[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 26 (Monday, February 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7074-7075]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02547]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0103]

Technical Report Evaluating Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety
Technologies

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for comments on technical report.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces NHTSA's publication of a technical
report estimating the lives saved in 2012 and also cumulatively from
1960 through 2012 by vehicle safety technologies in passenger cars and
LTVs. The report's title is: Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies
and Associated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 1960 to 2012.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than June 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Report: The technical report is available on the Internet
for viewing in PDF format at http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812069.pdf.
    Comments: You may submit comments [identified by Docket Number
NHTSA-2014-0103] by any of the following methods:
     Internet: To submit comments electronically, go to the
U.S. Government regulations Web site at http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: Written comments may be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: If you plan to submit written comments by
hand or courier, please do so at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
     You may call Docket Management at 1-800-647-5527.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information see the Comments heading of the Supplementary
Information section of this document. 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
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Kindelberger, Chief, Evaluation
Division, NVS-431, National Center for Statistics and Analysis,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Room W53-312, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NHTSA began in 1975 to evaluate the
effectiveness of vehicle safety technologies associated with the
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. By June 2014, NHTSA had
evaluated the effectiveness of virtually all the life-saving
technologies introduced in passenger cars, pickup trucks, SUVs, and
vans from about 1960 up through about 2010. A statistical model
estimates the number of lives saved from 1960 to 2012 by the
combination of these life-saving technologies. Fatality Analysis
Reporting System (FARS) data for 1975 to 2012 documents the actual
crash fatalities in vehicles

that, especially in recent years, include many safety technologies.
Using NHTSA's published effectiveness estimates, the model estimates
how many people would have died if the vehicles had not been equipped
with any of the safety technologies. In addition to equipment compliant
with specific FMVSS in effect at that time, the model tallies lives
saved by installations in advance of the FMVSS, back to 1960, and by
non-compulsory improvements, such as pretensioners and load limiters
for seat belts. FARS data has been available since 1975, but an
extension of the model allows estimates of lives saved in 1960 to 1974.
    A previous NHTSA study (70 FR 3975) using the same methods
estimated that vehicle safety technologies had saved 328,551 lives from
1960 through 2002. The agency now estimates 613,501 lives saved from
1960 through 2012. The annual number of lives saved grew from 115 in
1960, when a small number of people used lap belts, to 27,621 in 2012,
when most cars and LTVs were equipped with numerous modern safety
technologies and belt use on the road achieved 86 percent.

Comments

How can I influence NHTSA's thinking on this subject?

    NHTSA welcomes public review of the technical report. NHTSA will
submit to the Docket a response to the comments and, if appropriate,
will supplement or revise the report.

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the Docket
number of this document (NHTSA-2014-0109) in your comments.
    Your primary comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR
553.21). However, you may attach additional documents to your primary
comments. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.
    Please submit one copy of your comments, including the attachments,
to Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES.
    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for
substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet
the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data
Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the
guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed
at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_reproducible. DOT's guidelines
may be accessed at http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/subject_areas/statistical_policy_and_research/data_quality_guidelines/index.html.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://www.regulations.gov.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by mail. You may also periodically
access http://www.regulations.gov and enter the number for this docket
(NHTSA-2014-0103) to see if your comments are online.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. In
addition, you should submit a copy, from which you have deleted the
claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the
address given above under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing
information claimed to be confidential business information, you should
include a cover letter setting forth the information specified in our
confidential business information regulation. (49 CFR part 512.)

Will the agency consider late comments?

    In our response, we will consider all comments that Docket
Management receives before the close of business on the comment closing
date indicated above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also
consider comments that Docket Management receives after that date.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are
indicated above in the same location.
    You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments
on the Internet, take the following steps:
    (1) Go to the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) FDMS provides two basic methods of searching to retrieve
dockets and docket materials that are available in the system: (a)
``Quick Search'' to search using a full-text search engine, or (b)
``Advanced Search,'' which displays various indexed fields such as the
docket name, docket identification number, phase of the action,
initiating office, date of issuance, document title, document
identification number, type of document, Federal Register reference,
CFR citation, etc. Each data field in the advanced search may be
searched independently or in combination with other fields, as desired.
Each search yields a simultaneous display of all available information
found in FDMS that is relevant to the requested subject or topic.
    (3) You may download the comments. However, since the comments are
imaged documents, instead of word processing documents, the ``pdf''
versions of the documents are word searchable.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30111, 30181-83 delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 4, 2015.
Terry Shelton,
Associate Administrator for the National Center for Statistics and
Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2015-02547 Filed 2-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 98 (Monday, May 22, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32709-32713]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10731]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0188]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Cuyahoga River, Cleveland, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to create a new operating schedule to
govern all movable bridges over the Cuyahoga River. The Coast Guard is
also proposing new rules that will assist mariners signal for and
anticipate bridge openings. Mariners have raised concerns to the Ninth
Coast Guard District Commander regarding the safety and consistency of
moveable bridge operations on the Cuyahoga River. These additions are
proposed in response to those concerns. We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and relate material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before July 21, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2023-0188 using Federal Decision-Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email If you have questions on this temporary final rule,
call or email Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth
Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CRSTF Cuyahoga River Safety Task Force
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
IGLD85 International Great Lakes Datum of 1985
LWD Low Water Datum Based on IGLD85
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PAWSA Ports And Waterway Safety Assessment
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Cuyahoga River is over 100-miles in length and empties into
Lake Erie at Cleveland, Ohio, but only the last 7-miles of the river
are considered navigable for interstate commerce purposes. The Cuyahoga
River system consists of the Cuyahoga River and the Old River Channel,
the original outflow channel of the Cuyahoga River. The Cuyahoga River
has multiple sharp bends that make visibility down river impossible and
is designated as an American Heritage River by Executive Order 13061.
    Twenty-four bridges cross the Cuyahoga River. These bridges
accommodate small powered and non-powered recreational vessels, along
with large commercial vessels of up to 700 feet in length.
    The Cuyahoga River is considered one of the major industrial
centers in the Great Lakes and handles several commodities for domestic
and international commerce, including steel, heavy machinery, dry and
liquid bulk products, and salt.
    The United States and Canadian Coast Guard conduct fall and spring
ice-breaking operations in the Cuyahoga River, depending on shipping
schedules and weather conditions.
    Heavy recreational traffic is concentrated in the Old River and on
the Cuyahoga River up to mile 2.42 during the summer.
    All vertical clearances over the Cuyahoga River and Old River
Channel are based on IGLD85. Two bridges cross the Old River Channel:
    1. The CSX Railroad Bridge, mile 0.89, is a single leaf bascule
bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 170-feet and a vertical
clearance of 6-feet in the closed position and an unlimited clearance
in the open position. This bridge is maintained in the open position.
    2. The Willow Avenue Bridge, mile 1.02, is a vertical lift bridge
that provides a horizontal clearance of 150-feet and a vertical
clearance of 12-feet in the closed position and 98 feet in the open
position.

    Twenty-two bridges cross the Cuyahoga River:
    1. The Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76, also known as
``The Iron Curtain'' or ``NS1'' is a vertical lift bridge that provides
a horizontal clearance of 250-feet and a vertical clearance of 8-feet
in the closed position and 98-feet in the open position.
    2. The Main Avenue Viaduct, mile 1.01, is a fixed bridge with a
horizontal clearance of 218-feet and a vertical clearance of 92-feet,
but 97-feet is available in the center 182-feet of the span.
    3. The CSX Railroad Bridge, mile 1.28, is a single leaf bascule
bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 229-feet and a vertical
clearance of 8-feet in the closed position and an unlimited clearance
in the open position. This bridge is normally maintained in the open
position.
    4. The Center Street Bridge, mile 1.28, is a bob-tail swing bridge
that provides a horizontal clearance of 113-feet and a vertical
clearance of 17-feet in the closed position and an unlimited clearance
in the open positions.
    5. The Detroit-Superior Viaduct, mile 1.42, is a fixed bridge that
provides a horizontal clearance of 113-feet and a vertical clearance of
98-feet.
    6. The Union Terminal Viaduct, mile 1.89, is a fixed bridge that
provides a horizontal clearance of 200-feet and a vertical clearance of
98-feet.
    7. The Columbus Road Bridge, mile 1.93, is a vertical lift bridge
that provides a horizontal clearance of 220-feet and a vertical
clearance of 17-feet in the closed position and 98-feet in the open
position.
    8. The Flats Industrial Railroad Bridge, mile 2.24, is a vertical
lift bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 200-feet and a
vertical clearance of 8-feet in the closed position and 97-feet in the
open position.
    9. The City of Cleveland Railroad Bridge, mile 2.42, is a vertical
lift bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 200-feet and a
vertical clearance of 23-feet in the closed position and 98-feet in the
open position.
    10. The Carter Road Bridge, mile 2.43, is a vertical lift bridge
that provides a horizontal clearance of 201-feet and a vertical
clearance of 22-feet in the closed position and 97-feet in the open
position.
    11. The Eagle Avenue Bridge, mile 2.80, is a vertical lift bridge
that provides a horizontal clearance of 187-feet and a vertical
clearance of 15-feet in the closed position and 97-feet in the open
position. This bridge has been maintained in the open position for over
15 years and plans are being made for its complete removal by winter of
2025.
    12. The Hope Memorial Bridge, mile 3.14, is a fixed bridge that
provides a horizontal clearance of 178-feet and a vertical clearance of
96-feet.
    13. The Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge also known as ``NS2'' or
``Nickle Plate'' or ``The Trestle Bridge'', mile 3.34, is a vertical
lift bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 200-feet and a
vertical clearance of 64-feet in the closed position and 97-feet in the
open position.
    14. The Inner Belt Freeway Bridge, mile 3.42, is a fixed bridge
that provides a horizontal clearance of 230-feet and a vertical
clearance of 93-feet.
    15. The West 3rd Street Bridge, mile 3.42, is a vertical lift
bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 200-feet and a vertical
clearance of 10-feet in the closed position and 97-feet in the open
position.
    16. The CSX Railroad Bridge, mile 4.75, is a single leaf bascule
bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 110-feet and a vertical
clearance of 10-feet in the closed position and an unlimited clearance
in the open position. This bridge is normally maintained in the open
position, except when trains cross the river.
    17. The I-490 Bridge, mile 4.79, is a fixed bridge that provides a
horizontal clearance of 110-feet and a vertical clearance of 101-feet.
    18. An Overhead Conveyor Bridge, mile 5.35, is a fixed bridge that
provides a horizontal clearance of 210-feet and a vertical clearance of
99-feet.
    19. The Cleveland Cliffs Railroad Bridge #1, mile 5.42, is a single
leaf bascule bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 129-feet
and a vertical clearance of 15-feet in the closed position and an
unlimited clearance in the open position.
    20. The Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad Bridge, mile 5.47, is a
vertical lift bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 200-feet
and a vertical clearance of 28-feet in the closed position and 97-feet
in the open position.
    21. The Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 6.07, is a fixed
bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 27-feet and a vertical
clearance of 14-feet.
    22. The Cleveland Cliffs Railroad Bridge #2, mile 6.09, is a fixed
bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 59-feet and a vertical
clearance of 14-feet.
    The newly constructed Voinovich Pedestrian Bridge, at the mouth of
North Coast Harbor, provides a horizontal clearance of 130-feet and a
vertical clearance of 6-feet at center diminishing to 4-feet at channel
edges with an unlimited clearance in the open position.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    For 20 years, the Coast Guard has awarded winter operating
deviations to all of the moveable highway bridges over the Cuyahoga
River from mid-December to the end of March, allowing the bridges to
open on signal if a 12-hour advance notice of arrival was received. We
propose to make a permanent all-seasons rule for all movable bridges,
except for the Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76, that, from
December 15 through March 31 of each year each bridge will require a
12-hours advance notice for openings. As already required under Sec.
117.55, each bridge will be required to display a sign with the bridge
name, river mile, and that from December 15 through March 31 the bridge
requires a 12-hour advance notice. The signage will also include the
correct number to provide the advance notice. We propose that the
Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76, be exempted from the
winter 12-hour advance notice and will be required to open on signal
all year. Freighters need to pass through the Norfolk Southern Railroad
Bridge, mile 0.76, to gain refuge from high winds and waves, and a 12-
hour delay would be considered unreasonable.
    During the 2018 PAWSA that is available on the https://navcen.uscg.gov site by visiting Cuyahoga_River_PAWSA_18_Dec_2018.pdf
(uscg.gov) we learned that ``when the Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge,
mile 0.76, is closed, all inbound and out bound vessel traffic is
halted. Congestion builds on both sides of the bridge as vessel
operators wait for the bridge to open. Mariners drift and maneuver to
maintain position, which increases the risk of collision.'' The PAWSA
proposed a better means of communications between recreation and
commercial vessels. These recommendations included: the posting of
telephone number at the bridge that would be answered by the tender or
dispatcher, posting of a countdown clock, and requiring a
radiotelephone at the Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76. The
recommendations sought to alleviate congestion, prevent possible
collisions, and improve the flow of commerce.
    We reviewed complaints from mariners concerning the operation of
the Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76, and discovered from
2019 through 2022 a total of 291 complaints were received; 115 of the
reports involved delays. For comparison, during

the same period, the Coast Guard received two complaints against the
Willow Street Bridge, mile 1.02, and one complaint against the Norfolk
Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 3.34. Most complaints cite as the
perceived cause of delay, communication difficulties with the
drawtender, or in the cases of Norfolk Southern, communication
difficulties with the train dispatchers.
    In the PAWSA discussions related to reducing congestion near the
Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76 and improving the overall
experience for recreational vessels, it was recommended that the
Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76, install an LED display
(countdown clock) on both sides of the Norfolk Southern Railroad
Bridge, mile 0.76, that would communicate the estimated wait time until
the bridge lifts. These clocks were in use when the former owner of the
Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76 operated the crossing. The
Coast Guard is proposing the railroad reestablish the use of those
clocks or install modern clock faces to communicate the time until next
opening.
    To improve public safety, reduce vessel congestion at the bridge,
and improve communication between the drawtender and the vessels, the
Coast Guard proposes to require the Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge,
mile 0.76, to install and maintain signs visible from the upriver and
downriver sides of the bridge. The size, type, and spacing of
characters must conform to the standard alphabets for highway signs and
be visible to vessels approaching the bridge from upriver or down river
of the bridge and be readable at a minimum distance of 500 feet. To
improve communications the Coast Guard will propose that the Norfolk
Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.5, in addition to monitoring the
signals listed in 33 CFR 117.15, operate and maintain a Radio Telephone
as required under 33 CFR 117.23 and operate and maintain a telephone,
whose number will be maintained on the appropriate signs at the bridge.
    Suggested signage would appear like this example:
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22MY23.004

    Under the proposal, all other movable bridges over the Cuyahoga
River, the Old River, and at North Coast Harbor would be allowed to
operate with a 12-hour advance notice from December 15th through March
31st and would be required, in accordance with Sec.  117.55, to install
and maintain signs visible from the upriver and downriver sides of the
bridge. The size, type, and spacing of characters must conform to the
standard alphabets for highway signs and be visible to vessels
approaching the bridge from upriver or down river of the bridge and be
readable at a minimum distance of 500 feet. The information on the
signs must provide the name of the bridge and the river mile and
include that the bridge opens on signal except from December 15 through
March 31 when the bridge requires a 12-hour advance notice followed by
instructions how to provide the advance notice.
    Suggested signage would appear like this example:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22MY23.005

BILLING CODE 9110-04-C

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes and Executive Orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the bridge given advanced notice.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A
above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact
on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian Tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1,

associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C.
4321-4370f). The Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges.
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review,
under paragraph L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard
Environmental Planning Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision-Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2023-0188 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
``Search Results'' column, and click on it. Then click on the
``Comment'' option. If your material cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted, or a
final rule is published of any posting or updates to the docket.
    We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Add Sec.  117.848 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.848  Cleveland Harbor.

    (a) The Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.76, will open on
signal.
    (1) The bridge owner will maintain and monitor a VHF-FM Marine
Radio, and telephone.
    (2) The bridge will display a clock that counts down the estimated
time of the next bridge opening that is visible to vessels approaching
from the upriver or downriver side of the bridge.
    (3) The bridge will also display a sign readable from vessels
approaching the bridge from upriver or down river and readable for 500
feet that states:
    (i) The name of the bridge;
    (ii) The river mile;
    (iii) That the bridge is remotely operated; and
    (iv) The opening signal of the bridge is one prolonged blast
followed by one short blast of the horn or VHF-FM Marine Radio Channel
16, or by calling the number posted by the owner.
    (b) All remaining moveable vehicle and railroad bridges on the
Cuyahoga River will open on signal, except from December 15 through
March 31 when the bridges will open if a 12-hour advance notice is
provided. Said bridges include: Willow Avenue Bridge at Mile 1.02;
Center Street Bridge, mile 1.28; the Columbus Road Bridge, mile 1.93;
the Flats Industrial Railroad Bridge, mile 2.24; the City of Cleveland
Railroad Bridge, mile 2.42; the Carter Road Bridge, mile 2.43; the
Norfolk Southern Railroad Bridge the West 3rd Street Bridge, mile 3.42;
the CSX Railroad Bridge, mile 4.75; the Cleveland Cliffs Railroad
Bridge #1, mile 5.42; and the Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad Bridge.
    (c) The Voinovich Pedestrian Bridge, at the mouth of North Coast
Harbor, will open on signal except from December 15 through March 31
when the bridge will open if a 12-hour advance notice is provided.

    Dated: May 15, 2023.
E.J. Doucette,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Ninth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2023-10731 Filed 5-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28141-28147]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12892]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80942; File No. SR-NSCC-2017-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a New
Stock Options and Futures Settlement Agreement With the Options
Clearing Corporation

June 15, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 1, 2017, National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the clearing agency.\3\ The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ On June 1, 2017, NSCC filed this proposed rule change as an
advance notice (SR-NSCC-2017-803) with the Commission pursuant to
Section 806(e)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act entitled the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement
Supervision Act of 2010, 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1), and Rule 19b-
4(n)(1)(i) of the Act, 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i). A copy of the
advance notice is available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx. The Options Clearing Corporation also has filed
proposed rule change and advance notice filings with the Commission
in connection with this proposal. See OCC filings SR-OCC-2017-013
and SR-OCC-2017-804.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change has been filed by NSCC in connection with
proposed changes relating to a new Stock Options and Futures Settlement
Agreement (``New Accord'') between NSCC and The Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC,'' collectively NSCC and OCC may be referred to
herein as the ``clearing agencies''), and proposed amendments to
Procedures III and XV of the Rules & Procedures of NSCC (``NSCC
Rules'') to accommodate the proposed provisions of the New Accord, as
described in greater detail below.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Terms not defined herein are defined in the NSCC Rules,
available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/
rules/nscc_rules.pdf, or in OCC's By-Laws and Rules, available at
http://optionsclearing.com/about/publications/bylaws.jsp, as the
context implies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency 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 clearing agency has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
Background
    OCC issues and clears U.S.-listed options and futures on a number
of underlying financial assets including common stocks, currencies and
stock indices. OCC's Rules, however, provide that delivery of, and
payment for, securities underlying certain physically settled stock
options and single stock futures cleared by OCC are effected through
the facilities of a correspondent clearing corporation (such as NSCC)
and are not settled through the facilities of OCC. NSCC and OCC are
parties to a Third Amended and Restated Options Exercise Settlement
Agreement, dated February 16, 1995, as amended (``Existing
Accord''),\5\ which governs the delivery and receipt of stock in the
settlement of put and call options issued by OCC (``Stock Options'')
that are eligible for settlement through NSCC's Continuous Net
Settlement (``CNS'') Accounting Operation and are designated to settle
on the third business day following the date the related exercise or
assignment was accepted by NSCC (``Options E&A''). All OCC Clearing
Members that intend to engage in Stock Options transactions are
required to also be Members of NSCC or to have appointed or nominated
an NSCC Member to act on its behalf.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Existing Accord and the proposed changes thereunder were
previously approved by the Commission. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 37731 (September 26, 1996), 61 FR 51731 (October 3,
1996) (SR-OCC-96-04 and SR-NSCC-96-11) (Order Approving Proposed
Rule Change Related to an Amended and Restated Options Exercise
Settlement Agreement Between the Options Clearing Corporation and
the National Securities Clearing Corporation); Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 43837 (January 12, 2001), 66 FR 6726 (January 22,
2001) (SR-OCC-00-12) (Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Creation of a Program to
Relieve Strains on Clearing Members' Liquidity in Connection With
Exercise Settlements); and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58988
(November 20, 2008), 73 FR 72098 (November 26, 2008) (SR-OCC-2008-18
and SR-NSCC-2008-09) (Notice of Filing and Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Changes Relating to Amendment
No. 2 to the Third Amended and Restated Options Exercise Settlement
Agreement).
    \6\ A firm that is both an OCC Clearing Member and an NSCC
Member, or is an OCC Clearing Member that has designated an NSCC
Member to act on its behalf is referred to herein as a ``Common
Member.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC proposes to adopt a New Accord with OCC, which would provide
for the settlement of certain Stock Options and delivery obligations
arising from certain matured physically-settled stock futures contracts
cleared by OCC (``Stock Futures''). Specifically, the New Accord would,
among other things: (1) Expand the category of securities that are
eligible for settlement and guaranty under the agreement to certain
securities (including stocks, exchange-traded funds and exchange-traded
notes) that (i) are required to be delivered in the exercise and
assignment of Stock Options and are eligible to be settled through
NSCC's Balance Order Accounting Operation (in addition to its CNS
Accounting Operation) or (ii) are delivery obligations arising from
Stock Futures that have reached maturity and are eligible to be settled
through NSCC's CNS Accounting Operation or Balance Order Accounting
Operation; (2) modify the time of the transfer of responsibilities from
OCC to NSCC and, specifically, when OCC's guarantee obligations under
OCC's By-Laws and Rules with respect to such transactions (``OCC's
Guaranty'') end and NSCC's obligations under Addendum K of the NSCC
Rules with respect to such transactions (``NSCC's Guaranty'') begin
(such transfer being the ``Guaranty Substitution''); and (3) put
additional arrangements into place concerning the procedures,
information sharing, and overall governance processes under the
agreement. Furthermore, NSCC proposes to make certain clarifying and
conforming changes to the NSCC Rules as necessary to implement the New
Accord.
    The primary purpose of the proposed changes is to (1) provide
consistent treatment across all expiries for

products with ``regular way'' \7\ settlement cycle specifications; (2)
reduce the operational complexities of the Existing Accord by
eliminating the cross-guaranty between OCC and NSCC and the bifurcated
risk management of exercised and assigned transactions between the two
clearing agencies by delineating a single point in time at which OCC's
Guaranty ceases and NSCC's Guaranty begins; (3) further solidify the
roles and responsibilities of OCC and NSCC in the event of a default of
a Common Member at either or both clearing agencies; and (4) improve
procedures, information sharing, and overall governance under the
agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Under the New Accord, ``regular way settlement'' shall have
a meaning agreed to by the clearing agencies. Generally, regular way
settlement is understood to be the financial services industry's
standard settlement cycle. Currently, regular way settlement of
Stock Options or Stock Futures transactions are those transactions
designated to settle on the third business day following the date
the related exercise, assignment or delivery obligation was accepted
by NSCC. NSCC has proposed to change the NSCC Rules with respect to
the meaning of regular way settlement in order to be consistent with
the anticipated industry-wide move to a shorter standard settlement
cycle of two business days after trade date. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 79734 (January 4, 2017), 82 FR 3030 (January 10,
2017) (SR-NSCC-2016-007). See also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 78962 (September 28, 2016), 81 FR 69240 (October 5, 2016) (S7-
22-16) (Amendment to Securities Transaction Settlement Cycle).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The New Accord would become effective, and wholly replace the
Existing Accord, at a date specified in a service level agreement to be
entered into between NSCC and OCC.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Such effective date would be a date following approval of
all required regulatory submissions to be filed by OCC and NSCC with
the appropriate regulatory authorities, including this proposed rule
change. See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Existing Accord
Key Terms of the Existing Accord
    Under the Existing Accord, the settlement of Options E&A generally
proceeds according to the following sequence of events. NSCC maintains
and delivers to OCC a list (``CNS Eligibility Master File'') that
enumerates all CNS Securities, which are defined in NSCC Rule 1 and
generally include securities that have been designated by NSCC as
eligible for processing through NSCC's CNS Accounting Operation and
eligible for book entry delivery at NSCC's affiliate, The Depository
Trust Company (for purposes of this proposed rule change, such
securities are referred to as ``CNS Eligible Securities'').\9\ OCC, in
turn, uses this file to make a final determination of which securities
NSCC would not accept and therefore would need to be settled on a
broker-to-broker basis. OCC then sends to NSCC a transactions file,\10\
listing the specific securities that are to be delivered and received
in settlement of an Options E&A that have not previously been reported
to NSCC and for which settlement is to be made through NSCC (``OCC
Transactions File'').\11\ With respect to each Options E&A, the OCC
Transactions File includes the CUSIP number of the security to be
delivered, the identities of the delivering and receiving Common
Members, the quantity to be delivered, the total value of the quantity
to be delivered based on the exercise price of the option for which
such security is the underlying security, and the exercise settlement
date. After receiving the OCC Transactions File, NSCC then has until
11:00 a.m. Central Time on the following business day to reject any
transaction listed in the OCC Transactions File. NSCC can reject a
transaction if the security to be delivered has not been listed as a
CNS Eligible Security in the CNS Eligible Master File or if information
provided in the OCC Transactions File is incomplete. Otherwise, if NSCC
does not so notify OCC of its rejection of an Options E&A by the time
required under the Existing Accord, NSCC will become unconditionally
obligated to effect settlement of the Options E&A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Supra note 4.
    \10\ Delivery of the OCC Transactions File with respect to an
Options E&A typically happens on the date of the option's exercise
or expiration, though this is not expressly stated in the Existing
Accord. However, in theory, an Options E&A could, due to an error or
delay, be reported later than the date of the option's exercise or
expiration.
    \11\ This process would be substantially the same under the New
Accord with the exception that the CNS Eligibility Master File and
OCC Transactions File would be renamed and would be expanded in
scope to include additional securities that would be eligible for
guaranty and settlement under the New Accord, as discussed in
further detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Existing Accord, even after NSCC's trade guarantee has
come into effect,\12\ OCC is not released from its guarantee with
respect to the Options E&A until certain deadlines \13\ have passed on
the first business day following the scheduled settlement date without
NSCC notifying OCC that the relevant Common Member has failed to meet
an obligation to NSCC or NSCC has ceased to act for such Common Member
pursuant to the NSCC Rules.\14\ As a result, there is a period of time
when NSCC's trade guarantee overlaps with OCC's guarantee and where
both clearing agencies are holding margin against the same Options E&A
position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Pursuant to Addendum K of the NSCC Rules, NSCC guarantees
the completion of CNS transactions and balance order transactions
that have reached the point at which, for bi-lateral submissions by
Members, such trades have been validated and compared by NSCC, and
for locked-in submission, such trades have been validated by NSCC,
as described in the NSCC Rules. Transactions that are covered by the
Existing Accord, and that would be covered by the New Accord, are
expressly excluded from the timeframes described in Addendum K. See
supra note 4.
    \13\ The deadline is 6:00 a.m. Central Time for NSCC notifying
OCC of a Common Member failure and, if NSCC does not immediately
cease to act for such defaulting Common Member, 4:00 p.m. Central
Time for notifying OCC that it has ceased to act.
    \14\ See NSCC Rule 46 (Rule 46 (Restrictions on Access to
Services). See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event that NSCC or OCC ceases to act on behalf of or
suspends a Common Member, that Common Member becomes a ``defaulting
member.'' Once a Common Member becomes a defaulting member, the
Existing Accord provides that NSCC will make a payment to OCC equal to
the lesser of OCC's loss or the positive mark-to-market amount relating
to the defaulting member's Options E&A and that OCC will make a payment
to NSCC equal to the lesser of NSCC's loss or the negative mark-to-
market amount relating to the defaulting member's Options E&A to
compensate for potential losses incurred in connection with the
default. A clearing agency must request the transfer of any such
payments by the close of business on the tenth business day following
the day of default and, after a request is made, the other clearing
agency is required to make payment within five business days of the
request.
The New Accord
Overview
    As noted above, NSCC proposes to adopt a New Accord with OCC, which
would provide for the settlement of certain Stock Options and Stock
Futures transactions. The New Accord is primarily designed to, among
other things, expand the category of securities that are eligible for
settlement and guaranty under the agreement; simplify the time of the
transfer of responsibilities from OCC to NSCC (specifically, the
transfer of guarantee obligations); and put additional arrangements
into place concerning the procedures, information sharing, and overall
governance processes under the agreement. The material provisions of
the New Accord are described in detail below.
Key Elements of the New Accord
Expanded Scope of Eligible Securities
    Pursuant to the proposed New Accord, on each day that both OCC and
NSCC are open for accepting trades for clearing (``Activity Date''),
NSCC would deliver to OCC an ``Eligibility Master

File,'' which would identify the securities, including stocks,
exchange-traded funds and exchange-traded notes, that are (1) eligible
to settle through NSCC's CNS Accounting Operation (as is currently the
case under the Existing Accord) or NSCC's Balance Order Accounting
Operation (which is a feature of the New Accord) and (2) to be
delivered in settlement of (i) exercises and assignments of Stock
Options (as is currently the case under the Existing Accord) or (ii)
delivery obligations arising from maturing physically settled Stock
Futures (which is a feature of the New Accord) (all such securities
collectively being ``Eligible Securities''). OCC, in turn, would
deliver to NSCC its file of E&A/Delivery Transactions \15\ that list
the Eligible Securities to be delivered, or received, and for which
settlement is proposed to be made through NSCC on that Activity Date.
Guaranty Substitution (discussed further below) would not occur with
respect to an E&A/Delivery Transaction that is not submitted in the
proper format or that involves a security that is not identified as an
Eligible Security on the then-current Eligibility Master File. This
process is similar to the current process under the Existing Accord
with the exception of the expanded scope of Eligible Securities (and
additional fields necessary to accommodate such securities) that would
be listed on the Eligibility Master File and the E&A/Delivery
Transactions file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ ``E&A/Delivery Transactions'' are transactions involving
the settlement of Stock Options and Stock Futures under the New
Accord. The delivery of E&A/Delivery Transactions to NSCC would
replace the delivery of the ``OCC Transactions File'' from the
Existing Accord. The actual information delivered by OCC to NSCC
would be the same as is currently provided on the OCC Transactions
File, but certain additional terms would be included to accommodate
the inclusion of Stock Futures, along with information regarding the
date that the instruction to NSCC was originally created and the
E&A/Delivery Transaction's designated settlement date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Like the Existing Accord, the proposed New Accord would continue to
facilitate the processes by which Common Members deliver and receive
stock in the settlement of Stock Options that are eligible to settle
through NSCC's CNS Accounting Operation and are designated to settle
regular way. The New Accord would also expand the category of
securities eligible for settlement under the agreement. In particular,
the New Accord would facilitate the processes by which Common Members
deliver and receive stock in settlement of Stock Futures that are
eligible to settle through NSCC's CNS Accounting Operation and are
designated to settle regular way. It would also provide for the
settlement of both Stock Options and Stock Futures that are eligible to
settle through NSCC's Balance Order Accounting Operation on a regular
way basis. The primary purpose of expanding the category of securities
that are eligible for settlement and guaranty under the agreement is to
provide consistent treatment across all expiries for products with
regular way settlement cycle specifications and simplify the settlement
process for these additional securities transactions.
    The New Accord would not apply to Stock Options or Stock Futures
that are designated to settle on a shorter timeframe than the regular
way settlement timeframe. These Stock Options would continue to be
processed and settled as they would be today, outside of the New
Accord. The New Accord also would not apply to any Stock Options or
Stock Futures that are neither CNS Securities nor Balance Order
Securities.\16\ Transactions in these securities are, and would
continue to be processed on a trade-for-trade basis away from NSCC's
facilities. Such transactions may utilize other NSCC services for which
they are eligible, but would not be subject to the New Accord.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Balance Order Securities are defined in NSCC Rule 1, and
are generally securities, other than foreign securities, that are
eligible to be cleared at NSCC but are not eligible for processing
through the CNS Accounting Operation. See supra note 4.
    \17\ OCC will continue to guarantee settlement until settlement
actually occurs with respect to these Stock Options and Stock
Futures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Changes Related to Guaranty Substitution
    The New Accord would adopt a fundamentally different approach to
the delineation of the rights and responsibilities of OCC and NSCC with
respect to E&A/Delivery Transactions. The purpose of the proposed
changes related to the Guaranty Substitution, defined below, is to
reduce the operational complexities of the Existing Accord by
eliminating the cross-guaranty between OCC and NSCC and the bifurcated
risk management of exercised and assigned transactions between the two
clearing agencies and delineating a single point in time at which OCC's
Guaranty ceases and NSCC's Guaranty begins. Moreover, the proposed
changes would solidify the roles and responsibilities of OCC and NSCC
in the event of a default of a Common Member at either or both clearing
agencies.
    As described above, the Existing Accord provides that NSCC will
make a payment to OCC following the default of a Common Member in an
amount equal to the lesser of OCC's loss or the positive mark-to-market
amount relating to the Common Member's Options E&A, and provides that
OCC will make a payment to NSCC following the default of a Common
Member equal to the lesser of NSCC's loss or the negative mark-to-
market amount relating to the Common Member's Options E&A to compensate
for potential losses incurred in connection with the Common Member's
default. The proposed New Accord, in contrast, would focus on the
transfer of responsibilities from OCC to NSCC and, specifically, the
point at which OCC's Guaranty ends and NSCC's Guaranty begins (i.e.,
the Guaranty Substitution) with respect to E&A/Delivery Transactions.
By focusing on the timing of the Guaranty Substitution, rather than
payment from one clearing agency to the other, the New Accord would
simplify the agreement and the procedures for situations involving the
default of a Common Member. The New Accord additionally would minimize
``double-margining'' situations when a Common Member may simultaneously
owe margin to both NSCC and OCC with respect to the same E&A/Delivery
Transaction.
    After NSCC has received an E&A/Delivery Transaction, the Guaranty
Substitution would normally occur when NSCC has received all Required
Deposits to its Clearing Fund, calculated taking into account such E&A/
Delivery Transaction, of Common Members (``Guaranty Substitution
Time'').\18\ At the Guaranty Substitution Time, NSCC's Guaranty takes
effect, and OCC does not retain any settlement obligations with respect
to such E&A/Delivery Transactions. The Guaranty Substitution would not
occur, however, with respect to any E&A/Delivery Transaction if NSCC
has rejected such E&A/Delivery Transaction due to an improper
submission, as described above, or if, during the time after NSCC's
receipt of the E&A/Delivery Transaction but prior to the Guaranty
Substitution Time, a Common Member involved in the E&A/Delivery
Transaction has defaulted on its obligations to NSCC by failing to meet
its Clearing Fund obligations, or NSCC has otherwise ceased to act for
such Common Member pursuant to the NSCC Rules (in either case, such
Common Member becomes a ``Defaulting NSCC Member'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Procedure XV of the NSCC Rules provides that all Clearing
Fund requirements and other deposits must be made within one hour of
demand, unless NSCC determines otherwise. See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC would be required to promptly notify OCC if a Common Member
becomes a Defaulting NSCC Member, as

described above. Upon receiving such a notice, OCC would not submit to
NSCC any further E&A/Delivery Transactions involving the Defaulting
NSCC Member for settlement, unless authorized representatives of both
OCC and NSCC otherwise consent. OCC would, however, deliver to NSCC a
list of all E&A/Delivery Transactions that have already been submitted
to NSCC and that involve the Defaulting NSCC Member (``Defaulted NSCC
Member Transactions''). The Guaranty Substitution ordinarily would not
occur with respect to any Defaulted NSCC Member Transactions, unless
both clearing agencies agree otherwise. As such, NSCC would have no
obligation to guaranty such Defaulted NSCC Member Transactions, and OCC
would continue to be responsible for effecting the settlement of such
Defaulted NSCC Member Transactions pursuant to OCC's By-Laws and Rules.
Once NSCC has confirmed the list of Defaulted NSCC Member Transactions,
Guaranty Substitution would occur for all E&A/Delivery Transactions for
that Activity Date that are not included on such list. NSCC would be
required to promptly notify OCC upon the occurrence of the Guaranty
Substitution Time on each Activity Date.
    If OCC suspends a Common Member after NSCC has received the E&A/
Delivery Transactions but before the Guaranty Substitution has
occurred, and that Common Member has not become a Defaulting NSCC
Member, the Guaranty Substitution would proceed at the Guaranty
Substitution Time. In such a scenario, OCC would continue to be
responsible for guaranteeing the settlement of the E&A/Delivery
Transactions in question until the Guaranty Substitution Time, at which
time the responsibility would transfer to NSCC. If, however, the
suspended Common Member also becomes a Defaulting NSCC Member after
NSCC has received the E&A/Delivery Transactions but before the Guaranty
Substitution has occurred, Guaranty Substitution would not occur, and
OCC would continue to be responsible for effecting the settlement of
such Defaulted NSCC Member Transactions pursuant to OCC's By-Laws and
Rules (unless both clearing agencies agree otherwise).
    Finally, the New Accord also would provide for the consistent
treatment of all exercise and assignment activity under the agreement.
Under the Existing Accord, ``standard'' \19\ option contracts become
guaranteed by NSCC when the Common Member meets its morning Clearing
Fund Required Deposit at NSCC while ``non-standard'' exercise and
assignment activity becomes guaranteed by NSCC at midnight of the day
after trade date (T+1). Under the New Accord, all exercise and
assignment activity for Eligible Securities would be guaranteed by NSCC
as of the Guaranty Substitution Time, under the circumstances described
above, further simplifying the framework for the settlement of such
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Option contracts with ``standard'' expirations expire on
the third Friday of the specified expiration month, while ``non-
standard'' contracts expire on other days of the expiration month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Terms of the New Accord
    The New Accord also would include a number of other provisions
intended to either generally maintain certain terms of the Existing
Accord or improve the procedures, information sharing, and overall
governance process under the new agreement. Many of these terms are
additions to or improvements upon the terms of the Existing Accord.
    Under the proposed New Accord, OCC and NSCC would agree to address
the specifics regarding the time, form and manner of various required
notifications and actions in a separate service level agreement, which
the parties would be able to revisit as their operational needs evolve.
The service level agreement would also specify an effective date for
the New Accord, which, as mentioned above, would occur on a date
following approval and effectiveness of all required regulatory
submissions to be filed by OCC and NSCC with the appropriate regulatory
authorities. Similar to the Existing Accord, the proposed New Accord
would remain in effect (a) until it is terminated by the mutual written
agreement of OCC and NSCC, (b) until it is unilaterally terminated by
either clearing agency upon one year's written notice (as opposed to
six months under the Existing Accord), or (c) until it is terminated by
either NSCC or OCC upon the bankruptcy or insolvency of the other,
provided that the election to terminate is communicated to the other
party within three business days by written notice.
    Under the proposed New Accord, NSCC would agree to notify OCC if
NSCC ceases to act for a Common Member pursuant to the NSCC Rules no
later than the earlier of NSCC's provision of notice of such action to
the governmental authorities or notice to other NSCC Members.
Furthermore, if an NSCC Member for which NSCC has not yet ceased to act
fails to satisfy its Clearing Fund obligations to NSCC, NSCC would be
required to notify OCC promptly after discovery of the failure.
Likewise, OCC would be required to notify NSCC of the suspension of a
Common Member no later than the earlier of OCC's provision of notice to
the governmental authorities or other OCC Clearing Members.
    Under the Existing Accord, NSCC and OCC agree to share certain
reports and information regarding settlement activity and obligations
under the agreement. The New Accord would enhance this information
sharing between the clearing agencies. Specifically, NSCC and OCC would
agree to share certain information, including general risk management
due diligence regarding Common Members, lists of Common Members, and
information regarding the amounts of Common Members' margin and
settlement obligations at OCC or Clearing Fund Required Deposits at
NSCC. NSCC and OCC would also be required to provide the other clearing
agency with any other information that the other reasonably requests in
connection with the performance of its obligations under the New
Accord. All such information would be required to be kept confidential,
using the same care and discretion that each clearing agency uses for
the safekeeping of its own members' confidential information. NSCC and
OCC would each be required to act in good faith to resolve and notify
the other of any errors, discrepancies or delays in the information it
provides.
    The New Accord also would include new terms to provide that, to the
extent one party is unable to perform any obligation as a result of the
failure of the other party to perform its responsibilities on a timely
basis, the time for the non-failing party's performance would be
extended, its performance would be reduced to the extent of any such
impairment, and it would not be liable for any failure to perform its
obligations. Further, NSCC and OCC would agree that neither party would
be liable to the other party in connection with its performance of its
obligations under the proposed New Accord to the extent it has acted,
or omitted or ceased to act, with the permission or at the direction of
a governmental authority. Moreover, the proposed New Accord would
provide that in no case would either clearing agency be liable to the
other for punitive, incidental or consequential damages. The purpose of
these new provisions is to provide clear and specific terms regarding
each clearing agency's liability for non-performance under the
agreement.

    The proposed New Accord would also contain the usual and customary
representations and warranties for an agreement of this type, including
representations as to the parties' good standing, corporate power and
authority and operational capability, that the agreement complies with
laws and all government documents and does not violate any agreements,
and that all of the required regulatory notifications and filings would
be obtained prior to the New Accord's effective date. It would also
include representations that the proposed New Accord constitutes a
legal, valid and binding obligation on each of OCC and NSCC and is
enforceable against each, subject to standard exceptions. Furthermore,
the proposed New Accord would contain a force majeure provision, under
which NSCC and OCC would agree to notify the other no later than two
hours upon learning that a force majeure event has occurred and both
parties would be required to cooperate in good faith to mitigate the
effects of any resulting inability to perform or delay in performing.
Proposed Amendments to NSCC Procedures III and XV of the NSCC Rules
    Given the key differences between the Existing Accord and the New
Accord, as described above, NSCC proposes certain changes to Procedures
III and XV of the NSCC Rules in order to accommodate the terms of the
New Accord. In particular, NSCC would update Section B of Procedure III
to define the scope of the New Accord. First, the proposed Section B of
Procedure III would identify the E&A/Delivery Transactions, and would
make clear that the New Accord would apply only to E&A/Delivery
Transactions that are in either CNS Securities or Balance Order
Securities, as such terms are defined in the NSCC Rules. The proposed
Section B of Procedure III would also define the Common Members, or
firms that must be named as counterparties to E&A/Delivery
Transactions, as ``Participating Members.'' The proposal would describe
the Guaranty Substitution Time and would describe the circumstances
under which the Guaranty Substitution would not occur. Finally, the
proposed Section B of Procedure III would describe how E&A/Delivery
Transactions for which the Guaranty Substitution has occurred would be
processed at NSCC both if they are covered by the proposed New Accord
and if they are not covered by the proposed New Accord because, for
example, they are not transactions in CNS Securities or Balance Order
Securities or were not submitted for regular way settlement.
    Finally, NSCC is also proposing to amend Procedure XV to remove
reference to the exclusion of E&A/Delivery Transactions from the
calculation of the mark-to-market margin component of its Clearing Fund
calculations, which is no longer applicable under the proposed New
Accord where the Guaranty Substitution would replace the transfer of a
defaulting Common Member's margin payments under the Existing Accord.
As such, NSCC is not proposing any change to its margining methodology,
but will include E&A/Delivery Transactions in the calculation the mark-
to-market margin component of Common Members' Clearing Fund Required
Deposits following implementation of the New Accord.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act, requires, in part, that the rules
of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions, to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or
control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in the
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\20\ NSCC believes
that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \21\ and the rules thereunder
applicable to NSCC for the reasons set forth below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the proposal to enhance the timing of the
Guaranty Substitution, the proposed New Accord, and related changes to
the NSCC Rules, would establish clear, transparent, and enforceable
terms for the settlement of OCC's cleared Stock Options and Stock
Futures through the facilities of NSCC. Specifically, the New Accord
would continue to provide a sound framework for the settlement of
certain Stock Options issued and cleared by OCC through the facilities
of NSCC and would extend this framework to a clearly defined scope of
additional Stock Options and Stock Futures transactions. In addition,
the proposed rule change would simplify the settlement process for
those Stock Options currently settled under the Existing Accord by
clarifying the timing and mechanisms by which OCC's guaranty ends and
NSCC's guaranty begins by focusing on the timing of the Guaranty
Substitution, as described in detail above. By clarifying and
simplifying the settlement process for these transactions, the New
Accord would operate to minimize the risk of interruptions to clearing
agency operations in the event of a Common Member default, and, in this
way, would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions.
    In addition, by eliminating any ambiguity regarding which clearing
agency is responsible for guaranteeing settlement at any given moment,
the proposal to enhance the timing of the Guaranty Substitution would
provide greater certainty that in the event of a Common Member default,
the default would be handled pursuant to the rules and procedures of
the clearing agency whose guarantee is then in effect and the system
for the clearance and settlement of Stock Options and Stock Futures
would continue with minimal interruption. This greater certainty would
strengthen OCC's and NSCC's ability to plan for and manage, and
therefore would mitigate, the risk presented by Common Member defaults.
It would also minimize the ``double margining'' issue that occurs under
the Existing Accord so that Common Members would no longer be required
to post margin at both clearing agencies to cover the same E&A/Delivery
Transactions, thereby reducing their potential exposures across
multiple clearing agencies for the same positions. In this way, the New
Accord is designed to safeguard the securities and funds which are in
the custody or control of NSCC or for which it is responsible.
    The proposals to expand the category of securities eligible for
settlement and guarantee and to apply uniform treatment to standard and
non-standard options under the New Accord would provide consistent
treatment across all expiries for products with regular way settlement
cycle specifications, and would promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of these additional securities transactions.
    In connection with the proposal to enhance the information sharing
arrangement between NSCC and OCC, NSCC and OCC would agree to share
certain information, including general risk management due diligence
regarding Common Members, lists of Common Members, and information
regarding the amounts of Common Members' margin and settlement
obligations at OCC or Clearing Fund Required Deposits at NSCC. In this
way, the New Accord would foster cooperation and coordination between

OCC and NSCC in the settlement of securities transactions.
    Finally, the proposed changes to the NSCC Rules would provide
additional clarity, transparency, and certainty around the application
of the New Accord to the applicable E&A/Delivery Transactions. By
providing its Members with this additional clarity, transparency, and
certainty in the NSCC Rules, the proposed rule change would promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
and the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody
or control of NSCC or for which it is responsible.
    Therefore, for the reasons stated above, NSCC believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) under the Act requires that a covered clearing
agency establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to provide for a well-founded, clear,
transparent, and enforceable legal basis for each aspect of its
activities in all relevant jurisdictions.\23\ The New Accord would
constitute a legal, valid and binding obligation on each of OCC and
NSCC, which is enforceable against each clearing agency. In connection
with the proposal to enhance the timing of the Guaranty Substitution,
the New Accord would establish clear, transparent, and enforceable
terms for the settlement of OCC's cleared Stock Options and Stock
Futures through the facilities of NSCC and would simplify the
settlement process for those Stock Options currently settled under the
Existing Accord. By clarifying the timing and mechanisms by which OCC's
Guaranty ends and NSCC's Guaranty begins by focusing on the timing of
the Guaranty Substitution, the new Accord, specifically the proposal to
enhance the timing of the Guaranty Substitution, would provide a clear,
transparent and enforceable legal basis for OCC's and NSCC's
obligations during the event of a Common Member default. As a result,
NSCC believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1).\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(20) under the Act requires, in part, that a covered
clearing agency establish, implement, maintain and enforce written
policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify, monitor, and
manage risks related to any link the covered clearing agency
establishes with one or more other clearing agencies or financial
market utilities.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC is proposing to adopt the New Accord in order to address the
risks it has identified related to its existing link with OCC within
the Existing Accord. Specifically, under the terms of the Existing
Accord, even after NSCC's guarantee has come into effect, OCC is not
released from its guarantee with respect to the Options E&A until
certain deadlines have passed on the first business day following the
scheduled settlement date without NSCC notifying OCC that the relevant
Common Member has failed to meet an obligation to NSCC and/or NSCC has
ceased to act for such firm. This current process results in a period
of time where NSCC's trade guarantee and OCC's guarantee both apply to
the same positions, and, therefore, both clearing agencies are holding
margin against the same Options E&A position. As a result, the Existing
Accord provides for a more complicated framework for the settlement of
certain Stock Options. These complications could give rise to
inconsistencies with regard to the development and application of
interdependent policies and procedures between OCC and NSCC, which
could lead to unanticipated disruptions in OCC's or NSCC's clearing
operations.
    In connection with the proposal to enhance the timing of the
Guaranty Substitution, the New Accord would provide for a clearer,
simpler framework for the settlement of certain Stock Options and Stock
Futures by pinpointing a specific moment in time, the Guaranty
Substitution Time, at which guarantee obligations would transfer from
OCC to NSCC. The New Accord would eliminate any ambiguity regarding
which clearing agency is responsible for guaranteeing settlement at any
given moment. Establishing a precise Guaranty Substitution Time would
also provide greater certainty that in the event of a Common Member
default, the default would be handled pursuant to the rules and
procedures of the clearing agency whose guarantee is then in effect and
the system for the clearance and settlement of Stock Options and Stock
Futures would continue with minimal interruption. This greater
certainty would strengthen OCC's and NSCC's ability to plan for and
manage, and therefore would mitigate, the risk presented by Common
Member defaults to OCC and NSCC, other members, and the markets the
clearing agencies serve. Therefore, through the adoption of the
proposal to enhance the timing of the Guaranty Substitution, NSCC would
more effectively manage its risks related to the operation of the New
Accord.
    Moreover, in connection with the proposal to put additional
arrangements into place concerning the procedures, information sharing,
and overall governance processes under the New Accord, NSCC and OCC
would agree to share certain information, including general
surveillance information regarding their members, so that each clearing
agency would be able to effectively identify, monitor, and manage risks
that may be presented by certain Common Members. Accordingly, NSCC
believes the proposed changes are reasonably designed to identify,
monitor, and manage risks related to the link established between OCC
and NSCC for the settlement of certain Stock Options and Stock Futures
in a manner consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(20).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(21) under the Act requires that a covered
clearing agency establish, implement, maintain and enforce written
policies and procedures reasonably designed to, among other things, be
efficient and effective in meeting the requirements of its participants
and the markets it serves.\27\ As noted above, under the Existing
Accord, even after NSCC's guarantee has come into effect, OCC is not
released from its guarantee with respect to the Options E&A until
certain deadlines have passed on the first business day following the
scheduled settlement date without NSCC notifying OCC that the relevant
Common Member has failed to meet an obligation to NSCC and/or NSCC has
ceased to act for such firm. This results in a period of time where
NSCC's guarantee overlaps with OCC's guarantee and where both clearing
agencies are holding margin against the same Options E&A positions. In
connection with the proposal to enhance the timing of the Guaranty
Substitution, the New Accord would minimize this ``double margining''
issue by introducing a new Guaranty Substitution Time, which would
normally occur as soon as NSCC has received all Required Deposits to
the Clearing Fund from Common Members, which have been calculated
taking into account the relevant E&A/Delivery Transactions, rather than
require reimbursement payments from one clearing agency to the other.
As a result, Common Members would no longer be required to post margin
at both clearing agencies to cover the same E&A/Delivery Transactions.
NSCC believes

that, by simplifying the terms of the existing agreement in this way,
the New Accord is designed to be efficient and effective in meeting the
requirements of OCC's and NSCC's participants and the markets they
serve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the proposal to put additional arrangements into
place concerning the procedures, information sharing, and overall
governance processes under the New Accord would create new efficiencies
in the management of this important link between OCC and NSCC. The
proposal to enhance information sharing between OCC and NSCC would
allow the clearing agencies to more effectively identify, monitor, and
manage risks that may be presented by certain Common Members, and would
create new efficiencies in their general surveillance efforts with
respect to these firms.
    In these ways, NSCC believes the proposed New Accord is consistent
with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(21).\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is not inconsistent with the existing NSCC
Rules, including any other rules proposed to be amended.

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\29\ NSCC does
not believe the proposed rule change would have any impact or impose
any burden on competition. The primary purpose of the proposed rule
change is to adopt a clearer, simpler framework for the settlement of
Stock Options issued by OCC and settled through the facilities of NSCC,
through the introduction of a new Guaranty Substitution Time. The
proposed New Accord would also extend this framework to both (1) Stock
Options contracts in securities that are eligible to be settled through
NSCC's Balance Order Accounting Operation and (2) certain delivery
obligations arising from matured physically-settled Stock Futures
contracts cleared by OCC that are eligible to be settled through NSCC's
CNS Accounting Operation or Balance Order Accounting Operation. The New
Accord would put additional arrangements into place concerning the
procedures, information sharing, and overall governance processes under
the agreement. NSCC is also proposing to make certain clarifying and
conforming changes to the NSCC Rules as necessary to implement the New
Accord. None of these proposed rule changes, either individually or
together, would affect Common Members' access to NSCC's services, nor
would any of these proposed changes disadvantage or favor any
particular user in relationship to another user. As such, NSCC believes
that the proposed changes would not have any impact or impose any
burden on competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the proposed rule change and none have been received. NSCC
will notify the Commission of any written comments received by NSCC.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) by order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
    The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions
required with respect to the proposal are completed.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2017-007 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2017-007. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on
DTCC's Web site (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). 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-NSCC-2017-007 and should be
submitted on or before July 11, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-12892 Filed 6-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P