[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27225-27226]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11170]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. ER12-1680-000]

Minonk Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Minonk Wind, 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 May 22, 2012.
    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 Street 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 email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 2, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-11170 Filed 5-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 247)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68512-68515]
[DOCID:fr28de09-12]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-29087; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-094-AD;
Amendment 39-16139; AD 2009-26-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -
800, and -900 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series
airplanes. This AD requires repetitive lubrication of the left and
right main landing gear (MLG) forward trunnion pins; and an inspection
for discrepancies of the transition radius, lead-in chamfer, and cross-
bolt bore of the MLG forward trunnion pins, and repair or replacement
if necessary. Doing the applicable inspections and repairs/
replacements, or overhauling the trunnion pins ends the repetitive
lubrication requirements of this AD. For airplanes on which a certain
repair is done, this AD requires repetitive inspections for
discrepancies of the transition radius. This AD results from a report
that the protective finishes on the forward trunnion pins for the left
and right MLG might have been damaged during final assembly. We are
issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the forward trunnion pin, which
could result in fracture of the pin and consequent collapse of the MLG.

DATES: This AD becomes effective February 1, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of February 1,
2010.

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6440; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to certain
Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes.
That supplemental NPRM was published in the Federal Register on August
5, 2009 (74 FR 38988). That supplemental NPRM proposed to require
repetitive lubrication of the left and right main landing gear (MLG)
forward trunnion pins; and an inspection for discrepancies of the
transition radius, lead-in chamfer, and cross-bolt bore of the MLG
forward trunnion pins, and repair or replacement if necessary. Doing
the applicable inspections and repairs/replacements, or overhauling the
trunnion pins, ends the repetitive lubrication requirements of the
proposed AD. For airplanes on which a certain repair is done, the
action proposed to require repetitive inspections for discrepancies of
the transition radius.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the two comments received on
the supplemental NPRM.

Support for the Supplemental NPRM

    One commenter, Boeing, concurs with the content of the supplemental
NPRM.

Request for Added Language

    Korean Air (KA) requests that we add some of the referenced service
bulletin language to further clarify the proposed AD. KA requests that
we add the phrase ``with MLG not removed (in situ)'' to paragraph (h),
and ``transition radius, the lead-in chamfer and cross-bolt bore with
MLG removed'' to paragraph (i), of the supplemental NPRM.
    We partially agree. Adding language from Boeing Service Bulletin
737-32-1376, Revision 2, dated August 6, 2008, can further clarify the
actions in the AD. We have revised paragraph (h) of the AD to add
``with MLG not removed (in situ)'' as the commenter requests. We have
also revised paragraph (i) of the AD to add ``with the MLG removed;''
however, reference to ``the lead-in chamfer and cross-bolt bore'' was
already stated in paragraph (i) of the supplemental NPRM.
    We do not agree, however, to add a reference to ``transition
radius'' to paragraph (i) of the AD. Although paragraph (i) of the AD
does not specify to inspect the transition radius of the trunnion pin
with the pin removed, that inspection, along with other tasks, would be
covered by the typical maintenance requirements for overhauling the
MLG. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the
comments received, and determined that air safety and the public
interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously.
We have determined that these changes will neither increase the
economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 890 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $80
per work hour.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
                Action                    Work hours        Cost per airplane        registered                          Fleet cost
                                                                                airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repetitive lubrication................               2  $160 per lubrication                  300  $48,000 per lubrication cycle.
                                                         cycle.
Inspections (in situ).................               2  $160.....................             300  $48,000.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII,

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General requirements.'' Under
that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of
civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2009-26-04 Boeing: Amendment 39-16139. Docket No. FAA-2007-29087;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-094-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective February 1, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800,
and -900 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 2, dated
August 6, 2008.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing
Gear.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report that the protective finishes
on the forward trunnion pins for the left and right main landing
gear (MLG) might have been damaged during final assembly. We are
issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the forward trunnion pin,
which could result in fracture of the pin and consequent collapse of
the MLG.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Lubrication or Overhaul

    (g) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD:
Lubricate the left and right MLG forward trunnion pins in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-
32-1376, Revision 2, dated August 6, 2008. Repeat the lubrication at
intervals not to exceed 30 days until all applicable requirements of
paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD have been accomplished.
Overhauling the trunnion pin in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 2,
dated August 6, 2008, ends the repetitive lubrication requirements
of this paragraph for that pin.

Inspection and Corrective Actions

    (h) Within 60 months after the date of issuance of the original
airworthiness certificate or date of issuance of the original export
certificate of airworthiness, or within 6 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Do a detailed inspection
for discrepancies (corrosion, finish damage, surface deformation, or
scratches) of the transition radius of the left and right MLG
trunnion pins with MLG not removed (in situ); and if any discrepancy
is found, repair or replace the trunnion pin before further flight.
Do all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 2, dated August 6,
2008. If the repair specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 2,
dated August 6, 2008, is done, within 24 months after doing the
repair, do the detailed inspection of the transition radius, and do
the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 24 months until
the trunnion pin is overhauled or replaced in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376,
Revision 2, dated August 6, 2008.
    (i) For airplanes on which the trunnion pin has not been
replaced or overhauled: Within 120 months after the date of issuance
of the original airworthiness certificate or date of issuance of the
original export certificate of airworthiness, or within 6 months
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, do a
detailed inspection for discrepancies of the lead-in chamfer and
cross-bolt bore with the MLG removed; and if any discrepancy is
found, repair or replace the trunnion pin before further flight. Do
all actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 2, dated August 6,
2008.

No Report Required

    (j) Although Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision 2,
dated August 6, 2008, specifies to send inspection reports to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

Credit for Actions Done Using Previous Issue of Service Information

    (k) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-32-
1376, dated May 12, 2005; or Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376,
Revision 1, dated March 19, 2007; are acceptable for compliance with
the corresponding actions of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (l)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S,
FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (425)
917-6590. Or, e-mail information to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (m) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin 737-32-1376, Revision
2, dated August 6, 2008, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 4, 2009.
Michael J. Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-29964 Filed 12-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 25, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 163)]
[Notices]
[Page 42896-42898]
[DOCID:fr25au09-70]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-TRI-2009-0614; FRL-8948-8]

Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Community Right-To-Know;
Request for Comment on Change of Contractor Handling Trade Secret
Claims

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces an upcoming change in location and
contractor designated to manage the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data
processing for all TRI submissions including TRI Trade Secret and
confidential information submitted. Under Section 322 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to- Know Act, facilities submitting TRI
reports may be eligible to claim Trade Secret for the specific chemical
identity of a toxic chemical being reported. Information entitled to
trade secret or confidential treatment may not be disclosed by the
Agency to the Agency's authorized representative until each affected
submitter has been furnished notice of the contemplated disclosure by
the EPA program office and has been afforded opportunity to submit its
comments. This Federal Register provides notice that EPA's authorized
representative is changing and provides the public an opportunity to
comment on this action. Limit your comments to the change of contractor
handling trade secret and confidential information submitted to TRI
under Emergency Planning and Community Right-to- Know reporting
requirements.

DATES: Comments should be submitted by August 31, 2009.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under EPA-HQ-
TRI-2009-0614. All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET
index at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy at the OEI Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The 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 Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact The
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline at Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 5101, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Toll free: 1-800-424-9346, in Virginia and
Alaska:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Toll free TDD: 1-800-553-7672., or http://
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hotline/. For technical information about this
change in contractor and location for TRI data processing, contact:
Peggy Bagnoli, Toxics Release Inventory Program Division, OEI (2844T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Effective July 30, 2009, certified mail
should be sent to CGI Federal, C/O CDX Reporting Center, 12601 Fair
Lakes Circle, Fairfax, VA 22033. All other submissions should be sent
to the TRI Reporting Center, P.O. Box 10163, Fairfax, VA 22038.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does This Notice Apply to Me?

    A. Affected Entities: Entities that will be affected by this action
are those facilities that manufacture, process, or otherwise use
certain toxic chemicals listed on the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
and which are required under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986, to report annually to EPA
their environmental releases of such chemicals. Currently, those
industries with the following NAICS code designations (that meet all
other threshold criteria for TRI reporting) must report toxic chemical
releases and other waste management activities: 11--Agriculture,
Forestry, Fishing and Hunting (except for NAICS Code 111998); 21--
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction (except for NAICS Codes
211112, 212324, 212325, 212393, and 212399); 22--Utilities (except for
NAICS Codes 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122); 31-33--
Manufacturing (except for NAICS Codes 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 323,
325, 326, 327, 334, 335, 337, and 339); 42--Wholesale Trade; 48-49--
Transportation and Warehousing (except for NAICS Code 488390); 51--
Information (except for NAICS Codes 511140, 512230, and 519130); 54--
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services (except for NAICS Code
541712); 56--Administrative and Support and Waste Management and
Remediation Services (except for NAICS Codes 562112, 562211, 562213,
562219, and 562920); and 81--Other Services (except Public
Administration) (except for NAICS Code 811490).
    To determine whether you or your business is affected by this
action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions at 40
CFR Part 350 and 40 CFR Part 372. If you have

any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

II. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related
Information?

    A. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2009-0614. The public docket
includes information considered by EPA in developing this action,
including the documents listed below, which are physically located in
the docket. In addition, interested parties should consult documents
that are referenced in the documents that EPA has placed in the docket,
regardless of whether these referenced documents are physically located
in the docket. For assistance in locating documents that are referenced
in documents that EPA has placed in the docket, but that are not
physically located in the docket, please consult the person listed in
the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Although a part
of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of
materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket
Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., 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 Notice of Change of Contractor
Handling TRI Submissions including TRI Trade Secret Claims Docket is
(202) 566-1752.
    B. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the Federal Register
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the
public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and
comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http://
www.epa.gov/edocket/ to view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically.
Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you
may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through
the docket facility identified in Unit II.A. Once in the system, select
``search,'' then key in the appropriate docket identification number.

III. How Can I Respond to This Notice?

    A. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments
through the mail, in person, or electronically. Be sure to identify the
appropriate docket control number (i.e., EPA-HQ-TRI-2009-0614) in your
correspondence. 1. By mail. All comments should be sent in triplicate
to: Office of Environmental Information (OEI/TRI), Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Ariel
Rios Building, Washington, DC 20460. 2. In person or by courier.
Comments may be delivered in person or by courier to: EPA Docket
Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC. The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is
(202) 260-7093. 3. Electronically. Submit your comments electronically
by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please note that you should not
submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI.
Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use
of special characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data
will also be accepted on standard computer disks in Microsoft Office
Word 2003 or ASCII file format. All comments and data in electronic
form must be identified by the docket control number EPA-HQ-TRI-2009-
0614. Electronic comments on this document may also be filed online at
many Federal Depository Libraries.
    B. How Should I Handle CBI Information That I Want To Submit to the
Agency? All comments which contain information claimed as CBI must be
clearly marked as such. Three sanitized copies of any comments
containing information claimed as CBI must also be submitted and will
be placed in the public record for this document. Persons submitting
information on any portion of which they believe is entitled to
treatment as CBI by EPA must assert a business confidentiality claim in
accordance with 40 CFR 2.203(b) for each such portion. This claim must
be made at the time that the information is submitted to EPA. If a
submitter does not assert a confidentiality claim at the time of
submission, EPA will consider this as a waiver of any confidentiality
claim and the information may be made available to the public by EPA
without further notice to the submitter.

IV. What Is the General Background for This Action?

    A. Trade Secret. The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is mandated by
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA)
and the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990. EPCRA Section 313 and
PPA Section 6607 establish requirements for reporting of toxic chemical
releases and other waste management quantities. Under Section 322 of
EPCRA and 40 CFR Part 350, facilities submitting TRI reports may be
eligible to claim Trade Secret for the specific chemical identity of
the toxic chemical being reported. To support a claim of trade secrecy,
a facility may need to submit additional confidential business
information. Pursuant to 40 CFR 350.23 (``Disclosure to Authorized
Representatives''), information entitled to trade secret or
confidential treatment may not be disclosed by the Agency to the
Agency's authorized representative until each affected submitter has
been furnished notice of the contemplated disclosure by the EPA program
office and has been afforded a period found reasonable by that office
(not less than five working days) to submit its comments. Such notice
shall include a description of the information to be disclosed, the
identity of the contractor, subcontractor, or grantee, the contract,
subcontract, or grant number, if any, and the purposes to be served by
the disclosure. This notice may be published in the Federal Register or
may be sent to individual submitters.

V. This Notice Announces a Change of Contractor Designated To Manage
the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Data Processing for All TRI
Submissions

    The contract to manage the TRI data submissions was competed in
2001 and was awarded to the Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) (GSA
Contract GSOOT99ALD0203). This contract will end September 30, 2009. A
new contract was awarded to CGI, Incorporated (GS-35F4797H
TO1518) on April 1, 2009. The management of TRI data
submissions will transition to CGI by the end of September 2009 and
remain with CGI through March 30, 2012. This new facility will be
located in Fairfax, Virginia.
    Effective July 30, 2009, certified mail should be sent to CGI
Federal, C/O CDX Reporting Center, 12601 Fair Lakes Circle, Fairfax, VA
22033. All other submissions should be sent to the TRI Reporting
Center, P.O. Box 10163, Fairfax, VA 22038. All TRI submissions
including trade secret and confidential

information submitted pursuant to 40 CFR Part 350 will be managed by
CGI.
    In accordance with 40 CFR 350.23, EPA has determined that CGI and
their subcontractors require access to trade secret and confidential
information submitted under 40 CFR Part 350 in order to receive,
manage, process, and safely store such information. The contractor will
have appropriate procedures and facilities in place to safeguard the
TRI trade secret and confidential information to which the contractor
and subcontractors have access during the term of this contract. The
contractor's and subcontractor's employees will be required to sign a
``Confidentiality Agreement'' prior to being permitted access to trade
secret and confidential information submitted under 40 CFR Part 350.
All contractor and subcontractor access to TRI trade secret and
confidential information will take place at the contractor's facility
in Fairfax, VA.

    Dated: August 10, 2009.
Rick Martin,
Acting Director, Office of Information Analysis and Access.
[FR Doc. E9-20397 Filed 8-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10251-10253]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03337]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0021]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 8 individuals for
exemption from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in
one eye for various reasons. The exemptions will enable these
individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate
commerce without meeting the prescribed vision requirement in one eye.
If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals to qualify as
drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 15, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0021 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on December
29, 2010 (75 FR 82132), or you may visit http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12-29/pdf/2010-32876.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for a 2-year period
if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety
that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved
absent such exemption.'' FMCSA can renew exemptions at the end of each
2-year period. The 8 individuals listed in this notice have each
requested such an exemption from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce.
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting an exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.

Qualifications of Applicants

Michael L. Bergman

    Mr. Bergman, age 56, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic
incident in 2009. The best corrected visual acuity in his left eye is
20/20. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted, ``I
believe that Mike's vision is sufficient to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Bergman reported that
he has driven straight trucks for 37 years, accumulating 74,000 miles,
and tractor-trailer combinations for 25 years, accumulating 250,000
miles. He holds a Class A Commercial Driver's License (CDL) from
Kansas. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Efrain Gonzalez

    Mr. Gonzalez, 52, has had amblyopia in his left eye since birth.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
70. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted, ``At this
time, Mr. Gonzalez has sufficient vision to safely operate a commercial
motor vehicle.'' Mr. Gonzalez reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 12 years, accumulating 360,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL
from Utah. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Anthony Hall

    Mr. Hall, 43, has had a retinal vein occlusion in his right eye
since 2003. The visual acuity in his right eye is no light perception,
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2012, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``In my opinion, the patient has full fields of
his left eye and 20/20 vision in his left eye. He is capable of
operating a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Hall reported that he has driven
tractor-trailer combinations for 13 years, accumulating 1.2 million
miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Louisiana. His driving record for
the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Shane Holum

    Mr. Holum, 32, has had optic nerve atrophy in his right eye since
2002 due to a traumatic incident. The best corrected visual acuity in
his right eye is light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20.
Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted, ``In my
opinion he has sufficient vision to drive and operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Holum reported that he has driven straight trucks for 4
years, accumulating 16,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Oregon.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Daryl W. Morris

    Mr. Morris, 70, has had optic nerve atrophy in his left eye since
1992. The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and
in his left eye, no light perception. Following an examination in 2012,
his optometrist noted, ``I want to certify in my medical opinion that
Mr. Morris has sufficient vision to perform the driving task required
to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Morris reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 8 years, accumulating 80,000 miles. He holds
a Class A CDL from Missouri. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Dan Nestel

    Mr. Nestel, 53, has had a ruptured globe in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident in 2009. The best corrected visual acuity in his
right eye is counting fingers, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an
examination in 2012, his ophthalmologist noted, ``In my medical opinion
Mr. Nestel does have sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Nestel reported that he
has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 25 years, accumulating 1.2
million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Thomas G. Normington

    Mr. Normington, 47, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic
incident in 1986. The best corrected visual acuity in his left eye is
20/15. Following an

examination in 2012, his optometrist noted, ``In my opinion, Mr.
Normington has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required
to safely operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Normington reported that
he has driven straight trucks for 14 years, accumulating 280,000 miles,
and tractor-trailer combinations for 14 years, accumulating 140,000
miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Wyoming. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Thomas L. Terrell

    Mr. Terrell, 57, has had a chronic retinal detachment in his left
eye due to a traumatic incident in 1984. The best corrected visual
acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light
perception. Following an examination in 2012, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``He has sufficient vision in his right eye and unless he has
some future problem in the right eye, he should have no problems
performing his duties of operating a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Terrell
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 39 years, accumulating
78,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 39 years,
accumulating 273,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. The Agency will consider all comments
received before the close of business March 15, 2013. Comments will be
available for examination in the docket at the location listed under
the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency will file comments
received after the comment closing date in the public docket, and will
consider them to the extent practicable.
    In addition to late comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in
the public docket, relevant information that becomes available after
the comment closing date. Interested persons should monitor the public
docket for new material.

    Issued on: February 4, 2013.
 Larry W. Minor,
 Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-03337 Filed 2-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 238 (Thursday, December 10, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79497-79498]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27176]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4569-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

California; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of California (FEMA-4569-DR), dated October 16,
2020, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued October 16, 2020.

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: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated October 16, 2020, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of California resulting from wildfires beginning on September 4,
2020, and continuing, is of

sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster
declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in
the State of California.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and
emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct Federal
assistance, under the Public Assistance program in the designated
areas; Hazard Mitigation throughout the State, and any other forms
of assistance under the Stafford Act that you deem appropriate
subject to completion of Preliminary Damage Assessments (PDAs).
    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and Other Needs Assistance
under section 408 will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Willie G. Nunn, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of California have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Fresno, Los Angeles, Madera, Mendocino, San Bernardino, San
Diego, and Siskiyou Counties for Individual Assistance.
    Fresno, Los Angeles, Madera, Mendocino, San Bernardino, San
Diego, and Siskiyou Counties for emergency protective measures
(Category B), including direct federal assistance, under the Public
Assistance program.
    All areas within the State of California are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

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.

Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-27176 Filed 12-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 159 (Thursday, August 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 50905]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17747]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 95496]

Notice of Intention To Cancel Registration of Certain Municipal
Advisors

August 12, 2022.
    Notice is given that the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') intends to issue an order or orders, pursuant to
Section 15B(c)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),
cancelling the registrations of the municipal advisors whose names
appear in the attached Appendix (hereinafter referred to as the
``registrants'').
    Section 15B(c)(3) of the Act provides, in pertinent part, that if
the Commission finds that any municipal advisor registered under
Section 15B is no longer in existence or has ceased to do business as a
municipal advisor, the Commission, by order, shall cancel the
registration of such municipal advisor.
    The Commission finds that each registrant listed in the attached
Appendix:

    (i) has not filed any municipal advisor form submissions with
the Commission through the Commission's Electronic Data Gathering
and Retrieval (``EDGAR'') system since January 1, 2020 (including
but not limited to the annual amendments (form MA-A) required by 17
CFR 240.15Ba1-5(a)(1)); and
    (ii) based on information available from the Municipal
Securities Rulemaking Board (the ``MSRB''), (a) is not registered as
a municipal advisor with the MSRB under MSRB Rule A-12(a) and/or (b)
does not have an associated person who is qualified as a municipal
advisor representative under MSRB Rule G-3(d) and for whom there is
a Form MA-I required by 17 CFR 240.15Ba1-2(b) available on EDGAR,
and/or (c) has not, since January 1, 2020, filed with the MSRB any
Form A-12 annual affirmation as required by MSRB Rule A-12(k).

    Accordingly, the Commission finds that each of the registrants
listed in the attached Appendix either is no longer in existence or has
ceased to do business as a municipal advisor.
    Notice is also given that any interested person may, by September
12, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time, submit to the Commission in
writing a request for a hearing on the cancellation of the registration
of any registrant listed in the attached Appendix, accompanied by a
statement as to the nature of such person's interest, the reason for
such request, and the issues, if any, of fact or law proposed to be
controverted, and such person may request to be notified if the
Commission should order a hearing thereon. Any such communication
should be addressed to the Commission's Secretary at the address below.
    At any time after September 12, 2022, the Commission may issue an
order or orders cancelling the registrations of any or all of the
registrants listed in the attached Appendix, upon the basis of the
information stated above, unless an order or orders for a hearing on
the cancellation shall be issued upon request or upon the Commission's
own motion. Persons who requested a hearing, or to be advised as to
whether a hearing is ordered, will receive any notices and orders
issued in this matter, including the date of the hearing (if ordered)
and any postponements thereof. Any registrant whose registration is
cancelled under delegated authority may appeal that decision directly
to the Commission in accordance with Rules 430 and 431 of the
Commission's rules of practice (17 CFR 201.430 and 431).

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Elion, Attorney Advisor, Office
of Municipal Securities, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or at
(202) 551-5680.

    For the Commission, by the Office of Municipal Securities,
pursuant to delegated authority.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 200.30-3a(a)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.

Appendix

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Registrant name                        SEC ID No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elzey Consulting Group, LLC.................................   867-02230
Hampel Charles Edward.......................................   867-01267
Harris Housing Advisors LLC.................................   867-00840
IFS Advisory, LLC...........................................   867-02354
Piedmont Securities LLC.....................................   867-00767
Pinnacle Financial Group LLC................................   867-01379
Powell Capital Markets, Inc.................................   867-01363
Public Advisory Consultants, Inc............................   867-00109
Rydle Project Funding.......................................   867-01908
Torain Group................................................   867-02137
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-17747 Filed 8-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103

SUBJECT:
                         June 17, 2013

Supplemental Technical Support Document (TSD) - Insignificance Findings
for the Motor Vehicle Emissions for the Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for the West Virginia Portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH 1997 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Nonattainment Area

FROM:	       /s/

Gregory Becoat

Environmental Scientist (3AP30)

TO:

Administrative Record for the Insignificance Findings for the Motor
Vehicle Emissions for the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for
West Virginia Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH 1997 PM2.5
Nonattainment Area

THRU:	          /s/

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director

Office of Air Program Planning (3AP30)

I. Background

On March 8, 2012, the State of West Virginia formally submitted a
Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for West Virginia Portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH 1997 PM2.5 Nonattainment Area (hereafter
the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan).  The State
Implementation Plan (SIP) included a request for a finding of
insignificance by EPA for motor vehicle emissions for nitrogen oxides
(NOx), direct particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO2).

Transportation conformity is required under section 176(c) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) to ensure that federally supported highway, transit
projects, and other activities are consistent with (conform to) the
purpose of the SIP.  The CAA requires federal actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas to “conform to” the goals of SIP.  This means
that such actions will not cause or contribute to violations of a
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS); worsen the severity of an
existing violation; or delay timely attainment of any NAAQS or any
interim milestone.  Actions involving Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are
subject to the transportation conformity rule (40 CFR part 93, subpart
A).  Under this rule, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in
nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate with State air quality
and transportation agencies, EPA, FHWA, and FTA to demonstrate that
their metropolitan transportation plans and TIPs conform to applicable
SIPs.  This is typically determined by showing that estimated emissions
from existing and planned highway and transit systems are less than or
equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) contained in a SIP.

For MVEBs to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, EPA’s
adequacy criteria found at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).  EPA’s adequacy
criteria are:  (1) the submitted control strategy implementation plan
was endorsed by the Governor or designee and was subject to a State
public hearing; (2) consultation among Federal, State, and local
agencies occurred; full implementation plan documentation was provided
to EPA; and EPA's stated concerns, if any, were addressed before the
control strategy implementation plan was submitted; (3) the MVEBs are
clearly identified and precisely quantified; (4) the MVEBs, when
considered together with all other emissions sources, are consistent
with applicable requirements for maintenance; (5) the MVEBs are
consistent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory and the
control measures in the submitted control strategy implementation plan;
and (6) revisions to previously submitted maintenance plans explain and
document any changes to previously submitted budgets and control
measures; impacts on point and area source emissions; any changes to
established safety margins; and reasons for the changes (including the
basis for any changes related to emission factors or estimates of
vehicle miles traveled).

In certain instances, the Transportation Conformity Rule allows areas to
forgo establishment of a MVEB where it is demonstrated that the regional
motor vehicle emissions for a particular pollutant or precursor are an
insignificant contributor to the air quality problem in an area.  The
general criteria for insignificance determinations can be found in 40
CFR 93.109(f). Insignificance determinations are based on a number of
factors, including the percentage of motor vehicle emissions in the
context of the total SIP inventory; the current state of air quality as
determined by monitoring data for the relevant NAAQS; the absence of SIP
motor vehicle control measures; and the historical trends and future
projections of the growth of motor vehicle emissions.  EPA’s rationale
for providing for insignificance determinations is described in the July
1, 2004, revision to the Transportation Conformity Rule at 69 FR 40004.
Specifically, the rationale is explained on page 40061 under the
subsection XXIII.B. entitled, “Areas With Insignificant Motor Vehicle
Emissions.”  Any insignificance determination under review of EPA is
subject to the adequacy and approval process for EPA's action on the
SIP.

II.  Administrative Requirements for Making Insignificance Findings

EPA has followed the process for reviewing the submitted SIP and
determining if an insignificance finding for motor vehicle emissions is
warranted in accordance with the procedures listed in the January 2008
Conformity Regulations contained in 40 CFR 93.102(b) - “Geographical
applicability” and 40 CFR 93.118(f) - “Adequacy review process for
implementation plan submissions.”

III.  Evaluation of the Request for an Insignificance Finding for Motor
Vehicle Emissions in the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for
the West Virginia Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH  1997 PM2.5
 Nonattainment Area Submitted by The West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection

In this TSD, EPA is evaluating the West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection’s request for an insignificance finding for
motor vehicle emissions associated with the Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan contained in the submittal.  EPA is using the
evaluation criteria detailed in the Transportation Conformity Rule, 40
CFR 93.102(b)(2)(iv), (b)(2)(v), and (b)(3) and 93.118(e)(4) and (e)(5).
 The evaluation is presented below.

Review of the Request for Insignificance Finding of Motor Vehicle
Emissions in the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the West
Virginia Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH PM2.5 Nonattainment
Area

Transportation Conformity Rule

40 CFR Part 93

Review Criteria

Was the Criterion Satisfied?  If Yes, How was this Criteria Satisfied?

93.102(b)(2)(iv)	Has the EPA and the State made a finding that NOx is an
insignificant contributor to the direct mobile PM emissions or does the
implementation plan fail to establish a NOx budget as part of the PM2.5
maintenance strategy?

	The State has requested that NOx be found an insignificant contributor
to the mobile PM emissions.  This request is based on the State finding
that Onroad mobile source NOx constitutes less than twelve percent of
the area’s total NOx emissions in the 2015 and 2022 horizon years due
to continuing fleet turnover even with future vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) growth included in the emission projections. EPA has also made a
finding that the transportation-related emissions of NOx within the
nonattainment area are not a significant contributor to the direct
mobile PM emissions.

93.102(b)(2)(v) 	Has the EPA or State made a finding that the
precursors, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), SO2 or Ammonia (NH3) are
a significant contributor to the mobile PM emissions or does the
implementation plan  submission establish a  budget for VOCs, SOx or NH3
as part of a PM2.5  maintenance strategy?	Neither EPA nor the State has
made any findings that VOCs, SO2, or NH3 is a significant contributor to
the PM2.5 mobile emissions, and therefore, it has not been included in
the SIP.  Onroad mobile source SO2 emissions constitute less than 0.1%
of the area’s total SO2 emissions in the 2015 and 2022 horizon years.

93.102(b)(3)

	Has the EPA or the State made a finding that direct PM is a significant
contributor to the PM mobile emissions or does the implementation plan
establish a budget that includes direct PM as part of a PM 2.5
maintenance strategy?

	The State has requested that direct PM be found an insignificant
contributor to the mobile PM emissions.  This request is based on the
State finding that Onroad mobile source PM2.5 constitutes less than 2.1%
of the area’s total PM2.5 emissions in the 2015 and 2022 horizon years
due to continuing fleet turnover even with future VMT growth included in
the emission projections.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(i)	Was the submitted revised plan endorsed by the
Governor (or his or her designee) and subject to a State public hearing?

	Yes.  The submitted Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan was
endorsed and submitted as a SIP revision by the Governor’s designee,
the Secretary of the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection.  A public hearing on the SIP proposal was held on February
23, 2012.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(ii)	Before the maintenance plan was submitted to EPA,
did consultation between federal, State and local agencies occur; was
full implementation plan documentation provided to EPA, and was EPA’s
stated concerns, if any, addressed?	Yes.  Consultation has occurred
among all required Federal, State, and local agencies.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(iii)	Were the MVEBs clearly identified and precisely
quantified?	As there was a request for an insignificance finding, no
MVEBs were identified in the SIP.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(iv)	Are the motor vehicle emissions, when considered
together with all other emission reductions, consistent with applicable
requirements for maintenance strategies?	EPA believes that motor vehicle
emissions can be declared insignificant contributors because in
comparing the motor vehicle emissions to the overall emissions
inventory, the motor vehicle emissions comprise only a small portion of
the over PM2.5 emissions for the nonattainment area and are projected to
continue to significantly decline due to fleet turnover.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(v)	Are the motor vehicle emissions consistent with and
clearly related to the emissions inventory and the control measures in
the Plan?

	EPA believes that the motor vehicle emissions have clearly related to
the emissions inventory and control measures in the SIP submittal.

Sec. 93.118(e)(4)(vi)	Revisions to previously submitted maintenance
plan: explain and document any changes to previously submitted budgets
and control measures; impacts on point and area source emissions; any
changes to established safety margins (see Sec. 93.101 for definition);
and reasons for the changes (including the basis for any changes related
to emission factors or estimates of vehicle miles traveled).	There are
no revisions to the maintenance plan because this is the initial
redesignation request, along with the associated maintenance plan for
West Virginia Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH Area.

Sec. 93.118(e)(5)	Did they provide and we review public comments and the
State’s responses to those comments with the submitted control
strategy SIP?	There were no comments on the SIP related to the proposed
insignificance finding request.

IV.  Conclusion

Based upon our review and evaluation of the motor vehicle emissions
contained in the West Virginia Redesignation Request and Maintenance
Plan for the West Virginia Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH
1997 PM2.5 Nonattainment Area, EPA finds that the SIP submittal meets
the criteria in the transportation conformity rules for an
insignificance finding for NOx, PM2.5, and SO2 contribution from motor
vehicles.  Weighing all the factors for an insignificance finding,
particularly the minor contribution of mobile source PM2.5 and SO2, EPA
has determined that the PM2.5 and SO2 contribution from motor vehicle
emissions to the annual PM2.5 pollution for the West Virginia portion of
the Nonattainment Area are insignificant.  With respect to
transportation conformity, the larger NOx contribution of less than
twelve and a half percent of the area’s total NOx emissions in the
2015 and 2022 horizon years requires further justification to request an
insignificant finding.  The requirements under 40 CFR 93.109(f) bases
insignificance on emission percentages, emission trends, and the
effectiveness of the pollutant in forming PM.  For the
Parkersburg-Marietta area, there is a significant emission decrease
projected for the highway sector and total emissions source inventory in
years 2008, 2015, and 2022.  Given the relatively small contribution of
the highway mobile emissions to the total SIP inventory, highway mobile
emissions are not likely to contribute significantly to local PM2.5.
Additionally, NOx reductions are significantly less effective in
reducing PM concentrations than are reductions in direct PM and SO2.
Consequently, NOx percentage emission contribution may be higher than
direct PM and SO2 without adversely affecting air quality.  Based on the
analysis of local historical trends and growth patterns in order to
develop the long range transportation plan and transportation
improvement program for transportation conformity purposes, EPA has no
reason to expect highway motor vehicle emissions growth to lead to a
violation of the annual PM2.5 standard.  Although vehicle miles traveled
increases over time, NOx emissions are projected to decrease
dramatically from 4505.4 tons/year in 2002 to 665.7 tons/year in 2030.
This demonstrates that highway emissions will remain insignificant in
the future.  Upon review of the further justification for requesting an
insignificant finding for NOx, EPA has determined that NOx contribution
from motor vehicle emissions to the annual PM2.5 pollution for the West
Virginia portion of the Nonattainment Area is insignificant.

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register: August 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 149)]
[Notices]
[Page 43307-43309]
[DOCID:fr03au07-109]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56165; File No. SR-ISE-2007-64]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Fee Changes

July 30, 2007.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\

notice is hereby given that on July 24, 2007, the International
Securities Exchange, LLC (``Exchange'' or ``ISE'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change, as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have
been substantially prepared by the Exhange. 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 ISE is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to establish
fees for transactions in options on 3 Premium Products.\3\ The text of
the proposed rule change is available on the ISE's Web site (http://www.iseoptions.com
), at the principal office of the ISE, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Premium Products'' is defined in the Schedule of Fees as
the products enumerated therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 ISE 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 ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to
establish fees for transactions in options on the following 3 Premium
Products: First Trust ISE Chindia Index Fund (``FNI''), iShares MSCI
Brazil Index Fund (``EWZ'') and the iShares MSCI Korea Index Fund
(``EWY'').\4\ The Exchange represents that FNI, EWZ and EWY are
eligible for options trading because they constitute ``Fund Shares,''
as defined by ISE Rule 502(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ iShares[reg] is a registered trademark of Barclays Global
Investors, N.A. (``BGI''), a wholly owned subsidiary of Barclays
Bank PLC. ``MSCI Korea Index'' and ``MSCI Brazil Index'' are service
marks of Morgan Stanley Capital International (``MSCI'') and have
been licensed for use for certain purposes by BGI. All other
trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective
owners. Neither EWY nor EWZ are sponsored, endorsed, issued, sold or
promoted by MSCI. BGI and MSCI have not licensed or authorized ISE
to (i) engage in the creation, listing, provision of a market for
trading, marketing, and promotion of options on EWY and EWZ or (ii)
to use and refer to any of their trademarks or service marks in
connection with the listing, provision of a market for trading,
marketing, and promotion of options on EWY and EWZ or with making
disclosures concerning options on EWY and EWZ under any applicable
federal or state laws, rules or regulations. BGI and MSCI do not
sponsor, endorse, or promote such activity by ISE, and are not
affiliated in any manner with ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All of the applicable fees covered by this filing are identical to
fees charged by the Exchange for all other Premium Products.
Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to adopt an execution fee and a
comparison fee for all transactions in options on FNI, EWZ and EWY.\5\
The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee for products covered
by this filing shall be $0.15 and $0.03 per contract, respectively, for
all Public Customer Orders \6\ and Firm Proprietary orders. The amount
of the execution fee and comparison fee for all ISE Market Maker
transactions shall be equal to the execution fee and comparison fee
currently charged by the Exchange for ISE Market Maker transactions in
equity options.\7\ Finally, the amount of the execution fee and
comparison fee for all non-ISE Market Maker transactions shall be $0.37
and $0.03 per contract, respectively. Further, since options on EWZ and
EWY are multiply-listed, the Payment for Order Flow fee shall apply
only to these two products. The Exchange believes the proposed rule
change will further the Exchange's goal of introducing new products to
the marketplace that are competitively priced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ These fees will be charged only to Exchange members. Under a
pilot program that is set to expire on July 31, 2007, these fees
will also be charged to Linkage Orders (as defined in ISE Rule
1900). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54204 (July 25,
2006), 71 FR 43548 (August 1, 2006) (SR-ISE-2006-38).
    \6\ ``Public Customer Order'' is defined in Exchange Rule
100(a)(39) as an order for the account of a Public Customer.
``Public Customer'' is defined in Exchange Rule 100(a)(38) as a
person that is not a broker or dealer in securities.
    \7\ The execution fee is currently between $.21 and $.12 per
contract side, depending on the Exchange Average Daily Volume, and
the comparison fee is currently $.03 per contract side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of section 6 of the Act,\8\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of section 6(b)(4),\9\ in particular, in that
it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing rule change establishes or changes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange, the foregoing rule change
has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \11\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the
filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily
abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-ISE-2007-64 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-64. This file

number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-64 and should be
submitted on or before August 24, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-15093 Filed 8-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21081-21083]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9061]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64284; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-48]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Update
Provisions Regarding the Dress Code and Trade Verification

April 8, 2011.
    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 April 6, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposal to amend Phlx
Rule 1054 (Verification of Contracts and Reconciliation of Uncompared
Trades) and Regulation 6 (Dress) of Rule 60 (Order and Decorum Code)
\3\ to delete obsolete provisions and update and modernize these
sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange's Order and Decorum regulations are part of the
Exchange's Options Floor Procedure Advices (``OFPAs'' or Advices''),
which may correspond to Exchange rules, and contain the Exchange's
minor rule plan (``MRP'' or ``Minor Rule Plan'') in respect of
options trading. The Minor Rule Plan consists of Advices with preset
fines, pursuant to Rule 19d-1(c) under the Act. 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c).
The Exchange is not, by this filing, amending the fine schedule for
Regulation 6 in OFPA.
     Similarly to OFPAs, the Exchange also has Equity Floor
Procedure Advices (``EFPAs'') in respect of equity trading, which
are not amended by this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXPHLX/Filings/, 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 amend Rule 1054 and
Regulation 6 to delete obsolete provisions and update and modernize
these sections.
    The Exchange's Order and Decorum regulations pursuant to Rule 60 of
the Option Floor Procedure Advices,\4\ with corresponding fine
schedules, were originally codified in 1989.\5\ The dress code in
Regulation 6 of Rule 60 in OFPA, which indicates dress norms for
individuals on the options floor (the ``Dress Code'') was omitted
inadvertently in the 1989 filing and was added the year thereafter.\6\
The last proposal in 2007 to amend the Dress Code adopted a business
casual code and indicated what business attire was deemed acceptable on
the trading floor.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Order and Decorum regulations relate to administration of
health, safety, welfare and general order and decorum on the
Exchange.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 27072 (August 8,
1989), 54 FR 32550 (SR-Phlx-89-41) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28499 (October 10,
1990), 55 FR 41290 (SR-Phlx-90-29) (approval order).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55492 (March 20,
2007), 72 FR 14321 (March 27, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2006-61) (notice of
filing).
    Regulation 6 currently states:
    Acceptable Business Casual Dress (Men):  Casual slacks
(i.e. khakis, dockers, corduroy fabric).  Ties are optional,
but must be neat, clean, and properly tied. If a tie is torn or
frayed, you will be asked to remove it.
     Traditional collared shirts, polo shirts, golf shirts
(shirts may be long or short sleeved). Shirts must be neat and
clean. All shirts must be tucked in. Shirts must be buttoned at
least to the second button from the top.  Dress shoes,
casual shoes, loafers, athletic shoes and boots (note: pant legs may
not be tucked into boots). All shoes must be neat and clean.
 Traditional business attire is always acceptable. Blazers
may be worn in lieu of trading jackets.  Trading jackets or
blazers must be worn at all times on the trading floor.
Identification badges must be properly displayed at chest level.
 Sweaters worn over a collared shirt, turtlenecks worn under
a collared shirt. Acceptable Business Casual Dress (Women):
Dresses or casual slacks (i.e. khakis, dockers, corduroy fabric).
 Shirts, sweaters, shells, turtlenecks, blouses, polo
shirts, golf shirts (long or short sleeved).  Dress shoes,
casual shoes, loafers, athletic shoes and boots (note: pant legs may
not be tucked into boots). All shoes must be neat and clean.
Inappropriate Casual Dress (Men & Women):  Denim clothing of
any kind (i.e. pants, skirts, dresses, shirts, vests, blouses).
 Sweat shirts, sweat pants, other sweat apparel of any kind
and sport jerseys.  Shorts, gym shorts, skorts, culottes,
beach wear, workout attire or miniskirts.  T-shirts of any
kind.  Stirrup pants or other excessively tight or revealing
clothing (i.e. bike shorts, leggings, sheer blouses, stretch pants).
 Tank tops, halter tops, tube tops, tops with spaghetti
straps, backless tops, crop tops (note: no bare midriffs).
Clothing with any inappropriate, or oversized logos (cartoon logos,
oversized sports logos or inappropriately suggestive logos).
 Slippers, sandals of any kind or open toed shoes.
Military fatigues, cargo pants, surgical scrubs, bib overalls.
 Clothing which is torn, soiled or in need of repair.
 Clothing and/or accessories which disrupt business
operations or which draw excessive attention to an employee
Hats or headgear unless worn for religious purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not propose by this filing to eliminate its
Regulation 6. Rather, in light of the Exchange options market combining
on-floor auction trading with an extensive electronic market, the
Exchange proposes to eliminate the specifics of the Dress Code from
Regulation 6 and set forth a procedure whereby the Exchange will
communicate the specifics of the Dress Code to members \8\ and post
them on the options floor. The Exchange believes that in this way it
would be able to address obsolete or unused Dress Code requirements \9\
and most efficiently address any needed changes and updates, subject to
notification of Exchange members regarding such requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ This includes, per current use, members, member
organizations, participants, and participant organizations. As such,
the Exchange is deleting obsolete or unused references to Floor
Manager, Post Supervisor, and Firm Representative from Regulation 6.
    \9\ As an example, the current Dress Code discusses items that
are essentially out of use such as skorts and culottes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend Regulation 6 to
indicate that the Dress Code outlining acceptable and unacceptable
dress for members and their staff, as well as any changes to the Dress
Code, will be communicated to members by the Exchange in writing.\10\
In addition, to further provide notification to on-floor traders, the
Dress Code will be posted on the options trading floor of the Exchange.
Moreover, to make sure that members have proper notification regarding
changes, the Exchange proposes that changes to the Dress Code will only
be effective three business days after such changes are communicated to
Exchange members. By communicating guidelines as needed regarding
acceptable apparel while on the trading floor, the Exchange intends to
encourage the membership (and their associated persons) to comply with
the Dress Code requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange intends to communicate the Dress Code to
members within one week of the date of effectiveness of this
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 1054 regarding the procedure for verification and
reconciliation of options trades has been in existence for more than
thirty years.\11\ During that time the rule has seen little substantive
(material) modification.\12\ As such, the rule still has obsolete
legacy language discussing the printing and distribution of carbon copy
trade contracts. The Exchange therefore proposes to eliminate reference
to obsolete or unused language in Rule 1054, particularly in light of
having both on-floor and electronic markets, while preserving most of
the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Rule 1054 was formerly known as Rule 1074. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 13591 (June 2, 1977) (SR-PBW-76-10)
(approval order regarding, among things, renumbering Rule 1074 as
1054).
    Rule 1054 states: At the time of execution, a carbon copy trade
contract will be printed and distributed by the Exchange to the
respective purchasing and selling members. Promptly upon receipt of
such contract, a member organization which is a clearing member of
the Options Clearing Corporation shall be obligated to verify the
information shown on the contract, to reconcile all uncompared
trades and advisory trades shown on the uncompared trade contract
and to report all reconciliations, corrections and adjustments to
the Exchange in accordance with such procedures as may be
established by the Exchange from time to time. Such reconciliation
report shall be filed with the Exchange prior to such cut-off hour
as the Exchange may prescribe and shall be binding on the clearing
member on whose behalf it is filed. The Exchange will consider all
trades as executed and compared as of such cut-off hour.
    \12\ The last modification of the rule, as an example, was for
the purpose of deleting Commentary .01 to Rule 1054 relating to use
of certain technology for the trading of Dell options. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42143 (November 16, 1999), 64 FR
66224 (SR-Phlx-99-22) (November 24, 1999) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, after eliminating reference to carbon copy trade
contracts, the Exchange proposes to state that a member organization
which is a clearing member of the Options Clearing Corporation shall be
obligated to compare all trades made through or on behalf of such
member as soon as possible after such trades are made or after
receiving notification thereof. In addition, as currently required by
the rule, such member would have to reconcile all uncompared trades and
advisory trades and report all reconciliations, corrections and
adjustments to the Exchange in accordance with such procedures as

may be established by the Exchange from time to time. The current rule
requirement that such reconciliation report shall be filed with the
Exchange prior to such cut-off hour as the Exchange may prescribe and
shall be binding on the clearing member on whose behalf it is filed is
not changed.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed Rule 1054 changes not only
deletes obsolete provisions and updates the rule but also brings the
rule into conformity with current options trading practices.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of
a free and open market and a national market system, by deleting
obsolete provisions and updating and modernizing its Regulation 6
regarding the Exchange's Dress Code and Rule 1054 regarding
verification and reconciliation of options trades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 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

    The Exchange believes that the foregoing proposed rule change may
take effect upon filing with the Commission pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \15\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder \16\
because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2011-48 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-2011-48. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room. 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-2011-48 and should be submitted on or before May 5,
2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Cathy Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-9061 Filed 4-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P