[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38829-38830]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15501]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0452]

Special Local Regulations; Seattle Seafair Hydroplane Race, Lake
Washington, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the Seattle Seafair Unlimited
Hydroplane Race Special Local Regulation on Lake Washington, WA from 8
a.m. on August 2, 2013, through 11:59 p.m. on August 4, 2013, during
hydroplane race times. This action is necessary to ensure public safety
from the inherent dangers associated with high-speed races while
allowing access for rescue personnel in the event of an emergency.
During the enforcement period, no person or vessel will be allowed to
enter the regulated area without the permission of the Captain of the
Port, on-scene Patrol Commander or Designated Representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1301 are effective from 8 a.m. on
August 2, 2013, through 11:59 p.m. on August 4, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Ensign Nathaniel P. Clinger, Sector Puget Sound Waterways
Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special
local regulation for the annual Seattle Seafair Unlimited Hydroplane
Race in 33 CFR 100.1301 from 8 a.m. on August 2, 2013, through 11:59
p.m. on August 4, 2013.
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100.1301, the Coast Guard will
restrict general navigation in the following area; The waters of Lake
Washington bounded by the Interstate 90 (Mercer Island/Lacey V. Murrow)
Bridge, the western shore of Lake Washington, and the east/west line
drawn tangent to Bailey Peninsula and along the shoreline of Mercer
Island.
    The regulated area has been divided into two zones. The zones are
separated by a line perpendicular from the I-90 Bridge to the northwest
corner of the East log boom and a line extending from the southeast
corner of the East log boom to the southeast corner of the hydroplane
race course and then to the northerly tip of Ohlers Island in Andrews
Bay. The western zone is designated Zone I, the eastern zone, Zone II.
(Refer to NOAA Chart 18447).
    The Coast Guard will maintain a patrol consisting of Coast Guard
vessels, assisted by Auxiliary Coast Guard vessels, in Zone II. The
Coast Guard patrol of this area is under the direction of the Coast
Guard Patrol Commander (the ``Patrol Commander''). The Patrol Commander
is empowered to control the movement of vessels on the racecourse and
in the adjoining waters during the periods this regulation is in
effect. The Patrol Commander may be assisted by other federal, state
and local law enforcement agencies.
    Only authorized vessels may be allowed to enter Zone I during the
hours this regulation is in effect. Vessels in the vicinity of Zone I
shall maneuver and anchor as directed by Coast Guard Officers or Petty
Officers.
    During the times in which the regulation is in effect, the
following rules shall apply:
    (1) Swimming, wading, or otherwise entering the water in Zone I by
any person is prohibited while hydroplane boats are on the racecourse.
At other times in Zone I, any person entering the water from the
shoreline shall remain west of the swim line, denoted by buoys, and any
person entering the water from the log boom shall remain within ten
(10) feet of the log boom.
    (2) Any person swimming or otherwise entering the water in Zone II
shall remain within ten (10) feet of a vessel.
    (3) Rafting to a log boom will be limited to groups of three
vessels.
    (4) Up to six (6) vessels may raft together in Zone II if none of
the vessels are secured to a log boom. Only vessels authorized by the
Patrol Commander, other law enforcement agencies or event sponsors
shall be permitted to tow other watercraft or inflatable devices.
    (5) Vessels proceeding in either Zone I or Zone II during the hours
this regulation is in effect shall do so only at speeds which will
create minimum wake, seven (07) miles per hour or less. This maximum
speed may be reduced at the discretion of the Patrol Commander.
    (6) Upon completion of the daily racing activities, all vessels
leaving either Zone I or Zone II shall proceed at speeds of seven (07)
miles per hour or less. The maximum speed may be reduced at the
discretion of the Patrol Commander.
    (7) A succession of sharp, short signals by whistle or horn from
vessels patrolling the areas under the direction of the Patrol
Commander shall serve as signal to stop. Vessels signaled shall stop
and shall comply with the orders of the patrol vessel; failure to do so
may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply,
or both. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or
local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.1301 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated
area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice,
he may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission
to enter the regulated area.

    Dated: June 12, 2013.
S. J. Ferguson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2013-15501 Filed 6-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 19667]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07593]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91504; File No. 4-757]

Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for
Commission Action on a Proposed National Market System Plan Regarding
Consolidated Equity Market Data

April 8, 2021.
    On August 11, 2020, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., Cboe BZX Exchange,
Inc., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc., Cboe
Exchange, Inc., Investors Exchange LLC, Long Term Stock Exchange, Inc.,
MEMX LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Nasdaq
Stock Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE
Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago, Inc., NYSE National, Inc., and Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed new single national
market system plan governing the public dissemination of real-time
consolidated equity market data for national market system stocks (the
``CT Plan''). The proposed CT Plan was published for comment in the
Federal Register on October 13, 2020.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Notice of Filing of a National Market System Plan
Regarding Consolidated Equity Market Data, Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 90096 (Oct. 6, 2020), 85 FR 64565 (Oct. 13, 2020)
(``Notice''). Comments received in response to the Notice can be
found on the Commission's website at https://www.sec.gov/comments/4-757/4-757.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 11, 2021, the Commission instituted proceedings to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the CT Plan.\2\ Rule
608(b)(2)(i) of Regulation NMS provides that such proceedings shall be
concluded within 180 days of the date of publication of notice of the
plan or amendment and that the time for conclusion of such proceedings
may be extended for up to 60 days (up to 240 days from the date of
notice publication) if the Commission determines that a longer period
is appropriate and publishes the reasons for such determination or the
plan participants consent to the longer period.\3\ The 180th day after
publication of the Notice for the proposed CT Plan is April 11, 2021.
The Commission is extending this 180-day period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Order Instituting Proceedings to Determine Whether to
Approve or Disapprove a National Market System Plan Regarding
Consolidated Equity Market Data, Securities Exchange Act Release No.
90885 (Jan. 11, 2021), 86 FR 4142 (Jan. 15, 2021).
    \3\ See 17 CFR 242.608(b)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to conclude proceedings regarding the proposed CT
Plan so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed CT Plan
and the comments received. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 608(b)(2)(i)
of Regulation NMS,\4\ the Commission designates June 10, 2021, as the
date by which the Commission shall conclude the proceedings to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed CT Plan (File
No. 4-757).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(85).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-07593 Filed 4-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48160-48162]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19747]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0842]

Division of Cardiovascular Devices 30-Day Notices and Annual
Reports; Public Workshop; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop; request for comments.

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

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the following
public workshop entitled ``Division of Cardiovascular Devices 30-Day
Notices and Annual Reports.'' This public workshop will be cosponsored
with Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed). The purpose of

this public workshop is to discuss details of, and issues relating to,
two types of reporting requirements applicable to premarket approval
applications (PMAs), 30-day notices and annual reports, specifically
for cardiovascular devices.

DATES: Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on August 28,
2012, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Location: The public workshop will be held at FDA's White Oak
Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great
Room (rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993. Entrance for the public
workshop participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where
routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and
security information, please refer to: http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.
    Contact: Lindsay K. Pack, Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
66, rm. 1260, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration: Registration is free and available on a first-come,
first-served basis. Persons interested in attending this public
workshop must register online by 5 p.m., August 17, 2012. Early
registration is recommended because facilities are limited and,
therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each
organization. If time and space permits, onsite registration on the day
of the public workshop will be provided beginning at 7 a.m.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Joyce Raines, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food
and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 4319,
Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    To register for the public workshop, please visit FDA's Medical
Devices News & Events--Workshops & Conferences calendar at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm.
(Select this public workshop from the posted events list.) Please
provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name,
title, affiliation, address, email, and telephone number. Those without
Internet access should contact Lindsay Pack to register (see Contact).
Registrants will receive confirmation after they have been accepted.
You will be notified if you are on a waiting list.
    Streaming Webcast of the Public Workshop: This public workshop will
also be webcast. Persons interested in viewing the webcast must
register online by 5 p.m., August 17, 2012. Early registration is
recommended because webcast connections are limited. Organizations are
requested to register all participants, but to view using one
connection per location. Webcast participants will be sent technical
system requirements after registration and will be sent connection
access information after August 22, 2012. If you have never attended a
Connect Pro event before, test your connection at https://collaboration.fda.gov/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. To get
a quick overview of the Connect Pro program, visit http://www.adobe.com/go/connectpro_overview. (FDA has verified the Web site
addresses in this document, but FDA is not responsible for any
subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document publishes in
the Federal Register.)
    Comments: FDA is holding this public workshop to discuss issues
related to 30-day notices and annual reporting requirements as they
pertain to manufacturing changes to class III cardiovascular devices
that are the subject of a PMA. In order to permit the widest possible
opportunity to obtain public comment, FDA is soliciting either
electronic or written comments on all aspects of the public workshop
topics. The deadline for submitting comments related to this public
workshop is September 26, 2012.
    Regardless of attendance at the public workshop, interested persons
may submit either electronic or written comments. Submit electronic
comments to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. It is only necessary
to send one set of comments. Please identify comments with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday and will be posted to the docket
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is
available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may
be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (see Comments). A
transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM,
after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests
are to be sent to the Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029),
Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg.,
Rockville, MD 20857. A link to the transcripts will also be available
approximately 45 days after the public workshop on the Internet at
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm. (Select this public workshop from the posted events list.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under section 515(d)(6)(A) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (section 360e(d)(6)(A) of the FD&C Act) and 21 CFR 814.39(a), PMA
supplements are required for any change to a device subject to an
approved application that affects safety or effectiveness, unless such
change is a modification in a manufacturing procedure or method of
manufacturing. Under the FD&C Act and 21 CFR 814.39(f), changes in
manufacturing procedures or methods of manufacture that affect the
safety or effectiveness of the device require a 30-day notice (however,
if FDA finds that the notice is inadequate, a supplement will be
required). Additionally, under 21 CFR 814.39(b), a manufacturer may
make a change to a device after FDA's approval of a PMA for the device
without submitting a PMA supplement if the change does not affect the
safety or effectiveness of the device and the change is reported to FDA
in a post approval periodic (annual) report.
    This workshop is intended to focus on manufacturing method and
procedure changes to Class III cardiovascular devices, which could be
submitted to FDA in a 30-day notice or annual report, depending on the
change. A guidance document issued on April 13, 2011, entitled ``30-Day
Notices, 135-Day Premarket Approval (PMA) Supplements and 75-Day
Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE) Supplements for Manufacturing
Method or Process Changes'' outlines FDA's current thinking on which
changes may qualify for a 30-day notice and which changes may require
other submission types (supplements, annual reports, etc.). This
workshop will allow a deeper discussion of relevant considerations when
determining the appropriate submission for manufacturing changes to
Class III cardiovascular devices.

II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Workshop

    FDA is holding this public workshop to discuss a variety of issues
relating to two types of reporting requirements applicable to PMAs, 30-
day notices and annual reports, specifically for

cardiovascular devices. These issues include, but are not limited to:
     Considerations that go into determining if a change is
appropriate for an annual report or 30-day notice (e.g., equipment
changes, software changes, supplier changes);
     Best practices for submission contents;
     Other issues and questions raised by the public workshop
attendees that are relevant to 30-day notices and annual reports for
cardiovascular devices.

    Dated: August 7, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-19747 Filed 8-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82926-82929]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26006]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98988; File No. SR-IEX-2023-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Introduce
a New Post Only Order Parameter Instruction

November 20, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on November 15, 2023, the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or
the ``Exchange'') 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Act,\4\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\5\ the Exchange is filing with the
Commission a proposed rule change to introduce a new Post Only order
parameter instruction. The Exchange has designated this proposed rule
change as ``non-controversial'' under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\6\ and provided the Commission with the notice required by Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.iextrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule filing is to amend IEX Rule
11.190 to introduce a new Post Only order parameter instruction.\8\ As
proposed, a Post Only parameter instruction would be available for a
displayable, non-routable order priced at or above $1.00 per share (a
``Post Only order''). A Post Only order would not remove liquidity from
the IEX Order Book \9\ except in specific circumstances as described
below. The Post Only order is designed to incentivize the posting of
displayed liquidity on the Exchange and to offer IEX Members \10\
greater determinism and flexibility in posting liquidity on the
Exchange. IEX also proposes to introduce a new Trade Now \11\ order
instruction, which would allow certain resting non-displayed orders
(described below) to convert into an executable order that removes
liquidity against an incoming Post Only order that would otherwise lock
the resting order (a transaction in which the Post Only order would be
the maker of liquidity and the Trade Now order would be the taker of
liquidity). The Trade Now instruction, when paired with Post Only
orders, is designed to encourage more executions of marketable orders
at IEX. In addition, IEX proposes to make conforming edits to several
order type definitions contained in IEX Rule 11.190 to specify which
order types may be submitted as a Post Only order, and which order
types will include the Trade Now instruction, either by default or
optionally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Proposed IEX Rule 11.190(b)(20).
    \9\ See IEX Rule 1.160(p).
    \10\ See IEX Rule 1.160(s).
    \11\ See Proposed IEX Rule 11.190(b)(21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX notes that every other national securities exchange that trades
equities offers nearly identical post only order types \12\ and most
also offer trade now functionality \13\ to their members. As proposed,
IEX's Post Only order type is structured in a substantially similar
manner, with minor differences (described below) limited to the orders
for which the functionality is available rather than the manner in
which is applied.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, e.g., Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') Rule
11.9(c)(6); MEMX Rule 11.6(l)(2); NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
(``Nasdaq'') Rule 4702(b)(4); MIAX Pearl Rule 2614(c); New York
Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') Rule 7.31(e)(2).
    \13\ See, e.g., BZX Rule 11.9(c)(12); NYSE Rule 7.31(d)(2)(B);
Nasdaq Rule 4703(m).
    \14\ See infra notes 20, 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post Only Orders
    As described in Proposed IEX Rule 11.190(b)(20), a Post Only order
would be a displayed, non-routable limit \15\ or Discretionary Limit
\16\ order that would not remove liquidity from the IEX Order Book
other than in the following circumstances:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See IEX Rule 11.190(a)(1).
    \16\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, a Post Only order will remove contra-side liquidity from the
IEX Order Book if the value of such execution when removing liquidity
equals or exceeds the value of such execution if the order instead
posted to the IEX Order Book and subsequently provided liquidity,
including the applicable fees charged or rebates provided (the ``Sum of
Fees''). To determine at the time of a potential execution whether the
Sum of Fees when removing liquidity equals or exceeds the value of such
execution if the order instead posted to the IEX Order Book and
subsequently provided liquidity, the Exchange will compare the price
improvement (i.e., available execution price to trade on entry versus
the limit price of the order) to the difference between the sum of the
fees charged for such execution and the rebate that would be provided
if the order posted to the IEX Order Book and subsequently provided
liquidity.
    Post Only orders by default would be subject to display-price
sliding as set forth in IEX Rule 11.190(h)(1), but the Member may
provide an optional instruction to cancel any untraded quantity of a
Post Only order that would otherwise be subject to display-price
sliding. Thus, during Regular Market Hours, if the limit price of the
Post Only order locked or crossed an order on the IEX Order Book,
depending upon the Member's instructions, the Post Only order would
either slide to a price one Minimum Price Variant (``MPV'') \17\ less
aggressive than the current Protected Quotation,\18\ or be canceled
back to the Member. This functionality is identical to that of several
other equities exchanges.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See IEX Rule 11.210.
    \18\ See IEX Rule 1.160(bb).
    \19\ See, e.g., BZX Rule 11.9(c)(6); MIAX Pearl Rule
2614(c)(2)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX is also proposing that Post Only orders must be at least a
round or mixed lot sized order on entry and must be displayed. Because
this proposal is designed to incentivize displayed liquidity in general
and price discovery in particular, IEX believes that it is

appropriate to limit Post Only orders to those that could become
Protected Quotations. IEX notes that although other exchanges allow
Post Only orders to be non-displayed or to be displayed odd lot sized
orders, until 2022, NYSE also did not allow non-displayed or displayed
odd lot sized orders to use its post only functionality.\20\
Additionally, IEX is proposing to not allow reserve \21\ orders be Post
Only orders. IEX notes that although other exchanges allow Post Only
orders to be reserve orders, until recently, NYSE also did not allow
reserve orders to use its post only functionality.\22\ IEX believes its
proposal to not allow reserve orders to be Post Only orders is
consistent with its proposal to not allow non-displayed orders to be
Post Only orders, because reserve orders have both a displayed and non-
displayed portion. IEX also notes that because it charges the same
amount for adding or removing non-displayed liquidity, the economic
benefits of a Post Only order would not apply to a non-displayed order
submitted to IEX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95209 (July 7,
2022), 87 FR 41832, 41835 (July 13, 2022) (SR-NYSE-2022-25).
    \21\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(2).
    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98891 (November 8,
2023), 88 FR 78407, 78408 (November 15, 2023) (SR-NYSE-2023-40).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, Proposed IEX Rule 11.190(b)(20) specifies that Post Only
orders must have a time-in-force (``TIF'') of DAY, GTX, SYS, or GTT
because they will only trade during Regular Market Hours, and that they
may not be an Intermarket Sweep Order, both because they are non-
routable orders and because ISOs are meant to take liquidity resting on
the Exchange and away markets while Post Only orders are designed to
add displayed liquidity to IEX's Order Book.
    Finally, the Post Only order parameter instruction would not be
operative for orders to buy or sell a security priced below $1.00 per
share. Thus, such orders that include the Post Only order parameter
instruction would function in the same manner as regular displayed
limit orders or D-Limit orders; they would remove contra-side liquidity
from the IEX Order Book on entry without consideration of whether the
Sum of Fees equals or exceeds the price improvement per share, and
otherwise post to the IEX Order Book. IEX believes that this approach
is appropriate in that IEX does not offer rebates for orders that add
displayed liquidity priced below $1.00 so the economics for a Post Only
order are less meaningful. IEX notes that this approach is similar to
that of other exchanges with respect to securities priced below $1.00
per share.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See, e.g., BZX Rule 11.9(c)(6); MIAX Pearl Rule
2614(c)(2)(i)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trade Now Instruction
    IEX also proposes to add IEX Rule 11.190(b)(21), to introduce the
``Trade Now'' order instruction. As proposed, Trade Now would be an
instruction on an order resting on the IEX Order Book that, when locked
by an incoming Post Only order that does not remove liquidity pursuant
to Proposed IEX Rule 11.190(b)(20), causes such order to be converted
to an executable order that removes liquidity against such incoming
order. As proposed, non-displayed limit orders (including non-displayed
portions of reserve \24\ orders and non-displayed Discretionary Limit
orders) would always include a Trade Now order instruction, while for
Midpoint Peg,\25\ Fixed Midpoint Peg,\26\ Offset Peg,\27\ and Market
Peg \28\ orders the Trade Now instruction would be optional. IEX makes
this proposal because the above four pegged order types are all able to
book at prices between the NBB and the NBO, which means they all could
match with (or be locked by) an incoming Post Only order. As proposed,
a resting pegged order with the optional Trade Now instruction would be
the taker of liquidity and the Post Only order would be the maker of
liquidity (unless the Sum of Fees calculation caused the Post Only
order to take liquidity on entry). IEX also has pegged order types that
book one MPV less aggressive than the Primary Quotation, and it is not
proposing to allow these orders to have a Trade Now instruction because
they will not be able to match with (or be locked by) an incoming Post
Only order.\29\ Similarly, IEX is not proposing to allow resting Retail
Liquidity Provider orders to have a Trade Now feature, because they are
not eligible to trade with a Post Only order.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(2).
    \25\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(9).
    \26\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(19).
    \27\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(13).
    \28\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(18).
    \29\ See IEX Rules 11.190(b)(8) (Primary Peg order),
11.190(b)(10) (Discretionary Peg order), and 11.190(b)(16)
(Corporate Discretionary Peg order).
    \30\ See IEX Rule 11.190(b)(14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Trade Now instruction would provide non-displayed orders
resting on the IEX Order Book with a greater ability to receive an
execution when that resting order is locked by an incoming Post Only
order, rather than creating the possibility of the incoming Post Only
order locking the resting non-displayed order. Thus, the proposed Trade
Now instruction assists in the avoidance of an internally locked IEX
Order Book (notwithstanding that such lock would not be displayed by
the Exchange) by facilitating the execution of orders that would
otherwise lock each other.
    If an incoming Post Only order matches with a resting non-displayed
order on entry with the Trade Now instruction, the Post Only order
would be treated as a displayed order and would receive a rebate of
$0.0004 per share. The order with the Trade Now instruction, having
become an executable taking order, would be charged $0.0010 per share,
which is the same fee IEX charges for both non-displayed liquidity-
adding and taking orders. Thus, the order with the Trade Now
instruction is able to get an execution with no change to the fees it
would be charged, while the Post Only order would also get an execution
with the rebate the Member expects to receive when submitting a
displayed order.
Conforming Changes
    As described above, only certain order types are eligible to be
Post Only orders. Therefore, IEX proposes to amend IEX Rules
11.190(b)(1) (``Displayed Order'') and 11.190(b)(7) (``Discretionary
Limit Order''), to specify that a displayed, non-routable, round or
mixed lot limit or Discretionary Limit order may include a Post Only
instruction, as defined in Proposed IEX Rule 11.190(b)(20).
    Similarly, as described above, only certain order types are
eligible to have a Take Now instruction. Therefore, IEX proposes to
amend IEX Rules 11.190(a)(1), 11.190(b)(2), and 11.190(b)(7), to
specify that non-displayed limit orders, non-displayed portions of
reserve orders, and non-displayed Discretionary Limit orders will
include a Trade Now instruction as defined in Proposed IEX Rule
11.190(b)(21). Because IEX proposes to allow Members to include a Trade
Now instruction on pegged orders that could interact with a Post Only
order, IEX is proposing to amend IEX Rules 11.190(b)(9), 11.190(b)(19),
11.190(b)(13), and 11.190(b)(18) to specify that a Member may include a
Trade Now instruction with Midpoint Peg, Fixed Midpoint Peg, Offset
Peg, and Market Peg orders, respectively.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with

Section 6(b) of the Act,\31\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5),\32\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. Specifically, the Exchange believes
that the proposed rule change is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest because it is designed to provide
more flexibility and opportunities for Members to add displayed
liquidity to the Exchange. As noted in the Purpose section, Post Only
orders, particularly when coupled with Trade Now functionality for some
non-displayed orders, would provide fee determinism for Members seeking
to add liquidity to the Exchange. This in turn is designed to encourage
the posting of more displayed liquidity on the Exchange, and to the
extent that such incentive is successful in increasing the overall
liquidity pool available at IEX, all market participants, including
takers of liquidity, will benefit. Thus, IEX believes this proposal
supports the purposes of the Act 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IEX also believes it is consistent with the Act to adjust the price
of Post Only orders as needed to post to the Order Book in compliance
with Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS by avoiding the display of
quotations that lock or cross any Protected Quotation, or to execute
against locking or crossing quotations in circumstances where
economically beneficial to the Member entering the Post Only order.
Post Only orders are thus designed to allow Members to achieve fee
determinism, while also providing displayed liquidity to the market and
thereby contribute to public price discovery in a manner that is
consistent with the Act.
    IEX also believes that the proposal to give Members the option of
having Post Only orders be subject to display price sliding or cancel
promotes price discovery and provision of greater liquidity by
facilitating the display of an order at its chosen limit price. Because
this flexibility will further encourage Members to submit Post Only
orders to IEX, which will in turn increase the displayed liquidity on
the Exchange, IEX believes that this proposal supports the purposes of
the Act to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system, and in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
    Additionally, IEX believes that its proposed approach to inclusion
of the Trade Now instruction (as described in the Purpose section) is
consistent with the purposes of the Act because it is designed to avoid
internally locking the IEX Order Book by facilitating the execution of
orders that would otherwise post, or remain posted, to the IEX Order
Book at prices that would otherwise lock. Additionally, the Trade Now
instruction would result in more executions of otherwise marketable
orders, which benefits both parties to the transaction as well as the
market as a whole by providing relevant price discovery. Thus, IEX
believes this proposal supports the purposes of the Act to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
    In addition, as noted in the Purpose section, every aspect of IEX's
proposal is already available on at least one other equities exchange,
with the exception that IEX will not allow a non-displayed, reserve, or
displayed odd lot order to be a Post Only order.\33\ As discussed in
the Purpose section, that functionality is identical to functionality
that was offered by the New York Stock Exchange until 2022. IEX notes
that these minor differences are limited to the orders for which the
functionality is available rather than the manner in which is applied.
Because these minor differences from other exchanges' functionality are
not based on competitive considerations but rather simply to provide
for reasonably predictable outcomes in a manner consistent with IEX's
system design, IEX believes that this proposal supports the purposes of
the Act 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See supra notes 20, 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    And IEX believes that the proposed conforming changes further the
purposes of the Act because they provide greater clarity and
consistency to the IEX Rule Book thereby reducing the potential for
confusion by market participants.
    Finally, IEX does not believe that the proposed changes raise any
new or novel material issues that have not already been considered by
the Commission in connection with existing order types offered by other
national securities exchanges, which supports the purposes of the Act
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.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary,
the proposal is designed to enhance IEX's competitiveness with other
markets by further incentivizing the posting of displayed liquidity on
the Exchange. As noted above, the Exchange believes the proposed rule
changes would generally align order handling on IEX with trading
functionality on other equity exchanges and thus would promote
competition among exchanges by offering member organizations similar
functionality and order handling options available on other exchanges.
The Exchange also believes that, to the extent the proposed changes
would increase opportunities for order execution, the proposed change
would promote competition by making the Exchange a more attractive
venue for order flow and enhance market quality for all market
participants. Moreover, competing exchanges have and can continue to
adopt the same functionality contained in this proposal, subject to the
SEC rule change process, as discussed in the Purpose and section.
    The Exchange also does not believe that the proposed rule change
will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. All Members
would be eligible to submit Post Only orders and to include Trade Now
instructions on eligible pegged orders in the same manner. Moreover,
the proposal would provide potential benefits to all Members, as
discussed in the Statutory Basis section, to the extent that allowing
Post Only orders incentivizes the

provision of more displayed liquidity on IEX.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \34\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \35\
thereunder. Because the proposed rule change does not: (i)
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder. In addition, the Exchange provided the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \35\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \36\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change meets the
criteria of subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 \37\ because it would not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest. Rather, the proposed rule change neither significantly
affects the protection of investors or the public interest, nor does it
impose any burden on competition because it would merely combine the
attributes of functionality currently offered by many other equities
exchanges, as discussed in the Purpose section, and does not raise any
new or novel material issues that have not already been considered by
the Commission. Accordingly, IEX has designated this rule filing as
non-controversial under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \38\ and
paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \39\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \40\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-IEX-2023-13 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-IEX-2023-13. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-IEX-2023-13 and should be
submitted on or before December 18, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-26006 Filed 11-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 17)]
[Notices]
[Page 3822-3823]
[DOCID:fr26ja07-80]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL07-3-000]

PJM Interconnection L.L.C.; Notice of Filing

January 18, 2007.
    Take notice that on January 16, 2007, PJM Interconnection L.L.C.
filed a response in compliance to the Commission's order issued October
25, 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy

of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on February 6, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-1160 Filed 1-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


alternative. Facilities that use the performance-based alternative
still would be required to comply with the operating controls (i.e.,
enhanced leak detection and repair, etc.) in the proposed rule.
    The alternative standard would provide more flexibility in choosing
the method of reducing emissions. This flexibility provides the
opportunity to decrease compliance costs, reduce recordkeeping, and
simplify compliance and enforcement. We anticipate that any facility
selecting this alternative would reduce emissions by replacing some
machines with alternative solvent machines and continuing to operate
some PCE machines without secondary controls. Additional emission
reductions could also be achieved by more aggressive maintenance and
leak detection programs.
    The performance-based alternative we are considering would limit
annual PCE consumption on a facility-wide basis. Usage of PCE
correlates directly with PCE emissions. The limit would be based on the
average fraction of emissions reduced by the control technology
requirement for the different types of affected sources. For the three
major source industrial facilities that would be required to make
equipment changes to comply with the proposed rule, the average
estimated facility-wide emission reduction, including enhanced leak
detection and repair, would be 76 percent. For the four affected major
source commercial facilities, the average estimated total emission
facility-wide reduction would be 67 percent. These reductions are
relative to estimated emissions from these facilities in 2002.
Therefore, we envision that facilities that clean industrial articles
such as work gloves would be required to reduce PCE usage by at least
76 percent. For facilities that do not clean work gloves or shop rags,
we envision a PCE reduction of 67 percent. For a description of how the
emission reduction percentages were estimated, refer to the Background
Information Document in the public docket. The baseline year for
determining the PCE usage limit would be 2002. Annual PCE usage would
be calculated based on the amount of PCE purchased during the calendar
year, adjusted for the PCE in use and storage at the beginning and end
of the calendar year.
    If the performance alternative is selected, the required PCE usage
percent reduction levels will be prescribed in the final rule. The
percent reductions would be selected to be equivalent to the emission
reductions achieved by the technology based MACT requirements and the
residual risk requirements adopted in the final rule.
    The performance-based alternative would apply only to existing
major sources. New major sources are not eligible for these
performance-based alternative standards because no baseline PCE data
exists for determining a required emission reduction level. This
alternative also would not be practicable for area sources because the
proposed rule has no process vent requirements for existing area
sources. The only requirements for existing area sources are the ban on
transfer machines, enhanced LDAR, and the operating requirements.
Moreover, most area sources operate only one dry cleaning machine.
    We solicit comments on whether such an approach would be
appropriate for major sources. We would also like comments from
affected sources regarding the likelihood that they would select this
alternative standard. In addition, we welcome comments on other options
for a performance-based alternative. Please include in your comments
how the option ensures equivalent emission reductions to the proposed
equipment standards and how the option could be enforced, including any
recordkeeping needed.

D. Environmental Impacts of PCE Emissions

    As discussed above, due to the large margin of exposures relative
to known thresholds, risks to mammals from PCE inhalation are likely
insignificant. Also, the scarcity of data makes it difficult to
identify any potential for adverse ecological impacts to plant life
from PCE emissions from dry cleaners due to conversion to TCAA. While
we have no direct evidence that this will present a significant
ecological risk, we nonetheless, invite public comment and solicit
additional scientific information on this issue.

E. Additional Time for Complying With Provisions for Transfer Machines

    As discussed in section III.H of this preamble, we are proposing to
eliminate the use of transfer machines. Per section 112(f) of the CAA,
sources have 90 days to comply with health based standards. However, we
are soliciting comment on what additional time beyond the 90-day
compliance period, if any, might be necessary for area sources to
replace existing transfer machines with dry-to-dry machines, and on
whether, if EPA were to grant area sources replacing transfer machines
additional compliance time in the final rule, any further steps should
be taken by these area sources before achieving compliance to assure
that the health of persons will be protected from imminent
endangerment, consistent with section 112(f)(4)(B) of the CAA.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, OMB has determined
that it considers this proposed rule a ``significant regulatory
action'' within the meaning of the Executive Order. The EPA has
submitted this action to OMB for review. Changes made in response to
OMB suggestions or recommendations will be documented in the public
record.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The Information Collection Request (ICR)
document prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA ICR number 1415.06 and
OMB Control Number 2060-0234.
    The 2005 proposed revisions to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP contain
recordkeeping and reporting requirements beyond the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements that were promulgated on September 22, 1993.
Owners or operators will continue to keep records and submit required
reports to us or the delegated State regulatory authority.
Notifications,

reports, and records are essential in determining compliance and are
required, in general, of all sources subject to the 1993 Dry Cleaning
NESHAP. Owners or operators subject to the 1993 Dry Cleaning NESHAP
continue to maintain records and retain them for at least 5 years
following the date of such measurements, reports, and records.
Information collection requirements that were promulgated on September
22, 1993 in the Dry Cleaning NESHAP prior to the 2005 proposed
amendments, as well the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63,
subpart A), which are mandatory for all owners or operators subject to
national emission standards, are documented in EPA ICR No. 1415.05.
    The information collection requirements described here are only
those notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that are
contained in the 2005 proposed revisions to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. To
comply with the 2005 proposed revisions to the 1993 Dry Cleaning
NESHAP, owners or operators of dry cleaning facilities would read
instructions to determine how they would be affected. All sources would
begin an enhanced leak detection and repair program that requires a
handheld portable monitor. Major source facilities would purchase a PCE
gas analyzer and area sources would purchase a halogenated hydrocarbon
leak detector. Owners and operators would incur the capital/startup
cost of purchasing the monitors, plus ongoing annual operation and
maintenance costs. The total capital/startup cost for this ICR is
$5,049,000. Annual operation and maintenance cost would be $552,825.
    Owners and operators of major and area sources would conduct
enhanced leak detection and repair and keep monthly records of enhanced
leak detection and repair events.
    Approximately 28,000 existing area sources and 15 existing major
sources are subject to the proposed rule and are subject to the 1993
Dry Cleaning NESHAP. We estimate that an average of 2,330 new area
sources per year will become subject to the regulation in the next 3
years, but that the overall number of facilities will remain constant
as the new owners will take over old existing facilities. No new major
sources are expected. The estimated annual labor cost for major and
area sources to comply with the 2005 proposed rule is approximately
$3.9 million.
    The recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically
authorized by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information
submitted to us pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is
safeguarded according to our policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2,
subpart B.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    To comment on EPA's need for this information, the accuracy of the
provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection
techniques, EPA has established a public docket for the proposed rule,
which includes this ICR, under Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0155. Submit any
comments related to the ICR for the proposed rule to EPA and OMB. See
the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of today's notice for where to
submit comments to EPA. Send comments to OMB at the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Since OMB is
required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days
after December 21, 2005, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its
full effect if OMB receives it by January 20, 2006. The final rule will
respond to any OMB or public comments on the information collection
requirements contained in the proposed rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For the purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule
on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business
based on the following Small Business Administration (SBA) size
standards, which are based on annual sales receipts: NAICS 812310--
Coin-Operated Laundries and Dry Cleaners-$6.0 million; NAICS 812320--
Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services (Except Coin-Operated)-$4.0 million;
NAICS 812332--Industrial Launderers-$12.0 million; (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. Under these definitions, over 99 percent of
commercial dry cleaning firms are small. For more information, refer to
http://www.sba.gov/size/sizetable2002.html. The economic impacts of the

regulatory alternatives were analyzed based on consumption of PCE, but
are described in terms of comparing the compliance costs to dry
cleaning revenues at affected firms. For more detail, see the current
Economic Impact Analysis in the public docket.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that the proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This certification is based on the economic impact of the proposed rule
to affected small entities in the entire PCE dry cleaning source
category and considers the economic impact associated with both
proposed options for co-residential facilities. Over 98 percent of the
approximately 20,000 small entities directly regulated by the proposed
rule, including both major and area sources, are expected to have costs
of less than 1 percent of sales. The cost impacts for all regulated
small entities range from cost savings to less than 1.9 percent of
sales. The small entities directly regulated by the proposed rule are
dry cleaning businesses within the NAICS codes 812310, 812320, and
812332. We have determined that all of the major sources affected by
the proposed rule are owned by businesses within NAICS 812332. The
proposed rule is expected to affect 14 ultimate parent businesses that
would be regulated as major

sources. Eight of the parent businesses are small according to the SBA
small business size standard. None of the eight firms would have an
annualized cost of more than 1 percent of sales associated with meeting
the requirements for major sources (option I noted earlier in this
preamble).
    We have determined that virtually all of the affected small
businesses that own area source dry cleaners are in NAICS 812320. Small
businesses complying with the proposed area source requirements (area
source option I described earlier in this preamble) are expected to
have the following impacts. Over 98 percent of the approximately 20,000
small entities owning area sources directly regulated by the proposed
rule, are expected to have costs of less than 1 percent of sales. The
one-time cost of $250 for purchasing a halogenated hydrocarbon detector
is less than 0.10 percent of the average annual revenues for dry
cleaning businesses in NAICS 812320, and there are minimal annualized
costs associated with a detector's use. Of the nearly 200 small
businesses that would have to replace their transfer machines (or 1
percent of the total number of affected small entities), most of these
businesses would experience an annual cost savings and the others would
have compliance costs of less than 1.2 percent of sales. Of the
remaining 200 affected small businesses (or 1 percent of the total
number of affected small entities), all of which are owners of co-
residential facilities, the compliance costs based on the first
proposed option for co-residential area sources range from 0.9 to 1.9
percent of sales. For the second proposed option for co-residential
area sources, there are 240 small firms that will be affected, and
these firms will have compliance costs ranging from 0.4 to 1.9 percent
of sales.
    Cost impacts associated with the proposed decision for major
sources are presented in Section III.E of this preamble. These impacts
are also presented for area sources in Section III.H, and for co-
residential sources in Section III.J. These impacts are detailed in the
BID in the public docket as memos 5 through 7. For more information on
the small entity economic impacts associated with the proposed
decisions for dry cleaners affected by today's action, please refer to
the Economic Impact and Small Business Analyses in the public docket.
    Although the proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, we nonetheless tried
to reduce the impact of the proposed rule on small entities. When
developing the revised standards, we took special steps to ensure that
the burdens imposed on small entities were minimal. We conducted
several meetings with industry trade associations to discuss regulatory
options and the corresponding burden on industry, such as recordkeeping
and reporting.
    Following publication of the proposed rule, copies of the Federal
Register notice and, in some cases, background documents, will be
publically available to all industries, organizations, and trade
associations that have had input during the regulation development, as
well as State and local agencies. We continue to be interested in the
potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome
comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
    We have determined that the proposed rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector in any 1 year. Thus, the proposed rule is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    EPA has determined that today's proposed rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments because it contains no requirements that apply to
such governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, the
proposed rule is not subject to section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that 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.''
    The proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will
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. None of the affected dry
cleaning facilities are owned or operated by State or local
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the proposed
rule. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on the proposed rule
from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal

implications.'' The proposed rule does not have tribal implications as
specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, 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. No
tribal governments own dry cleaning facilities subject to the proposed
standards for dry cleaning facilities. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to the proposed rule. EPA specifically solicits additional
comment on this proposed rule from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety risk of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    The proposed rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it
is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866,
and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. This conclusion is based on our
assessment of the information on PCE effects on human health and
exposures associated with dry cleaner operations.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined
in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
    The proposed rule would have a negligible impact on energy
consumption because less than 1 percent of the industry would have to
install additional emission control equipment to comply. The cost of
energy distribution should not be affected by the proposed rule at all
since the standards do not affect energy distribution facilities. We
also expect that there would be no impact on the import of foreign
energy supplies, and no other adverse outcomes are expected to occur
with regards to energy supplies. Further, we have concluded that the
proposed rule is not likely to have any significant adverse energy
effects.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 112(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when
the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    The proposed revisions to the 1993 NESHAP for PCE dry cleaners do
not include requirements for technical standards beyond what the NESHAP
requires. Therefore, the requirements of the NTTAA do not apply to this
action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental Protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 9, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart M--[Amended]

    2. Section 63.320 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (c), (d),
and (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.320  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) The compliance date for a new dry cleaning system depends on
the date that construction or reconstruction commences.
    (1) Each dry cleaning system that commences construction or
reconstruction on or after December 9, 1991 and before December 21,
2005, shall be in compliance with the provisions of this subpart except
Sec.  63.322(o) beginning on September 22, 1993 or immediately upon
startup, whichever is later, except for dry cleaning systems complying
with section 112(i)(2) of the Clean Air Act; and shall be in compliance
with the provisions of Sec.  63.322(o) beginning on [90 DAYS AFTER DATE
FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE Federal Register] or immediately upon
startup, whichever is later, except as provided by Sec.  63.6(b)(4).
    (2) Each dry cleaning system that commences construction or
reconstruction on or after December 21, 2005 and before [DATE FINAL
RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE Federal Register], shall be in compliance with
the provisions of this subpart except Sec.  63.322(o) immediately upon
startup, and shall be in compliance with the provisions of Sec.
63.322(o) beginning on [DATE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE Federal
Register] or immediately upon startup, whichever is later.
    (3) Each dry cleaning system that commences construction or
reconstruction on or after [DATE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE Federal
Register], shall be in compliance with provisions of this subpart,
including Sec.  63.322(o) immediately upon startup.
    (c) Each dry cleaning system that commenced construction or
reconstruction before December 9, 1991, and each new transfer machine
system and its ancillary equipment that commenced construction or
reconstruction on or after December 9, 1991 and before September 22,
1993, shall comply with Sec. Sec.  63.322(c), (d), (i), (j), (k), (l),
and (m); 63.323(d); and 63.324(a), (b), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4),
and (e) beginning on December 20, 1993, and shall comply with other
provisions of this subpart except Sec.  63.322(o) by September 23,
1996; and shall comply with Sec.  63.322(o) by [DATE 90 DAYS AFTER DATE
FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE Federal Register].
    (d) Each existing dry-to-dry machine and its ancillary equipment
located in a dry cleaning facility that includes only dry-to-dry
machines, and each existing transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment, and each new transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993, as
well as each existing dry-to-dry machine and its ancillary equipment,
located in a dry cleaning facility that includes both transfer machine
system(s) and dry-to-dry machine(s) is exempt from Sec. Sec.  63.322,
63.323, and 63.324, except paragraphs 63.322(c), (d),

(i), (j), (k), (l), (m), (o)(1), and (o)(4); 63.323(d); and 63.324 (a),
(b), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), and (e) if the total
perchloroethylene consumption of the dry cleaning facility is less than
530 liters (140 gallons) per year. Consumption is determined according
to Sec.  63.323(d).
    (e) Each existing transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment, and each new transfer machine system and its ancillary
equipment installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993,
located in a dry cleaning facility that includes only transfer machine
system(s), is exempt from Sec. Sec.  63.322, 63.323, and 63.324, except
paragraphs 63.322(c), (d), (i), (j), (k), (l), (m), (o)(1), and (o)(4),
63.323(d), and 63.324 (a), (b), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), and (e)
if the perchloroethylene consumption of the dry cleaning facility is
less than 760 liters (200 gallons) per year. Consumption is determined
according to Sec.  63.323(d).
* * * * *
    3. Section 63.321 is amended by revising the definition of  Filter,
and adding in alphabetical order definitions for Halogenated
hydrocarbon detector, Perchloroethylene gas analyzer, Residence, and
Vapor leak to read as follows:

Sec.  63.321  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Filter means a porous device through which perchloroethylene is
passed to remove contaminants in suspension. Examples include, but are
not limited to, lint filter, button trap, cartridge filter, tubular
filter, regenerative filter, prefilter, polishing filter, and spin disc
filter.
    Halogenated hydrocarbon detector means a portable device capable of
detecting vapor concentrations of perchloroethylene of 25 parts per
million by volume and indicating a concentration of 25 parts per
million by volume or greater by emitting an audible or visual signal
that varies as the concentration changes.
* * * * *
    Perchloroethylene gas analyzer means a flame ionization detector,
photoionization detector, or infrared analyzer capable of detecting
vapor concentrations of perchloroethylene of 25 parts per million by
volume.
* * * * *
    Residence means any dwelling or housing in which people reside
excluding short-term housing that is occupied by the same person for a
period of less than 180 days (such as a hotel room).
* * * * *
    Vapor leak means a perchloroethylene vapor concentration exceeding
25 parts per million by volume (50 parts per million by volume as
methane) as indicated by a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or
perchloroethylene gas analyzer.
* * * * *
    4. Section 63.322 is amended by revising paragraphs (e)(3), (k)
introductory text, and (m), and adding paragraph (o) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.322  Standards.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) Shall prevent air drawn into the dry cleaning machine when the
door of the machine is open from passing through the refrigerated
condenser.
* * * * *
    (k) The owner or operator of a dry cleaning system shall inspect
the system weekly for perceptible leaks while the dry cleaning system
is operating. Inspection with a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or
perchloroethylene gas analyzer also fulfills the requirement for
inspection for perceptible leaks. The following components shall be
inspected:
* * * * *
    (m) The owner or operator of a dry cleaning system shall repair all
leaks detected under paragraph (k) or (o)(1) of this section within 24
hours. If repair parts must be ordered, either a written or verbal
order for those parts shall be initiated within 2 working days of
detecting such a leak. Such repair parts shall be installed within 5
working days after receipt.
* * * * *
    (o) Additional requirements:
    (1) The owner or operator of a dry cleaning system shall inspect
the components listed in paragraph (k) of this section for vapor leaks
monthly while the component is in operation.
    (i) Area sources shall conduct the inspections using a halogenated
hydrocarbon detector or perchloroethylene gas analyzer that is operated
according to the manufacturer's instructions. The operator shall place
the probe inlet at the surface of each component interface where
leakage could occur and move it slowly along the interface periphery.
    (ii) Major sources shall conduct the inspections using a
perchloroethylene gas analyzer operated according to EPA Method 21.
    (2) The owner or operator of a dry cleaning system at any major
source shall route the air-perchloroethylene gas-vapor stream contained
within each dry cleaning machine through a refrigerated condenser and
shall pass the air-perchloroethylene gas-vapor stream from inside the
dry cleaning machine drum through a carbon adsorber or equivalent
control device immediately before or as the door of the dry cleaning
machine is opened. The carbon adsorber must be desorbed in accordance
with manufacturer's instructions.
    (3) The owner or operator of each dry cleaning system installed
after December 21, 2005 at an area source shall route the air-
perchloroethylene gas-vapor stream contained within each dry cleaning
machine through a refrigerated condenser and pass the air-
perchloroethylene gas-vapor stream from inside the dry cleaning machine
drum through a carbon adsorber or equivalent control device immediately
before the door of the dry cleaning machine is opened. The carbon
adsorber must be desorbed in accordance with manufacturer's
instructions.
    (4) The owner or operator of any dry cleaning system shall
eliminate any emission of perchloroethylene during the transfer of
articles between the washer and the dryer(s) or reclaimer(s).
    (5) The owner or operator shall eliminate any emission of
perchloroethylene from any dry cleaning system that is installed after
December 21, 2005 and that is located in a building with a residence.
    5. Section 63.323 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)
introductory text, (b)(1), (b)(2), and (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.323  Test methods and monitoring.

* * * * *
    (b) When a carbon adsorber is used to comply with Sec.
63.322(a)(2) or exhaust is passed through a carbon adsorber immediately
upon machine door opening to comply with Sec.  63.322(b)(3) or Sec.
63.323(o)(2), the owner or operator shall measure the concentration of
perchloroethylene in the exhaust of the carbon adsorber weekly with a
colorimetric detector tube or perchloroethylene gas analyzer. The
measurement shall be taken while the dry cleaning machine is venting to
that carbon adsorber at the end of the last dry cleaning cycle prior to
desorption of that carbon adsorber or removal of the activated carbon
to determine that the perchloroethylene concentration in the exhaust is
equal to or less than 100 parts per million by volume. The owner or
operator shall:
    (1) Use a colorimetric detector tube or perchloroethylene gas
analyzer designed to measure a concentration of 100 parts per million
by volume of

perchloroethylene in air to an accuracy of 25 parts per
million by volume; and
    (2) Use the colorimetric detector tube or perchloroethylene gas
analyzer according to the manufacturer's instructions; and
* * * * *
    (c) If the air-perchloroethylene gas vapor stream is passed through
a carbon adsorber prior to machine door opening to comply with Sec.
63.322(b)(3) or Sec.  63.323(o)(2), the owner or operator of an
affected facility shall measure the concentration of perchloroethylene
in the dry cleaning machine drum at the end of the dry cleaning cycle
weekly with a colorimetric detector tube or perchloroethylene gas
analyzer to determine that the perchloroethylene concentration is equal
to or less than 300 parts per million by volume. The owner or operator
shall:
    (1) Use a colorimetric detector tube or perchloroethylene gas
analyzer designed to measure a concentration of 300 parts per million
by volume of perchloroethylene in air to an accuracy of 75
parts per million by volume; and
    (2) Use the colorimetric detector tube or perchloroethylene gas
analyzer according to the manufacturer's instructions; and
    (3) Conduct the weekly monitoring by inserting the colorimetric
detector or perchloroethylene gas analyzer tube into the open space
above the articles at the rear of the dry cleaning machine drum
immediately upon opening the dry cleaning machine door.
* * * * *
    6. Section 63.324 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(3), (d)(5),
and (d)(6) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.324  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (3) The dates when the dry cleaning system components are inspected
for leaks, as specified in Sec.  63.322(k), (l), or (o)(1), and the
name or location of dry cleaning system components where leaks are
detected;
* * * * *
    (5) The date and temperature sensor monitoring results, as
specified in Sec.  63.323 if a refrigerated condenser is used to comply
with Sec.  63.322(a) or (b); and
    (6) The date and monitoring results, as specified in Sec.  63.323,
if a carbon adsorber is used to comply with Sec.  63.322(a)(2), (b)(3),
or (o)(2).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-24071 Filed 12-20-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P