant, and manually operated equipment. These definitions are
consistent with the definitions in the Iowa SIP.
    Two revisions are being made to Article VII, ``Performance Test for
Stack Emission Test,'' at 5-18(a)(2) and 5-18(a)(3), to include recent
CFR amendment dates.
    Revisions to Article X, ``Permits,'' and Division 2, ``Operating
Permits,'' are being made to add the term of ``cooling units'' to fuel-
burning equipment for indirect heating and reheating furnaces. The
paragraphs at 5-33(3) and 5-39(b)(2) were deleted and replaced with
paragraphs that included residential heaters, cook stoves, or
fireplaces which burn untreated wood, untreated seeds or pellets, or
other untreated vegetative materials. Exemptions were added at 5-33(19)
and 5-39(a)(12) to add manually-operated equipment, as defined in
Article I, 5-2. Revisions made to Article X are consistent with the
Iowa SIP.

Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical
support document which is part of this document, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.

What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving a revision to the SIP submitted by the state of
Iowa to approve the 2005 update to the Polk County Board of Health
Rules and Regulations, Chapter V, Air Pollution. These revisions will
ensure consistency between the applicable local agency rules and
Federally-approved rules, and ensure Federal enforceability of the
applicable parts of the local agency air programs.
    We are processing this action as a direct final action because the
revisions make routine changes to the existing rules that are
noncontroversial. Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments.
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.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 30, 2006. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: March 13, 2006.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

0
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart Q--Iowa

0
2. In Sec.  52.820 the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry for ``Chapter V'' under the heading ``Polk County'' to read
as follows:

Sec.  52.820  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                          EPA-Approved Iowa Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         State effective    EPA approval
         Iowa citation                   Title                date              date            Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Commission
                                                      [567]

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                                   Polk County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER V.....................  Polk County Board of             8/24/05  3/30/06 [insert  Article I, Section 5-
                                 Health Rules and                          FR page number   2, definition of
                                 Regulations Air                           where the        ``variance'';
                                 Pollution Chapter V.                      document         Article VI, Sections
                                                                           begins]          5-16(n), (o) and
                                                                                (p); Article VIII,
                                                                                Article IX, Sections
                                                                                5-27(3) and (4);
                                                                                Article XIII, and
                                                                                Article XVI, Section
                                                                                5-75(b) are not a
                                                                                part of the SIP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-3032 Filed 3-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45396-45398]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18601]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67501; File No. SR-EDGA-2012-31]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
EDGA Rule 11.14 To Extend the Operation of the Single Stock Circuit
Breaker Pilot Program Until February 4, 2013

July 25, 2012.
    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 18, 2012, the EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or the
``EDGA'') 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 self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend EDGA Rule 11.14 to extend the
operation of the single stock circuit breaker pilot program (the
``Pilot'') pursuant to the Rule until February 4, 2013. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.directedge.com, at the Exchange's principal office, on the
Commission's Web site at www.sec.gov, and at the Public Reference Room
of the Commission.

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 self-regulatory organization 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend EDGA Rule 11.14 to extend the
operation of a Pilot that allows the Exchange to provide for uniform
market-wide trading pause standards for NMS stocks through February 4,
2013.
Background
    Pursuant to Rule 11.14, the Exchange is allowed to pause trading in
any NMS stock when the primary listing market for such stock issues a
trading pause in such NMS stock. The Exchange will pause trading in
such security until trading has resumed on the primary listing market.
    EDGA Rule 11.14 was approved by the Commission on June 10, 2010 on
a Pilot basis to end on December 10, 2010.\3\ The Pilot was
subsequently extended until April 11, 2011.\4\ The Pilot was then
further extended through the earlier of August 11, 2011 or the date on
which a limit up/limit down mechanism to address extraordinary market
volatility, if adopted, applies.\5\ The Pilot was again extended
through January 31, 2012,\6\ and then extended yet again through July
31, 2012.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62252 (June 10,
2010) (SR-EDGA-2010-01), 75 FR 34186 (June 16, 2010).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63514 (December 9,
2010) (SR-EDGA-2010-23), 75 FR 78783 (December 16, 2010).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64204 (April 6,
2011) (SR-EDGA-2011-11), 76 FR 20394 (April 12, 2011).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65091 (August 10,
2011) (SR-EDGA-2011-24), 76 FR 50788 (August 16, 2011).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66227 (January 24,
2012) (SR-EDGA-2012-01), 77 FR 4608 (January 30, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its initial filing to adopt EDGA Rule 11.14, the Exchange stated
that the original Pilot list of securities was all securities included
in the S&P 500[supreg] Index (``S&P 500''). The Exchange also noted in
that filing that it would continue to assess whether additional
securities needed to be added or removed from the Pilot list and
whether the parameters of the rule needed to be modified to accommodate
trading characteristics of different securities. As noted in comment
letters to the initial filing to adopt EDGA Rule 11.14, concerns were
raised that including only securities in the S&P 500 in the Pilot rule
was too narrow. In particular, commenters noted that securities that
experienced volatility on May 6, 2010, including ETFs, should be
included in the Pilot.
    In response to these concerns, various exchanges and national
securities associations collectively determined to expand the list of
Pilot securities to include securities in the Russell 1000 and
specified ETPs to the Pilot beginning in September 2010.\8\ The
Exchange believed that adding these securities would address concerns
that the scope of the Pilot may be too narrow, while at the same time
recognizing that during the Pilot period, the markets would continue to
review whether and when to add additional securities to the Pilot and
whether the parameters of the rule should be adjusted for different
securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62884 (September 10,
2010) (SR-EDGA-2010-05), 75 FR 56618 (September 16, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of consulting with other markets and the staff of the
Commission, the Exchange subsequently included all NMS stocks within
the Pilot that were not already included therein.\9\ In particular, the
additional stocks were those not included in the S&P 500, Russell 1000
Index, or specified ETPs, and therefore were more likely to be less
liquid securities or securities with lower trading volumes. The
Exchange stated that it would continue to assess whether the parameters
for invoking a trading pause continued to be appropriate and whether
the parameters should be modified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64375 (June 23,
2011) (SR-EDGA-2011-15), 76 FR 38243 (June 29, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that an extension of the Pilot through
February 4, 2013 would continue to promote uniformity regarding
decisions to pause trading and continue to reduce the negative impacts
of sudden, unanticipated price movements in NMS stocks. The Exchange
believes that the Pilot is working well, that it has been infrequently
invoked during the prior months, and that given the

implementation of the Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility
Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'') on February 4, 2013,\10\
the Exchange requests an extension of the Pilot through February 4,
2013. At that time, the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan will replace the
Pilot.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012).
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the proposed rule change is Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act,\12\ which requires the rules of an exchange 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. The
proposed rule change also is designed to support the principles of
Section 11A(a)(1) \13\ of the Act in that it seeks to assure fair
competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange markets. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule meets these requirements in
that it promotes uniformity across markets concerning decisions to
pause trading in a security when there are significant price movements.
The Exchange believes that the Pilot is working well, that it has been
infrequently invoked during the previous months, and that the extension
of the Pilot will allow the Exchange to further assess the effect of
the Pilot on the market until the implementation of the Limit Up-Limit
Down Plan on February 4, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any 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 filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\15\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change along with a
brief description and 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 under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \18\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \19\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, as
it will allow the pilot program to continue uninterrupted, thereby
avoiding the investor confusion that could result from a temporary
interruption in the pilot program. For this reason, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also 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.

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 No. SR-EDGA-2012-31 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 No. SR-EDGA-2012-31. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-EDGA-2012-31 and should be
submitted on or before August 21, 2012.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-18601 Filed 7-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P