[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 196 (Thursday, October 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57165-57166]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22368]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4493-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 8 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4493-DR), dated March 27,
2020, and related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on August 23, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and

Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Chad Gorman, of
FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this
disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Thomas J. Fargione as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-22368 Filed 10-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: March 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 9239]
[DOCID:fr03mr09-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-712-000]

High Lonesome Mesa, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

February 24, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
High Lonesome Mesa, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is March 16, 2009.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also 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>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-4421 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 248 (Thursday, December 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76325-76326]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31128]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68497; File No. SR-ICEEU-2012-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to the Acceptance of Letters of Credit or Pass-Through Letters of
Credit Deposits From Non-Financial Institution Energy Clearing Members

December 20, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on December 19, 2012, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear
Europe'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change described in Items I, II and
III, below, which Items have been prepared primarily by ICE Clear
Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) \3\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii) \4\
thereunder, so that the proposal was effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to accept Letters of
Credit as permitted cover for certain clearing members for cleared
energy futures. As part of the update to the Permitted Cover, ICE Clear
Europe will consider new requests to use Letters of Credit or Pass
through Letters of Credit to meet Initial/Original Margin requirements.
All capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the ICE Clear
Europe Rules.

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe 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 and comments may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. ICE Clear Europe has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C, below, of the most
significant aspects of these statements.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
provided by ICE Clear Europe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In addition to providing clearing services for credit default
swaps, ICE Clear Europe also provides clearing services for non-
securities contracts in energy and emissions markets (``Energy Futures
Products''). ICE Clear Europe is updating the List of Permitted Cover
and Haircuts \6\ to allow non-financial institution Energy Clearing
Members to deposit Letters of Credit or Pass-Through Letters of Credit
to cover Initial/Original Margin requirements for Energy Futures
Products.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The updated list of Permitted Cover, along with the
corresponding haircut rates, can be found at the following location:
https://www.theice.com/publicdocs/clear_europe/list-of-permitted-covers.pdf.
    \7\ Letters of Credit and Pass-Through Letters of Credit are
subject to concentration limits as described in the list of
Permitted Cover. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Clearing House will accept three forms of the Letter of Credit:
     Letters of Credit: May be deposited by non-financial
Energy Clearing Members;
     Pass-Through Letters of Credit: May be deposited by non-
financial institutions that are clients of Energy Clearing Members
without FCM Clearing Member status; and
     Pass-Through Letters of Credit: May be deposited by non-
financial institutions that are clients of Clearing Members with FCM
Clearing Member status, from November 28, 2012.
    Both forms of Pass-Through Letters of Credit are transferrable from
ICE Clear Europe to the Clearing Member making the Clearing Member the
beneficiary of the proceeds at execution. The Clearing Member will be
responsible for assessing the wording of the Letter of Credit and only
consent to its use in case the Letter on Credit is acceptable by the
Clearing Member as permitted cover and fully compliant with its
regulatory requirements.
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed change is consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act and the regulations
thereunder applicable to it. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) \8\ of the Act
requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be
designed to protect investors and the public interest. ICE Clear Europe
believes that allowing non-financial institutions to deposit Letters of
Credit or Pass-Through Letters of Credit as permitted cover for
Initial/Original Margin requirements for energy futures products would
help protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

B. Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe that the proposed rule change
would have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition.

C. Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    ICE Clear Europe has not solicited written comments regarding the
proposed change. ICE Clear Europe will notify the Commission of any
written comments received by ICE Clear Europe.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) \9\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii)
\10\ thereunder because it primarily affects the futures clearing
operations of the clearing agency with respect to futures that are not
security futures, and does not significantly affect the securities
clearing operations of the clearing agency or any related rights or
obligations of the clearing agency or persons using such service. 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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(ii).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 may be submitted by using the
Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml), or by sending an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File No. SR-ICEEU-2012-12 on the subject line.
     Paper comments should be sent in triplicate to Elizabeth
M. Murphy, Secretary, Securities and Exchange

Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-0609.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2012-12. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method of submission. 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 changes that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule changes 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 filings also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE
Clear Europe, and on ICE Clear Europe's Web site at: https://www.theice.com/publicdocs/regulatory_filings/ICEU_SEC_121912_2012-12.pdf.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2012-12
and should be submitted on or before January 17, 2013.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-31128 Filed 12-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 203)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 64969-64970]
[DOCID:fr21oc10-17]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0769; Airspace Docket No. 10-ACE-9]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Farmington, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Farmington,
MO. Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at Farmington Regional
Airport. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before December 6,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2010-0769/Airspace Docket No. 10-
ACE-9, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2010-0769/
Airspace Docket No. 10-ACE-9.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), part 71 by adding additional Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface for SIAPs at Farmington Regional
Airport, Farmington, MO. Controlled airspace is needed for the safety
and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more

detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A,
subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to
ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would add
additional controlled airspace at Farmington Regional Airport,
Farmington, MO.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9U, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 18,
2010, and effective September 15, 2010, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Farmington, MO [Amended]

Farmington Regional Airport, MO
    (Lat. 37[deg]45[min]40[sec] N., long. 90[deg]25[min]43[sec] W.)
Farmington VORTAC
    (Lat. 37[deg]40[min]24[sec] N., long. 90[deg]14[min]03[sec] W.)
Perrine NDB
    (Lat. 37[deg]45[min]50[sec] N., long. 90[deg]25[min]43[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Farmington Regional Airport, and within
4 miles each side of the 204[deg] bearing from the airport extending
from the 6.4-mile radius to 11.5 miles southwest of the airport, and
within 2.6 miles each side of the 034[deg] bearing from the Perrine
NDB extending from the 6.4-mile radius to 7.9 miles northeast of the
airport, and within 1.3 miles each side of the Farmington VORTAC
300[deg] radial extending from the 6.4-mile radius of the airport to
the VORTAC.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX on October 6, 2010.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-26581 Filed 10-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28699-28701]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13170]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83445; File No. SR-GEMX-2018-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Increase Certain
Route-Out Fees Set Forth in Section II.A of the Schedule of Fees

June 14, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 1, 2018, Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (``GEMX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to increase certain route-out fees set forth
in Section II.A of the Schedule of Fees.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaqgemx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to increase certain
route-out fees set forth in Section II.A of the Schedule of Fees.
Today, the Exchange charges Non-Priority Customers (i.e., Market
Maker,\3\ Non-Nasdaq GEMX Market Maker,\4\ Firm Proprietary \5\/Broker-
Dealer,\6\ and Professional Customer \7\) route-out fees of $0.95 per
contract for orders in Non-Penny Symbols that are routed to away
exchanges in connection with the Options Order Protection and Locked/
Crossed Market Plan (the ``Plan''). The Exchange now proposes to
increase this fee to $1.09 per contract for all Non-Priority Customer
orders in Non-Penny Symbols that are routed to away

exchanges in connection with the Plan. The Exchange believes that the
proposed increase will help offset the costs associated with routing
orders through the Plan, such as paying the transaction fees for such
executions at other exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market
Makers'' and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Rule
100(a)(30).
    \4\ A ``Non-Nasdaq GEMX Market Maker'' is a market maker as
defined in Section 3(a)(38) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, registered in the same options class on another options
exchange.
    \5\ A ``Firm Proprietary'' order is an order submitted by a
member for its own proprietary account.
    \6\ A ``Broker-Dealer'' order is an order submitted by a member
for a broker-dealer account that is not its own proprietary account.
    \7\ A ``Professional Customer'' is a person or entity that is
not a broker/dealer and is not a Priority Customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility,
and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that proposed increase in the Non-Priority
Customer route-out fees from $0.95 to $1.09 per contract for orders in
Non-Penny Symbols is reasonable because it is designed to help recoup
costs associated with routing orders to away exchanges in connection
with the Plan, such as paying the transaction fees for such executions
at other exchanges. Furthermore, the Exchange notes that the proposed
fees remain competitive with the fees of other options exchanges which,
in addition to a fixed routing fee, assess the actual transaction
fees.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For example, CBOE C2 Exchange, Inc. (``C2'') charges $1.63
per routed contract for non-public customer, non-C2 market-maker
orders in non-penny classes. See C2 Fees Schedule, Section 1.A
(Transaction Fees) and Section 2 (Linkage Routing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that proposed increase in the Non-Priority
Customer route-out fees is an equitable allocation and is not unfairly
discriminatory because the Exchange will apply the same fee to all
similarly situated members. The Exchange believes it is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory to increase the route-out fees for all
market participants other than Priority Customers \11\ because the
Exchange seeks to encourage Priority Customer order flow and the
liquidity that such order flow brings to the marketplace, which in turn
benefits all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in Nasdaq GEMX Rule
100(a)(37A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In particular, the proposed
increase to the route-out fees will apply equally to all Non-Priority
Customer orders that are routed to away exchanges in connection with
the Plan, and will help offset costs associated with routing orders via
the Plan. Furthermore as noted above, the Exchange believes that its
proposed fees remain competitive with another options exchange.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they
deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate
opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In such
an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems
that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards
applicable to exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their
own fees in response, and because market participants may readily
adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the
degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited. In sum, if the changes proposed
herein are unattractive to market participants, it is likely that the
Exchange will lose market share as a result. Accordingly, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of
members or competing order execution venues to maintain their
competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \13\ 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: (i) Necessary or
appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of
investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-GEMX-2018-20 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-GEMX-2018-20. 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 (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-GEMX-2018-20 and

should be submitted on or before July 11, 2018.

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

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-13170 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2902-2905]
[FR Doc No: 2010-800]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61326; File No. SR-Phlx-2009-113]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. Relating to
Index Option Position Limits

January 11, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 29, 2009, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The 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, pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,\4\ proposes to increase the position limits \5\ for
certain narrow-based (industry) index option contracts.\6\ Phlx also
proposes to amend Rule 1001A to delete obsolete references to index
options which no longer trade on the Exchange, and to delete the word
``Phlx'' from the term ``Phlx/KBW Bank Index''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \5\ Position limits generally impose a ceiling on the number of
option contracts in each class on the same side of the market (i.e.,
aggregating long calls and short puts or long puts and short calls)
that can be held or written by an investor or group of investors
acting in concert.
    \6\ Also known as Sector Index Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is set forth below. Proposed
new language is in italics and deleted language is bracketed.
Rule 1001A.

Position Limits

    (a) Except as otherwise indicated, the position limit for a broad-
based (market) index option shall be 25,000 contracts on the same side
of the market. All other broad-based (market) index options contracts
shall be subject to a contract limitation fixed by the Exchange, which
shall not be larger than the limits provided in this section (a),
except certain positions must be aggregated in accordance with
paragraph (d) or (e) below:
    [(i) Respecting the Value Line Composite Index, VLE, and the U.S.
Top 100 Index, TPX, 75,000 contracts total, of which no more than
45,000 contracts can be in the nearest expiration month.
    (ii) Respecting the National Over-the-Counter Index, XOC, 75,000
contracts total.
    (iii) Respecting the Nasdaq Composite Index, (1) 50,000 contracts
total for full-size options, with 30,000 contracts in the nearest
expiration month, and (2) 500,000 contracts total for mini size
options, with 300,000 contracts total in the nearest expiration month.]
    (i[v]) Respecting the Full Value Russell 2000[supreg] Options and
the Reduced Value Russell 2000[supreg] Options, there shall be no
position limits.
    (ii[v]) Respecting the Full Value Nasdaq 100 Options and the
Reduced Value Nasdaq 100 Options, there shall be no position limits.
    (b)(i) In determining compliance with Rule 1001, option contracts
on a narrow-based (industry) index shall, subject to the procedures
specified in subparagraph (iii) of this rule, be subject to the
following position limits:

--18,000 contracts (or 54,000 contracts for options on the PHLX Oil
Service Sector, PHLX Semiconductor Sector, PHLX Utility Sector, PHLX
Gold/Silver Sector, PHLX Housing Sector, SIG Energy MLP Index, SIG
Oil Exploration & Production Index and the NASDAQ China Index) if
the Exchange determines, at the time of a review conducted pursuant
to subparagraph (ii) of this paragraph (b), that any single
underlying stock accounted, on average, for 30% or more of the index
value during the 30-day period immediately preceding the review; or
--24,000 contracts (or 72,000 contracts for options on the PHLX Oil
Service Sector, PHLX Semiconductor Sector, PHLX Utility Sector, PHLX
Gold/Silver Sector, PHLX Housing Sector, SIG Energy MLP Index, SIG
Oil Exploration & Production Index and the NASDAQ China Index) if
the Exchange determines, at the time of a review conducted pursuant
to subparagraph (ii) of this paragraph (b), that any single
underlying stock accounted, on average, for 20% or more of the index
value or that any five underlying stocks together accounted, on
average, for more than 50% of the index value, but that

no single stock in the group accounted, on average, for 30% or more
of the index value, during the 30-day period immediately preceding
the review; or
--31,500 contracts (or 94,500 contracts for options on the PHLX Oil
Service Sector, PHLX Semiconductor Sector, PHLX Utility Sector, PHLX
Gold/Silver Sector, PHLX Housing Sector, SIG Energy MLP Index, SIG
Oil Exploration & Production Index and the NASDAQ China Index) if
the Exchange determines that the conditions specified above which
would require the establishment of a lower limit have not occurred,
or
--44,000 contracts total with respect to the [Phlx/]KBW Bank Index.

    (ii)-(iii)--No Change. `
    (c) Reporting Requirements for Options on Market Indexes.--Each
member or member organization that maintains a position on the same
side of the market [in excess of 60,000 contracts for its own
account or for the account of a customer in the Value Line Composite
Index, VLE, and the U.S. Top 100 Index, TPX or the National Over-
the-Counter Index, XOC, or] in excess of 100,000 contracts for its
own account or for the account of a customer in the Full Value
Russell 2000[reg] Options, RUT; or in excess of 100,000 contracts
for its own account or for the account of a customer in the Full
Value Nasdaq 100 Options, NDX must file a report with the Exchange
that includes, but is not limited to, data related to the option
position, whether such position is hedged and if applicable, a
description of the hedge and information concerning collateral used
to carry the position. Registered Options Traders are exempt from
this reporting requirement. For positions exceeding the position
limit in paragraph (a), Commentary .01 contains the requirements for
qualifying for the Index Hedge Exemption under this Rule.
    (d)-(e)--No Change.
    Commentary--No Change.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to increase index option
position limits in Phlx Rule 1001A applicable to options on the PHLX
Oil Service Sector, PHLX Semiconductor Sector, PHLX Utility Sector,
PHLX Gold/Silver Sector, PHLX Housing Sector, SIG Energy MLP Index, SIG
Oil Exploration & Production Index and the NASDAQ China Index)
(collectively, the ``Specified Index Options'') in order to attract
additional trading interest and promote depth and liquidity in those
options.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The SIG Indexes noted herein are trademarks of SIG Indices,
LLLP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange exercise limits in Phlx Rule 1002A, Exercise Limits, which
rule is not proposed to be amended, are established by reference to
position limits. The proposed increase in position limits would
therefore effectively also increase exercise limits.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Phlx Rule 1002A, states, in relevant part: ``* * * exercise
limits for index options contracts shall be equivalent to the
position limits described in Rule 1001A.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the current position limits constrain
certain investors from trading the Specified Index Options, the markets
for which have become well established and liquid. Pursuant to Rule
1001A, the three tiered levels of position limits are 18,000, 24,000,
and 31,500 contracts. These position limits, which are similar among
all the options exchanges respecting narrow-based index options, are
based generally on the degree of concentration of a component stock of
the index.\9\ In some cases the existing position limits for the
Specified Index Options force these same investors out of transparent
listed markets and into opaque over-the-counter (``OTC'') transactions.
The Exchange proposes to increase these limits to 54,000, 72,000, and
94,500 contracts, respectively, for the Specified Index Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Specifically, Phlx Rule 1001A(b)(i) currently provides the
following position limits for narrow-based index options: (1) 18,000
contracts if the Exchange determines that any single underlying
stock accounted, on average, for 30% or more of the index value
during the 30-day period immediately preceding the semi-annual
review of narrow-based index option position limits; (2) 24,000
contracts if the Exchange determines, at the time of a semi-annual
review, that any single underlying stock accounted, on average, for
20% or more of the index value or that any five underlying stocks
together accounted, on average, for more than 50% of the index
value, but that no single stock in the group accounted, on average,
for 30% or more of the index value, during the 30-day period
immediately preceding the review; or (3) 31,500 contracts if the
Exchange determines that the conditions specified above which would
require the establishment of a lower limit have not occurred.
Additionally, the rule provides that position limits with respect to
options on the KBW Bank Index are 44,000 contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange recognizes that the purpose of position limits is to
prevent manipulation and protect against disruption of the markets for
both the option as well as the underlying security. The Exchange has
considered the effects of increased position limits for the Specified
Index Options on the marketplace, and believes that manipulation and
disruption concerns are addressed by a combination of existing
surveillances and the implementation of tiered position limits.
    Increasing position limits for the Specified Index Options should
increase market transparency to the benefit of the investing public by
attracting more existing over the counter transactions in these
securities to listed, centrally cleared markets. The Exchange dedicates
substantial resources to monitoring the markets for evidence of
manipulation or disruption caused by investors with positions at or
near current position or exercise limits. The proposed increased
position limits would not diminish the surveillance function in this
regard. The Exchange believes an increase in position limits for the
Specified Index Options at this time would reduce risk for manipulation
and also benefit the investing public.
    The proposed higher position limits for the Specified Index Options
would serve to better accommodate the hedging needs of Exchange market
makers and specialists, who are restricted by current position limit
levels. Exchange members and customers have indicated that the current
position limits hamper their ability to execute investment strategies
in respect of narrow-based indexes and have requested increased
position limits. The market's need for these higher position limits is
particularly critical for institutional hedging and other high volume
trading objectives, and in view of the large portfolios common to
institutional trading and the tendency to use larger-sized transactions
to execute complex cross-market strategies. Floor members have also
expressed the negative effect of the current low position limits on
index options trading in an exchange environment. The Exchange
believes, based on such member and customer requests, that the current
position limit levels for the Specified Index Options continue to
discourage market participation by large investors as well as
institutions that compete to facilitate the trading interests of some
of the largest investors. Accordingly, this proposal aims to also
accommodate the liquidity and hedging needs of large investors and
their facilitators.
    Investors that are not able to take large positions in the
Specified Index Options

due to the restrictive index option position limits of Rule 1001A may
resort in the alternative to executing that strategy in the OTC
markets, where index option position limit rules do not constrain their
ability to structure the desired strategy, and where regulators are
limited in their ability to monitor and surveil market activity
altogether. In today's evolving regulatory climate, the Exchange
believes that the Commission should encourage migration of trading from
opaque and largely unregulated OTC markets onto exchanges which are
able to provide regulators with greater transparency and control.
Additionally, by raising position limits, the Exchange should be able
to increase investor participation in its markets for Specified Index
Options, thereby reducing even further any potential for manipulation
of index option settlement prices.
    The Exchange understands based on conversations with Commission
staff that the Commission's understanding of appropriate position limit
levels is based upon an economic analysis of that issue conducted under
the auspices of the Commission over five years ago (the ``SEC
Study'').\10\ The Exchange understands that the goal of the SEC Study's
analysis was to determine a methodology for setting optimal position
limits for index option contracts in order to minimize the potential
for manipulation of the index options' settlement prices. The Exchange
also understands that SEC staff have recently reviewed the SEC's
study's analysis to reflect changes in market and regulatory
environment and have analyzed the Specified Index Options in light of
its review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Exchange staff had previously discussed with Commission
staff the issue of the position limits counseled by the SEC Study in
the context of an earlier proposed rule change filed by the Exchange
to raise the Sector Index option contracts' position limits. That
filing was ultimately withdrawn by the Exchange at Commission
staff's request. See SR-Phlx-2008-56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Markets to buy and sell the individual index component stocks are
now much more efficient, liquid, competitive and automated in nature
making it highly unlikely that any one person or institution, either
acting alone or in concert, could successfully influence the price of
an underlying component stock to the extent that would be necessary to
measurably affect the settlement price of one of the Specified Index
Options. Since 2002, average daily volume has nearly tripled.\11\
Furthermore, liquidity measures of the price impact of a trade show an
improvement of tenfold or more relative to 2002 values. Finally, the
stocks which are the individual index components of the Specified Index
Options trade actively on a number of national market centers as well
as OTC, and all major market centers have become highly automated and
fully linked in response to Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In 2002 United States equities markets averaged 77 billion
shares traded per month. So far in 2009 United States equities
markets are averaging 225 billion shares traded per month--nearly
three times the trading volume of the 2002 markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 1001A to delete
obsolete references to options on the Value Line Composite Index, the
U.S. Top 100 Index and the National Over-the-Counter Index, as these
index options are no longer traded on the Exchange, and is removing the
word ``Phlx'' from the term Phlx/KBW Bank Index, as the index is now
known simply as the ``KBW Bank Index''.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \13\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by establishing increased position limits for the Specified
Index Options which should allow more efficient use of those options by
market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (a) by order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (b) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2009-113 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-Phlx-2009-113. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 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. 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-
Phlx-2009-113 and should be submitted on or before February 9, 2010.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-800 Filed 1-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 15689-15690]
[DOCID:fr02ap07-63]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0443; FRL-8294-1]

NESHAP for Halogenated Solvent Cleaners/Halogenated Hazardous Air
Pollutants (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1652.06, OMB Control Number 2060-
0273

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. This ICR is scheduled to expire on April 30, 2007.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
This ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its
estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 2, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2006-0443, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA

Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement
and Compliance Docket and Information Center, Mail Code 2201T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB at: Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Compliance Assessment
and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2223A,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On June 21, 2006 (71 FR 35652), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0443, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Enforcement and

Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket Center is
(202) 566-1927.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.epa.gov
, to submit or view public comments, access the index

listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in
the docket that are

available electronically. Once in the system, select ``docket search,''
then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that
EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically
or in paper, will be made available for public viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA receives them and without change, unless

the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information
whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further
information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

    Title: NESHAP for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning/Halogenated
Hazardous Air Pollutants (Renewal).
    Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1652.06; OMB Control Number 2060-0273.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on April 30, 2007.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning/Halogenated
Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR part 63, subpart T), was proposed on
November 29, 1993, promulgated on December 2, 1994, and corrected to
final rule June 5, 1995.
    The monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements outlined
in the rule are similar to those required for other NESHAP regulations.
Plants must demonstrate compliance with the emission standards by
monitoring their control devices and performing annual emissions
testing. This information notifies EPA when a source becomes subject to
the regulations, informs the Agency if a source is in compliance, when
it begins operation, and informs the Agency if the source remained in
compliance during any period of operation.
    In the Administrator's judgment, emissions of hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs) from halogenated solvent cleaners may cause or
contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare. Therefore, NESHAP standards were
promulgated for this source category, as required under Section 112 of
the Clean Air Act. HAP emissions from halogenated solvent cleaners are
the result of inadequate equipment design and work practices.
    These standards rely on the proper design and operation of
halogenated solvent cleaning machines such as working-mode covers, a
freeboard ratio of 1.0, and reduced room draft to reduce solvent
emissions from halogenated solvent cleaners. Certain records and
reports are necessary to enable EPA to identify sources subject to the
standards and to ensure that the standards are being achieved.
    Owners/operators of halogenated solvent cleaners must provide EPA
with an initial notification of existing or new solvent cleaning
machines, initial statements of compliance, and annual control device
monitoring report (owners/operators of batch vapor and in-line cleaning
machines), an annual solvent emission report (owners/operators of batch
vapor and in-line cleaning machines complying with the alternative
standard), and exceedance of monitoring parameters or emissions. The
records that the facilities maintain indicate to EPA whether they are
operating and maintaining the halogenated solvent cleaners properly to
control emissions. In order to ensure compliance with the standards
promulgated to protect public health, adequate reporting and
recordkeeping is necessary. In the absence of such information,
enforcement personnel would be unable to determine whether the
standards are being met on a continuous basis, as required by the Clean
Air Act.
    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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, and are
identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information are estimated to average
approximately 14 hour per response. Burden means the total time,
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions;
develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information,
processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously
applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to
respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete
and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Halogenated Solvent Cleaners.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,431.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, quarterly, semiannually, and
annually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 41,035.
    Estimated Total Costs: $3,852,448 which includes $0 annualized
Capital Start Up costs, $1,015,000 annualized Operation and Maintenance
(O&M) costs, and $2,837,448 annualized labor costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours or
cost in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two
considerations. First, the regulations have not changed over the past
three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years. Secondly, the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative
or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall
burden.
    Since there are no changes in the regulatory requirements and there
is no significant industry growth, the labor hours and cost figures in
the previous ICR are used in this ICR and there is no change in burden
to industry.

    Dated: March 26, 2007.
Oscar Morales,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E7-6055 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P