[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 18 (Wednesday, January 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4605-4610]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01510]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74118; File No. SR-MIAX-2015-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified
by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To Adopt Rule 519A Risk Protection Monitor

January 22, 2015.
    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 January 8, 2015, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC
(``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
On January 20, 2015, the Exchange filed Amendment No.1 to the
proposal.\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\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange proposed changes to the
Form 19b-4, Exhibit 1, and Exhibit 5 to clarify that once triggered,
the Risk Protection Monitor described therein will apply to orders
in all series in all classes of options from the Exchange Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to adopt new risk protections for orders.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at
MIAX's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 519A, Risk Protection Monitor,
to provide new risk protections for orders entered by Members on the
Exchange. The proposed functionality is similar to the existing
Aggregate Risk Protections available to Market Makers that provide risk
protections for Market Maker quotations, however it will apply to
orders entered by Members.\4\ The Exchange also proposes to codify
existing functionality regarding the Aggregate Risk Manager to provide
additional transparency in the Rule to Members regarding the current
functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Rule 612. The proposed Risk Protection Monitor is
similar in that it is based on a counting program that triggers a
risk protection if a certain predetermined threshold is reached.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes that the MIAX System will maintain a counting
program (``counting program'') for each participating Member that will
count the number of orders entered and the number of contracts traded
via an order entered by a Member on the Exchange within a specified
time period that has been established by the Member (the ``specified
time period''). The maximum duration of the specified time period will
be established by the Exchange and announced via a Regulatory Circular.
Members may establish an Allowable Order Rate \5\ and/or an Allowable
Contract Execution Rate \6\. When a Member's order is entered or when
an execution of a Member's order occurs, the System will look back over
the specified time period to determine whether the order entered or the
execution that occurred triggers the Risk Protection Monitor.\7\
Members may establish whether the Risk Protection Monitor, when
triggered, will (i) prevent the System from receiving any new orders in
all series in all classes from the Member; or (ii) prevent the System
from receiving any new orders in all series in all classes from the
Member and cancel all existing Day orders in all series in all classes
from the Member; or

(iii) send a notification that the Risk Protection Monitor has been
triggered without any further preventative or cancellation action by
the System.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Allowable Order Rate is the number of orders entered
during the specific time period that has been established by the
Member.
    \6\ The Allowable Contract Execution Rate is the number of
contracts executed during the specific time period that has been
established by the Member.
    \7\ The Exchange notes that the specific time period does not
need to be the same for both the Allowable Order Rate and Allowable
Contract Execution Rate (i.e., there can be one specific time period
for Allowable Order Rate and a different specific time period for
Allowable Contract Execution Rate).
    \8\ See Proposed Rule 519A(a). As discussed below, the Risk
Protection Monitor will not cancel any existing GTC orders. GTC
Orders will remain in the System available for trading when the Risk
Protection Monitor is engaged. See Proposed Rule 519A,
Interpretations and Policies .02.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The System will trigger the Risk Protection Monitor when the
counting program has determined either (i) that a Member has entered
during the specified time period a number of orders exceeding their
Allowable Order Rate, or (ii) that a Member has executed during the
specified time period a number of contracts exceeding their Allowable
Contract Execution Rate.\9\ Once engaged, the Risk Protection Monitor
will then automatically either prevent the System from receiving any
new orders in all series in all classes from the Member, and cancel all
existing Day orders in all series in all classes from the Member (if
designated by the Member's instructions), or send a notification
without any further preventative or cancellation action by the System.
When engaged, the Risk Protection Monitor will still allow the Member
to interact with existing orders entered prior to exceeding the
Allowable Order Rate or the Allowable Contract Execution Rate,
including sending cancel order messages and receiving trade executions
from those orders. The Risk Protection Monitor shall remain engaged
until the Member communicates with the Help Desk to enable the
acceptance of new orders.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange does not believe that establishing a minimum or
maximum Allowable Order Rate or Allowable Contract Execution Rate is
necessary at this time. The Exchange notes that use of the Risk
Protection Monitor is optional and not mandatory. If, after some
time of gaining experience with the Risk Protection Monitor, the
Exchange sees a need for either minimums or maximums in the interest
of maintaining fair and orderly markets, the Exchange will submit a
subsequent 19b-4 rule filing as necessary.
    \10\ See Proposed Rule 519A(b). The communication from the
Member to the Help Desk can either be via email or phone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following examples show how the proposed Risk Protection
Monitor would operate.
    Example 1.
    BD1 designates the following settings:
    1. Allowable Order Rate = 500 orders/per 2 second. Reject new
orders.
    2. Allowable Contract Execution Rate = 1000 contracts/per 2
seconds. Reject new orders and cancel day orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Time                   Event              Count total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
@100 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    10 orders.
                               orders.
@110 milliseconds...........     50 contracts     50 contracts
                                  execute.
@200 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    20 orders.
                               orders.
@225 milliseconds...........     355              405 contracts.
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@250 milliseconds...........     45 contracts     450 contracts.
                                  execute.
@350 milliseconds...........     150              600 contracts.
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@500 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    30 orders.
                               orders.
@1000 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 200   230 orders.
                               orders.
@1500 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 200   430 orders.
                               orders.
@1700 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 50    480 orders.
                               orders.
@2000 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 50    530 orders.
                               orders.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     530 orders over 2 seconds exceeds the Allowable Order
Rate--triggers the RPM
     Once engaged, the System will reject new orders from BD1
until BD1 contacts the Help Desk to request re-enabling the acceptance
of new orders from BD1.
     Orders on the book, may continue to trade.

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
@2200 milliseconds..........  300 contracts    850 contracts.
                               execute.
@2500 milliseconds..........  500 contracts    800 contracts.
                               execute.
@3000 milliseconds..........  300 contracts    1100 contracts.
                               execute.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     1100 contract executions over 2 seconds exceeds the
Allowable Contract Execution Rate--triggers RPM
     Once engaged, the System will then reject new orders and
cancel day orders from BD1 until BD1 contacts the Help Desk to request
re-enabling the acceptance of new orders for BD1.
    Example 2.
    BD1 designates the following settings:
    1. Allowable Order Rate = 500 orders/per 2 second. Reject new
orders.
    2. Allowable Contract Execution Rate = 6,000 contracts/per 2
seconds. Reject new orders and cancel day orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Time                   Event              Count total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
@100 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    10 orders.
                               orders.
@110 milliseconds...........     5050             5050 contracts.
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@200 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    20 orders.
                               orders.
@225 milliseconds...........     355              5405 contracts.
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@250 milliseconds...........     45 contracts     5450 contracts.
                                  execute.
@350 milliseconds...........     150              5600 contracts.
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@500 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    30 orders.
                               orders.
@1000 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 200   230 orders.
                               orders.
@1500 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 200   430 orders.
                               orders.
@1700 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 50    480 orders.
                               orders.
@2000 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 50    530 orders.
                               orders.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     530 orders over 2 seconds exceeds the Allowable Order
Rate--triggers the RPM
     Once engaged, the System will reject new orders from BD1
until BD1 contacts the Help Desk to request re-enabling the acceptance
of new orders from BD1.
     Orders on the book, may continue to trade.

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
@2200 milliseconds..........  300 contracts    850 contracts.
                               execute.
@2500 milliseconds..........  500 contracts    800 contracts.
                               execute.
@3000 milliseconds..........  5300 contracts   6100 contracts.
                               execute.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     6100 contract executions over 2 seconds exceeds the
Allowable Contract Execution Rate--triggers RPM
     Once engaged, the System will then reject new orders and
cancel day orders from BD1 until BD1 contacts the Help Desk to request
re-enabling the acceptance of new orders for BD1.
    In Examples 1 and 2, the Exchange notes that contracts continued to
execute even though the Risk Protection Monitor was triggered because
the orders received during the specified time period exceeded the
Allowable Order Rate. If BD1 wishes to mitigate the risk of additional
executions after the Risk Protection Monitor is triggered in scenarios
like Examples 1 or 2, BD1 could designate that the Risk Protection
Monitor prevent the System from receiving any new orders in all series
in all classes from the Member and cancel all existing Day orders in
all series in all classes from the Member if the orders entered equal
or exceed the Allowable Order Rate.
    Example 3.
    BD1 designates the following settings:
    1. Allowable Order Rate = 500 orders/per 2 second. Reject new
orders.
    2. Allowable Contract Execution Rate = 1000 contracts/per 2
seconds. Reject new orders and cancel day orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Time                   Event              Count total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
@100 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    10 orders
                               orders.
@110 milliseconds...........     50 contracts     50 contracts
                                  execute.
@200 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    20 orders
                               orders.
@225 milliseconds...........     355              405 contracts
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@250 milliseconds...........     45 contracts     450 contracts
                                  execute.
@350 milliseconds...........     150              600 contracts
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@500 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    30 orders
                               orders.
@1000 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 200   230 orders
                               orders.
@1500 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 200   430 orders
                               orders.
@1700 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 50    480 orders
                               orders.
@2200 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 10    480 orders
                               orders.
@2200 milliseconds..........     300              850 contracts
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@2500 milliseconds..........     500              800 contracts
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
@3050 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 150   410 orders
                               orders.
@3060 milliseconds..........     300              1100 contracts
                                  contracts
                                  execute.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     1100 contract executions over 2 seconds exceeds the
Allowable Contract Execution Rate--triggers RPM
     Once engaged, the System will then reject new orders and
cancel day orders from BD1 until BD1 contacts the Help Desk to request
re-enabling the acceptance of new orders for BD1.
    The Exchange also proposes Interpretation and Policy .01 to provide
that Members may elect to group with other Members to enable the Risk
Protection Monitor to apply collectively to the group.\11\ The Members
in the group must designate a group owner. Specifically, Members may
elect to group with other Members to enable the Risk Protection Monitor
to apply collectively to the group, provided that either: (i) There is
at least 75% common ownership between the firms as reflected on each
firm's Form BD, Schedule A; or (ii) there is written authorization
signed by all Members in the group and the group owner maintains
exclusive control of all orders sent to the Exchange from each MPID
within the group.\12\ A Member may also elect to group with the
Member's clearing firm.\13\ A clearing firm may also elect to group
several Members to enable the Risk Protection Monitor to apply
collectively to the group with the clearing firm designated as the
group owner, provided that the clearing firm serves as the clearing
firm for all the MPIDs of the group and there is written authorization
signed by the clearing firm and each Member of the group. A clearing
firm that has grouped several Members may only receive warning messages
pursuant to Interpretation and Policy .03 of this Rule, unless one
Member of the group maintains exclusive control of all orders routed
through all MPIDs within the group.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Proposed Rule 519A, Interpretations and Policies .01.
    \12\ See Proposed Rule 519A, Interpretations and Policies
.01(a).
    \13\ See Proposed Rule 519A, Interpretations and Policies
.01(b).
    \14\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the threshold of at least 75% common
ownership between the firms as reflected on each firm's Form BD,
Schedule A, is reasonable and appropriate for determining adequate
affiliation between two or more Member firms. The Exchange notes that
this threshold level has been widely adopted by options exchanges in
the context of aggregated trading volume of affiliated firms for volume
based fee/rebate programs.\15\ The written authorization and exclusive
control requirement helps ensure that the Risk Protection Monitor does
not apply to Members in a group or orders without adequate permission
in the manner that is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, and to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transaction in securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See e.g., MIAX Options Fee Schedule, Sections 1)a)i),
1)a)iii); CBOE Fees Schedule, p. 3 (Volume Incentive Program), p. 13
(Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale), p. 13 [sic] (Clearing Trading
Permit Holder Fee Cap); NASDAQ Options Market, Chapter XV, Section
2(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Risk Protection Monitor for groups will operate in the same
manner as described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of Proposed Rule 519A,
except that: (i) The counting program will count the number of orders
entered and the number of contracts traded resulting

from an order entered by all MPIDs in the group collectively; (ii) the
System will trigger the Risk Protection Monitor when the group
collectively exceeds either the Allowable Order Rate or Allowable
Contract Execution Rate for the group; (iii) once engaged, the Risk
Protection Monitor will then either automatically prevent the System
from receiving any new orders in all series in all classes from each
MPID in the group, and, if designated by the group owner's
instructions, cancel all existing Day orders in all series in all
classes from the group, or send a notification without any further
preventative or cancellation action by the System; and (iv) only the
designated group owner may request through the Help Desk to enable the
acceptance of new orders for all the Members of the group.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Proposed Rule 519A, Interpretations and Policies
.01(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following examples show how the proposed Risk Protection
Monitor would operate for groups.
    Example 4.
    BD1, BD2, BD3 elect to group with each other, with BD1 as the group
owner. BD1, BD2, BD3 designate the following settings:
    1. Allowable Order Rate = 500 orders/per 2 second. Reject new
orders.
    2. Allowable Contract Execution Rate = 1000 contracts/per 2
seconds. Reject new orders and cancel day orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Time                   Event              Count total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
@100 milliseconds...........  BD1 enters 10    10 orders
                               orders.
@110 milliseconds...........     50 contracts     50 contracts
                                  execute.
@200 milliseconds...........  BD2 enters 10    20 orders
                               orders.
@225 milliseconds...........     355              405 contracts
                                  contracts
                                  execute for
                                  BD1.
@250 milliseconds...........     45 contracts     450 contracts
                                  execute for
                                  BD2.
@350 milliseconds...........     150              600 contracts
                                  contracts
                                  execute for
                                  BD1.
@500 milliseconds...........  BD3 enters 10    30 orders
                               orders.
@1000 milliseconds..........  BD1 enters 200   230 orders
                               orders.
@1500 milliseconds..........  BD2 enters 200   430 orders
                               orders.
@1700 milliseconds..........  BD3 enters 50    480 orders
                               orders.
@2000 milliseconds..........  BD3 enters 50    530 orders
                               orders.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     530 orders over 2 seconds exceeds the Allowable Order Rate
for the group--triggers the RPM
     Once engaged, the System will reject new orders from BD1,
BD2, BD3 until BD1 contacts the Help Desk to request re-enabling the
acceptance of new orders from BD1, BD2, BD3.
     Orders on the book, may continue to trade.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               300 contracts
     @2200 milliseconds       execute for BD3        850 contracts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
@2200 milliseconds..........  300 contracts    850 contracts.
                               execute for
                               BD3.
@2500 milliseconds..........  500 contracts    800 contracts.
                               execute for
                               BD2.
@3000 milliseconds..........  300 contracts    1100 contracts.
                               execute for
                               BD1.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     1100 contract executions over 2 seconds exceeds the
Allowable Contract Execution Rate for the group--triggers RPM
     Once engaged, the System will then reject new orders and
cancel day orders from BD1, BD2, BD3 until BD1 contacts the Help Desk
to request re-enabling the acceptance of new orders for BD1, BD2, BD3.
    Example 5.
    BD1 elects to group with their clearing firm CC1, with CC1 as the
group owner. BD1, CC1 designate the following settings:
    1. Allowable Order Rate = 500 orders/per 2 second. Reject new
orders.
    2. Allowable Contract Execution Rate = 1000 contracts/per 2
seconds. Reject new orders and cancel day orders.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Time                                Event                            Count total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@100 milliseconds........................  BD1 enters 10 orders.........  10 orders.
@110 milliseconds........................     50 contracts execute......     50 contracts.
@200 milliseconds........................  BD1 enters 10 orders.........  20 orders.
@225 milliseconds........................     355 contracts execute.....     405 contracts.
@250 milliseconds........................     45 contracts execute......     450 contracts.
@350 milliseconds........................     150 contracts execute.....     600 contracts.
@500 milliseconds........................  BD1 enters 10 orders.........  30 orders.
@1000 milliseconds.......................  BD1 enters 200 orders........  230 orders.
@1500 milliseconds.......................  BD1 enters 200 orders........  430 orders.
@1700 milliseconds.......................  BD1 enters 50 orders.........  480 orders.
@2200 milliseconds.......................  BD1 enters 10 orders.........  480 orders.
@2200 milliseconds.......................     300 contracts execute.....     850 contracts.
@2500 milliseconds.......................     500 contracts execute.....     800 contracts.
@3050 milliseconds.......................  BD1 enters 150 orders........  410 orders.
@3060 milliseconds.......................     300 contracts execute.....     1100 contracts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     1100 contract executions over 2 seconds exceeds the
Allowable Contract Execution Rate--triggers RPM
     Once engaged, the System will then reject new orders and
cancel day orders from BD1 until CC1 contacts the Help Desk to request
re-enabling the acceptance of new orders from BD1.

    The Exchange believes that the ability for affiliated Members to
collectively monitor and manage their risk from excessive order or
execution rates that may be caused by a system error or market event,
will provide a valuable risk management tool for such Members that have
shared order exposure and execution risk across affiliated entities.
The Exchange believes that allowing Members to group with their
clearing firm will help both Members and clearing firms monitor and
manage order exposure and execution risk that may be caused from a
system or other error or market event in a manner that removes
impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, protects investors and the
public interest.
    The Exchange proposes Interpretation and Policy .02 to provide that
PRIME Orders, PRIME Solicitation Orders \17\ and GTC Orders do not
participate in the Risk Protection Monitor. However, the System does
include such PRIME Orders, PRIME Solicitation Orders and GTC Orders in
the counting program for purposes of this Rule. PRIME Orders, PRIME
Solicitation Orders and Customer-to-Customer Orders will each be
counted as two orders for the purpose of calculating the Allowable
Order Rate. Once engaged, the Risk Protection Monitor will not cancel
any existing PRIME Orders, PRIME Solicitation Orders, AOC orders, OPG
orders, or GTC orders. PRIME Orders, PRIME Solicitation Orders and GTC
Orders will remain in the System available for trading when the Risk
Protection Monitor is engaged.\18\ The Exchange believes the proposed
treatment of PRIME Orders, PRIME Solicitation Orders, AOC orders, OPG
orders, and GTC Orders is an equitable approach to handling the unique
characteristics of these order types within the Risk Protection Monitor
mechanism. Separately, the Exchange believes the proposed treatment of
paired orders in the form of PRIME Orders and PRIME Solicitation Orders
processed pursuant to Rule 515A versus standard Agency Orders processed
pursuant to Rule 515, is an equitable approach to handling the unique
characteristics of PRIME Orders and PRIME Solicitation Orders within
the Risk Protection Monitor mechanism. The Exchange notes that PRIME
Orders submitted pursuant to Rule 515A by operation of the ``stop''
have been guaranteed an execution at the time of acceptance into the
System; therefore, the Exchange does not believe that such orders
should be cancelled when the Risk Protection Monitor is engaged, since
the execution effectively already happened. In contrast, standard
Agency Orders that a Member is representing as a principal are
processed according to Rule 515 in the same manner as other incoming
orders and are not been guaranteed an execution at the time of
acceptance in the System, thus the Exchange believes that standard
Agency Orders should be treated the same as other orders and be subject
to the protections of the Risk Protection Monitor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The terms ``PRIME Order'' and ``PRIME Solicitation Order''
refer to a two-sided paired order that consists of both an Agency
Order and a Contra-side Order that is submitted to the Exchange
pursuant to Rule 515A.
    \18\ See Proposed Rule 519A, Interpretations and Policies .02.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes Interpretation and Policy .03 to provide that
Members may elect to receive warning notifications indicating that a
specific percentage of an Allowable Order Rate or an Allowable Contract
Execution Rate has been met.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Proposed Rule 519A, Interpretations and Policies .03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes Interpretation and Policy .04 to provide that
at the request of a Member or in order to maintain a fair and orderly
market the Help Desk may pause and restart the specified time period
used by the counting program or clear and reset any calculated
Allowable Order Rate or Allowable Contract Execution Rate.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Proposed Rule 519A, Interpretations and Policies .04.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 612 to codify existing
functionality regarding the Aggregate Risk Manager to provide
additional transparency in the Rule to Members regarding the current
functionality. Currently, the Rule provides that after the System
engages the Aggregate Risk Manager, that the Aggregate Risk Manager
will automatically remove the Market Maker's quotations from the
Exchange's disseminated quotation in all series of that particular
option class until the Market Maker submits a new revised quotation.
However, submitting a new revised quotation alone is not currently
enough in this situation. The Market Maker must also send a
notification to the System of the intent to reengage quoting. The
Exchange proposes to amend the Rule to codify this additional
requirement, of sending a notification to the System of the intent to
reengage quoting, in order to eliminate potential confusion on behalf
of Market Makers. In addition, the Exchange proposes to adopt a new
Interpretation and Policy .01 to Rule 612 to codify existing
functionality regarding the Aggregate Risk Manager to provide
additional transparency in the Rule to Members regarding the current
functionality. The Exchange proposes to specify that eQuotes do not
participate in the Aggregate Risk Manager. An eQuote is a quote with a
specific time in force that does not automatically cancel and replace a
previous Standard quote or eQuote. An eQuote can be cancelled by the
Market Maker at any time, or can be replaced by another eQuote that
contains specific instructions to cancel an existing eQuote.\21\ The
System does not include contracts traded through the use of an eQuote
in the counting program for purposes of this Rule. eQuotes will remain
in the System available for trading when the Aggregate Risk Manager is
engaged.\22\ The proposed changes to the Aggregate Risk Manager are
designed to protect investors and the public interest by codifying the
protections that apply to quotation orders that help Market Makers
avoid quotation activity that exceeds their established risk thresholds
on the Exchange. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed
amendment removes impediments to and perfects the mechanisms of a free
and open market and a national market system and, in general, protects
investors and the public interest by helping to eliminate potential
confusion on behalf of Market Makers by clearly stating the System's
functionality with regard to quotations that trigger the Aggregate Risk
Manager protections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Rule 517(a)(2).
    \22\ See Proposed Rule 612, Interpretations and Policies .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    MIAX believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act \23\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \24\ 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, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that Members will benefit from the proposed
new Risk Protection Monitor. Members are vulnerable to the risk from
system or other error or a market event, that may

cause them to send a large number of orders or receive multiple,
automatic executions before they can adjust their order exposure in the
market. Without adequate risk management tools, such as the Risk
Protection Monitor, Members could reduce the amount of order flow and
liquidity that they provide to the market. Such actions may undermine
the quality of the markets available to customers and other market
participants. Accordingly, the proposed Risk Protection Monitor is
designed to encourage Members to submit additional order flow and
liquidity to the Exchange, thereby removing impediments to and perfect
the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system
and, in general, protecting investors and the public interest. In
addition, providing Members with more tools for managing risk will
facilitate transactions in securities because, as noted above, the
Members will have more confidence that protections are in place that
reduce the risks from potential system errors and market events. As a
result, the new functionality has the potential to promote just and
equitable principles of trade.
    The written authorization and exclusive control requirement helps
ensure that the Risk Protection Monitor does not apply to Members in a
group or orders without adequate permission in the manner that is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, and
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transaction in securities. The Exchange believes the
proposed treatment of PRIME Orders, PRIME Solicitation Orders, AOC
orders, OPG orders, and GTC Orders is an equitable approach to handling
the unique characteristics of these order types within the Risk
Protection Monitor mechanism. Further, the Exchange believes the
proposed treatment of paired orders in the form of PRIME Orders and
PRIME Solicitation Orders processed pursuant to Rule 515A versus
standard Agency Orders processed pursuant to Rule 515, is an equitable
approach to handling the unique characteristics of Agency Orders within
the Risk Protection Monitor mechanism.
    The proposed changes to the Aggregate Risk Manager are designed to
protect investors and the public interest by codifying the protections
that apply to quotations that help Market Makers avoid executions from
quotation activity that exceeds their established risk thresholds on
the Exchange. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed
amendment removes impediments to and perfects the mechanisms of a free
and open market and a national market system and, in general, protects
investors and the public interest by helping to eliminate potential
confusion on behalf of Market Makers by clearly stating the System's
functionality with regard to quotations that trigger the Aggregate Risk
Manager protections.

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. Rather, the Exchange believes
that the new Risk Protection Monitor help promote fair and order
markets. The Exchange believes the proposed changes will not impose any
burden on intra-market competition because the use of the Risk
Protection Monitor is voluntary and is available to all Members. The
Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues
who offer similar functionality. As to inter-market competition, the
Exchange believes that the proposed risk protections should promote
competition for such functionality that is designed to protect market
participants from system errors or market events that may cause them to
send a large number of orders or receive multiple, automatic executions
before they can adjust their order exposure in the market.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    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 Exchange 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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, 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-MIAX-2015-03 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-MIAX-2015-03. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices 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-MIAX-2015-03,
and should be submitted on or before February 18, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01510 Filed 1-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

<META name="generator" content="PDFCreactiveX HTML Export">
<META name="creation-date" content="24/04/2008 07:35:40 ">
<TITLE></TITLE>


[Federal Register: August 19, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 159)]
[Notices]
[Page 41955]
[DOCID:fr19au09-101]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60496; File No. PCAOB-2008-05]

Public Company Accounting Oversight Board; Order Approving
Proposed Rules on Succeeding to the Status of a Predecessor Firm

August 13, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On August 4, 2008, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(the ``Board'' or the ``PCAOB'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') proposed rules (File No. PCAOB-2008-05)
on succeeding to the status of a predecessor firm, pursuant to Section
107 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the ``Act''). Notice of the
proposed rules was published in the Federal Register on June 18,
2009.\1\ The Commission did not receive any comment letters relating to
this rule proposal. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is
granting approval of the proposed rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Release No. 34-60108 (June 12, 2009); 74 FR 29005 (June
18, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    On July 28, 2008, the Board adopted rules and submitted to the
Commission a rule proposal consisting of two new rules (PCAOB Rules
2108-2109) and a new form, Form 4, related to succeeding to the
registration status of a predecessor firm. The proposed rules allow, in
certain circumstances, a registered public accounting firm's
registration status to continue with a firm that survives a merger or
other change in the registered firm's legal form. If approved by the
Commission, the rules on succession reporting would take effect 60 days
after Commission approval. For firms that had a change in legal form,
or that resulted from an acquisition or combination, in the period
between the firm's registration and the effective date of the rules,
those firms will be required to report the change on Form 4 within 14
days after the Commission's approval date.
    The proposed rules provide the opportunity for continuity of a
firm's registration in two categories: (1) changes related to a firm's
legal form of organization or jurisdiction; and (2) transactions in
which a registered firm is acquired by an unregistered entity or
combines with other entities to form a new legal entity. The events to
which the rules apply are events for which a firm plans, not
unanticipated events to which a firm reacts. The proposed rules are
designed to facilitate a firm's ability to factor into its planning,
and to predict with certainty, whether and how continuity of
registration can be maintained.
    The proposed rules set a deadline of 14 days for a firm to file a
report on Form 4, and require certain information and representations
in the form. If the firm files the form within the required timeframe,
provides the required representations, and certifies that all required
information is included, then continuity of registration is automatic,
without the need for separate Board action. The rules and Form 4 also
build in safeguards to ensure that the Form 1 registration process is
not circumvented in circumstances where that process is more
appropriate than Form 4 succession.

III. Discussion

    The Commission did not receive any comment letters relating to the
rule proposal.

IV. Conclusion

    The Commission finds that the proposed PCAOB rules on succeeding to
the registration status of a predecessor firm are consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the securities laws and are necessary or
appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 107 of the Act and
Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, that proposed PCAOB Rules on
Succeeding to the Registration Status of a Predecessor Firm (File No.
PCAOB-2008-05) be and hereby are approved.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-19839 Filed 8-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8307-8308]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03158]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2014-0926, FRL-9922-92-OSWER]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Facility Ground-Water Monitoring Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), Facility Ground-Water
Monitoring Requirements (EPA ICR No. 0959.15, OMB Control No. 2050-
0033) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on
specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described
below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently
approved through May 31, 2015. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 20, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2014-0926, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Vyas, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that
the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this
ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in
person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is
202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket,
visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) creates a comprehensive program for the safe management of
hazardous waste. Section 3004 of RCRA requires owners and operators of
facilities that treat,

store, or dispose of hazardous waste to comply with standards
established by EPA that are to protect the environment. Section 3005
provides for implementation of these standards under permits issued to
owners and operators by EPA or authorized States. Section 3005 also
allows owners and operators of facilities in existence when the
regulations came into effect to comply with applicable notice
requirements to operate until a permit is issued or denied. This
statutory authorization to operate prior to permit determination is
commonly known as ``interim status.'' Owners and operators of interim
status facilities also must comply with standards set under Section
3004.
    This ICR examines the ground-water monitoring standards for
permitted and interim status facilities at 40 CFR parts 264 and 265, as
specified. The ground-water monitoring requirements for regulated units
follow a tiered approach whereby releases of hazardous contaminants are
first detected (detection monitoring), then confirmed (compliance
monitoring), and if necessary, are required to be cleaned up
(corrective action). Each of these tiers requires collection and
analysis of ground-water samples. Owners or operators that conduct
ground-water monitoring are required to report information to the
oversight agencies on releases of contaminants and to maintain records
of ground-water monitoring data at their facilities. The goal of the
ground-water monitoring program is to prevent and quickly detect
releases of hazardous contaminants to groundwater, and to establish a
program whereby any contamination is expeditiously cleaned up as
necessary to protect human health and environment.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are Business or other for-profit; and State, Local, or
Tribal Governments.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (RCRA 3004).
    Estimated number of respondents: 818.
    Frequency of response: Quarterly, semi-annually, and annually.
    Total estimated burden: 84,391 hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $18,322,083, which includes $3,770,485
annualized labor costs and $14,551,598 annualized capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The burden hours are likely to stay
substantially the same.

     Dated: February 2, 2015.
Barnes Johnson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2015-03158 Filed 2-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 164)]
[Notices]
[Page 48626]
[DOCID:fr24au07-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-578-000]

CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission Corporation;
Notice of Tariff Filing

August 20, 2007.
    Take notice that on August 15, 2007, CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi
River Transmission Corporation (MRT) tendered for filing as part of its
FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, Sixth Revised Sheet No.
252 effective September 15, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-16748 Filed 8-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 11, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27251-27253]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11484]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0164]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Coughlin Wedding Fireworks, Lake St. Clair, Harrison
Township, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake St. Clair, Harrison Township, MI. This safety zone is intended to
restrict vessels from a portion of Lake St. Clair during the Coughlin
Wedding Fireworks.

DATES: This rule is effective from 10 p.m. through 10:20 p.m. on July
2, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0164 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0164 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail LT Katie Stanko, Prevention Department,
Sector Detroit, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because waiting for a notice and comment
period to run would be impracticable and contrary to the public
interest because it would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect
the public from the hazards associated with maritime fireworks
displays.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because it would inhibit the Coast Guard from ensuring the safety of
vessels and the public during the fireworks display.

Background and Purpose

    On July 2, 2011, a private party is holding a land based wedding
that will include fireworks launched from a point on Lake St. Clair.
This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels
and spectators from hazards associated with that fireworks display.
Such hazards include obstructions to the waterway that may cause marine
casualties, explosive danger of fireworks, debris falling into the
water

that may cause death, serious bodily harm or property damage.
Establishing a safety zone to control vessel movement around the
location of the launch platform will help ensure the safety of persons
and property in the vicinity of this event and help minimize the
associated risks.

Discussion of Rule

    A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
spectators and vessels during the setup, loading, and launching of the
Coughlin Wedding Fireworks Display. The fireworks display will occur
between 10 p.m. and 10:20 p.m., July 2, 2011.
    The safety zone will encompass all waters on Lake St. Clair within
a 300 foot radius of the fireworks barge launch site located off the
shore of Harrison Township, MI at position 42[deg]34'52'' N,
082[deg]47'12'' W from 10 p.m. until 10:20 p.m. on July 2, 2011. All
geographic coordinates are North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene
representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit
or his designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or
his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone around the launch platform will
be relatively small and exist for only a minimal time. Thus,
restrictions on vessel movement within any particular area of Lake St.
Clair are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover,
vessels may still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the
Captain of the Port.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: the owners and operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in this portion of Lake St. Clair between 10 p.m.
through 10:20 p.m. on July 2, 2011.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because vessels can easily transit
around the zone. The Coast Guard will give notice to the public via a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners that the regulation is in effect.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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 rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have Tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of
the Instruction because it involves the establishment of a temporary
safety zone. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination will be available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR Part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add 165.T09-0164 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.  T09-0164 Safety zone; Coughlin Wedding Fireworks, Lake St.
Clair, Harrison Township, MI.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all U. S. navigable
waters on Lake St. Clair within a 300-foot radius of the fireworks
barge launch site located off the shore of Harrison Township, MI at
position 42[deg]34'52'' N, 082[deg]47'12'' W. All geographic
coordinates are North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
    (b) Effective and enforcement period. This rule is effective and
will be enforced from 10 p.m. through 10:20 p.m. on July 2, 2011.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Detroit, or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been
designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-
scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or
his designated on scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so.
    (5) Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the
Captain of the Port or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: April 26, 2011.
E.J. Marohn,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2011-11484 Filed 5-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: January 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 19)]
[Notices]
[Page 4913-4916]
[DOCID:fr30ja06-50]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0555; FRL-7758-9]

Review of Chemical Proposals for Addition under the Stockholm
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants; Solicitation of
Information for the Development of Risk Profiles

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice solicits information relevant to the development
of risk profiles pursuant to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants (POPs Convention) for the following chemicals which
are being reviewed for possible addition to the POPs Convention's
Annexes A, B, and/or C as POPs: Hexabromobiphenyl (HBB) (CAS No. 36355-
01-8); pentabromodiphenyl ether (PBDE) (CAS No. 32534-81-9);
chlordecone (CAS No. 143-50-0); lindane (CAS No. 58-89-9); and
perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). EPA is issuing this notice to alert
interested and potentially affected persons of these proposals and the
status of their review under the POPs Convention, and to encourage such
persons to provide information relevant to the development of risk
profiles under Article 8 and Annex E of the POPs Convention.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0555, by one of the following methods.
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO, EPA East
Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0555. 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<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-

2005-0555. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' systems,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov your
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information
is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically through regulations.gov or in
hard copy at the OPPT Docket, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Rm.
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
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
OPPT Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby
Linter, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    For technical information contact: Amy Breedlove, Chemical Control
Division, (7405M), Office Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
particular interest to chemical substance and pesticide manufacturers,
importers, and processors. Since other entities may also be interested,
the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that
may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed CBI. In addition to one complete
version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy
of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so
marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set
forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Procedures for preparing confidential information related to
pesticides and industrial chemicals are in Unit I.B.1. Send
confidential information about industrial chemicals using the
submission procedures under ADDRESSES. Send confidential information
about pesticides to: Cathleen McInerney Barnes, International Programs
Manager, Office of Pesticide Programs (7506C), Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC 20460-0001 or hand delivered to: Cathleen
Barnes, Government and International Services Branch, Office of
Pesticide Programs, Rm. 1104G, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 Bell St.,
Arlington, VA.
    3. Commenters should note that none of the CBI information received
by EPA will be forwarded to the POPs Secretariat. Information from
submissions containing CBI may be incorporated into larger products by
EPA but CBI will be masked in any such products.
    4. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at the estimate.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggested alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

    The POPs Convention is a multilateral environmental agreement
designed to protect human health and the environment from POPs. The
United States signed the POPs Convention in May of 2001 but has not yet
ratified it (and thus is not a Party to the POPs Convention). The POPs
Convention, which went into force in May of 2004, requires the Parties
to reduce or eliminate the production and use of a number of
intentionally produced POPs used as pesticides or industrial chemicals.
The POPs Convention also calls upon Parties to take certain specified
measures to reduce releases of certain unintentionally produced POPs
with the goal of their continuing minimization and, where feasible,
ultimate elimination. It also imposes controls on the handling of POPs
wastes and on trade in POPs chemicals. In addition, there are specific
science-based procedures that Parties to the POPs Convention must use
when adding new chemicals to the POPs Convention's Annexes.

    The first meeting of the committee that reviews proposals for
listing of new chemicals, called the POPs Review Committee (POPRC),
took place November 7-11, 2005, in Geneva, Switzerland. Information
about the POPs Convention and the November POPRC meeting is available
at the POPs Convention website at http://www.pops.int and http://www.pops.int/documents/meetings/poprc
, respectively. The POPRC had

Parties to the POPs Convention, for addition to Annexes A, B, and/or C
of the POPs Convention. Three of the five proposals were for industrial
chemicals:
     PBDE.
     HBB.
     PFOS.
Two of the five proposals were for pesticides:
     Lindane.
     Chlordecone.
    In accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 8 of the POPs
Convention, during the November meeting POPRC examined the proposals
and applied the screening criteria in Annex D of the POPs Convention
(``Information Requirements and Screening Criteria''). With regard to
all five chemicals, POPRC decided that it was satisfied that the
screening criteria had been fulfilled and that further work should
therefore be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the POPs
Convention.
    The next step in the process is for POPRC to prepare a risk profile
for each of the chemicals to, as noted in Annex E of the POPs
Convention, ``evaluate whether the chemical is likely, as a result of
its long-range environmental transport, to lead to significant adverse
human health and/or environmental effects, such that global action is
warranted.'' The risk profile must further evaluate and elaborate on
the information referred to in Annex D of the POPs Convention and
include, as far as possible, the information listed in Annex E of the
POPs Convention (``Information Requirements for the Risk Profile''). A
draft outline of the risk profile has been developed by POPRC,
available at http://www.pops.int/documents/meetings/poprc. As requested

by POPRC through the POPs Convention Secretariat, the risk profile will
take into account information to be submitted by Parties and Observers
(the current step). If, on the basis of the risk profile, POPRC decides
that the chemical is likely, as a result of its long-range
environmental transport, to lead to significant adverse human health
and/or environmental effects, such that global action is warranted, it
will proceed to develop a risk management evaluation. This will include
an analysis of the possible control measures as well as the socio-
economic considerations, and at that stage information relating to
socio-economic considerations will be requested from Parties and
Observers. See Annex F of the POPs Convention (``Information on Socio-
economic Considerations'').

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    The Agency is issuing this notice to increase awareness of the
proposals concerning the chemicals, and to provide interested persons
with an opportunity to provide relevant information. The POPs
Convention Secretariat's invitation to submit information states that
the POPs Convention Secretariat is only accepting responses from
Parties and Observers. The United States is an Observer. EPA is
requesting that any information be submitted to EPA no later than
February 14, 2006. The United States intends to make an initial
submission by January 27, 2006, to meet the POPs Secretariat's
deadline. However, EPA also plans to make a second submission, as
appropriate, based on information resulting from this notice on or
about mid-to-late February 2006. In addition, EPA will consider the
information during its review of the risk profiles developed by the
POPRC in the coming months. Individuals or organizations that wish to
submit information directly to the POPs Convention Secretariat should
work through their respective observer organizations, if any.

B. What Information is Being Requested?

    The EPA is seeking information that is supplementary to the
information in the proposals on the chemicals and POPRC's evaluation of
the proposals against Annex D of the POPs Convention's screening
criteria. The proposals and the evaluations are available at the POPs
Convention website at http://www.pops.int/documents/meetings/poprc/default.htm
.

    EPA has previously solicited information through the Lindane
Reregistration Eligibility Document (RED) and through its participation
in the draft North American Regional Action Plan (NARAP) on Lindane and
other Hexachlorocyclohexane Isomers. Consequently, EPA is only
interested in any new information on lindane that may have been
developed since those activities.
    Commenters are invited to provide information they deem relevant to
POPRC's development of risk profiles, such as that specified in Annex E
of the POPs Convention and other related information, as described
below:
    1. Sources, including as appropriate:
    i. Production data, including quantity and location.
    ii. Uses.
    iii. Releases, such as discharges, losses, and emissions.
    2. Hazard assessment for the endpoint or endpoints of concern (as
identified in the proposals and/or POPRC's evaluation of the proposals
against the screening criteria of Annex D of the POPs Convention),
including a consideration of toxicological interactions involving
multiple chemicals.
    3. Environmental fate, including data and information on the
chemical and physical properties of a chemical as well as its
persistence and how they are linked to its environmental transport,
transfer within and between environmental compartments, degradation,
and transformation to other chemicals. (POPRC is to make a
determination of the bioconcentration factor or bio-accumulation
factor, based on measured values, available, except when monitoring
data are judged to meet this need.)
    4. Monitoring data.
    5. Exposure in local areas and, in particular, as a result of long-
range environmental transport, and including information regarding bio-
availability.
    In addition, POPRC has identified some additional types of
information on several of the chemicals that would be useful in the
development of the risk profiles. That information can be found in the
Letter of Invitation on the POPs Convention website at http://www.pops.int/documents/meetings/poprc/default.htm
.

C. How Should the Information be Provided?

    1. EPA requests that commenters, where possible, use the form
developed by POPRC to provide their information. The form can be found
on the POPs Convention website at http://www.pops.int/documents/meetings/poprc.
 Commenters are requested to include clear and precise

references for all sources. Without the exact source of the
information, POPRC will not be able to use the information. If the
information is not readily available in the public literature,
commenters may consider attaching the original source of the
information to their submission. Commenters should indicate clearly on
the form which chemical the information concerns and use one form per
chemical. If for some reason the form does not provide an adequate

mechanism for a type of comment or information, EPA requests that such
comment or information be submitted using a similar format; this will
increase the likelihood of the relevant information being considered.
    2. Although POPRC has developed provisional arrangements for the
treatment of confidential information, as mentioned in Unit I.B.3. no
CBI will be forwarded to the POPs Convention Secretariat. EPA will,
however, consider such information in development of the U.S. response
to the POPs Convention Secretariat. Instructions on where and how to
submit comments and confidential information can be found in Unit
I.B.2. and ADDRESSES.
    3. Anyone wishing to have an opportunity to communicate with EPA
orally on this issue should consult the technical person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

D. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    EPA is requesting comment and information under the authority of
section 102(2)(F) of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C.
section 4321 et seq., which directs all agencies of the Federal
Government to ``[r]ecognize the worldwide and long-range character of
environmental problems and, where consistent with the foreign policy of
the United States, lend appropriate support to initiatives, resolutions
and programs designed to maximize cooperation in anticipating and
preventing a decline in the quality of mankind's world environment.''
Section 17(d) of Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) also provides additional support in that it directs the
Administrator of EPA ``in cooperation with the Department of State and
any other appropriate Federal agency, [to] participate and cooperate in
any international efforts to develop improved pesticide research and
regulations.''

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances.

    Dated: January 23, 2006.
Charles M. Auer,
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
[FR Doc. E6-1107 Filed 1-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S