[Federal Register: October 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 205)]
[Notices]
[Page 60398-60400]
[DOCID:fr24oc07-141]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56669; File No. SR-FINRA-2007-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rules Relating to Reporting of Odd-Lot
Transactions to FINRA

October 17, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'')\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 10, 2007, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by FINRA.
FINRA has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-
controversial'' rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to amend its trade reporting rules to change the
manner in which members are required to report odd-lot transactions\5\
to a FINRA Trade Reporting Facility (``TRF''),\6\ the Alternative
Display Facility (``ADF''), and the OTC Reporting Facility (``ORF'')
(referred to herein as the ``FINRA Facilities''). Specifically, FINRA
is proposing to: (1) Eliminate the requirement that members use the
special ``.RO'' trade report modifier to indicate that an odd-lot
transaction is reported in accordance with Section 3 of Schedule A to
the By-Laws (``Section 3''); and (2) require members to report odd-lot
transactions ``for publication,'' i.e., mark reports of odd lots as
``tape eligible,'' as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For purposes of the trade reporting rules, an odd lot is
less than a ``normal unit of trading,'' which is defined as ``100
shares of a security unless, with respect to a particular security,
NASD determines that a normal unit of trading shall constitute other
than 100 shares.'' See NASD Rules 4200, 4200A, 4200C, and 4200E.
    \6\ Effective July 30, 2007, FINRA was formed through the
consolidation of NASD and the member regulatory functions of NYSE
Regulation. Accordingly, the TRFs are now doing business as the
FINRA TRFs (i.e., the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF, the FINRA/NSX TRF, and the
FINRA/NYSE TRF). The formal name change of each TRF is pending, and
once completed FINRA will file a separate proposed rule change to
reflect those changes in the Manual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at FINRA's
principal office, from the Commission's Public Reference Room, and on
FINRA's Web site (http://www.finra.org).

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

    In its filing with the Commission, FINRA 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. FINRA 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
    On June 12, 2006, the Commission approved SR-NASD-2006-055,\7\
which requires members to report to FINRA in an automated manner all
transactions, including odd-lot transactions, that must be reported to
FINRA and that are subject to a regulatory transaction fee pursuant to
Section 3.\8\ Today, with the exception of OTC Equity Securities, odd-
lot transactions are not reported for purposes of public
dissemination;\9\ members report such transactions to FINRA for
regulatory purposes only. In this regard, members are required to
include a special ``.RO'' trade report modifier on reports of odd lots
to denote that the transaction is reported in accordance with Section 3
(the ``.RO Modifier''). FINRA uses the .RO Modifier to identify odd-lot
transactions that are required to be included in FINRA's calculation of
its Section 31 obligation to the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53977 (June 12,
2006), 71 FR 34976 (June 16, 2006) (order approving SR-NASD-2006-
055).
    \8\ Pursuant to Section 31 of the Act, FINRA and the national
securities exchanges are required to pay transaction fees and
assessments to the Commission that are designed to recover the costs
related to the government's supervision and regulation of the
securities markets and securities professionals. FINRA obtains funds
to pay its Section 31 fees and assessments from its membership, in
accordance with Section 3.
    \9\ See NASD Rules 4632(e) (relating to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF),
4632A(i) (relating to the ADF), 4632C(e) (relating to the NASD/NSX
TRF), and 4632E(f) (relating to the NASD/NYSE TRF). Pursuant to
current NASD Rule 6620, odd-lot transactions in OTC Equity
Securities, as defined in NASD Rule 6110, are required to be
reported to FINRA for purposes of publication.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the implementation of Regulation NMS and a new trade report
messaging format, members are required to include the .RO Modifier on
trade reports of odd-lot transactions in the same information level (or
byte) as other regulatory modifiers. Thus, in certain instances,
members may be faced with prioritizing and determining which modifier
should be included in the trade report submitted to FINRA. This can
lead to confusion, inaccuracies, and inconsistencies in trade reporting
which, in turn, can impair FINRA staff's ability to produce a complete
and accurate audit trail and properly assess transaction-related
fees.\10\ FINRA staff has determined that the .RO Modifier can be
eliminated because the FINRA Facilities can systematically identify
odd-lot transactions from the number of reported shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ FINRA rules require members to use special trade report
modifiers to indicate that away-from-the-market sales (the ``.RA''
modifier) and exercises of OTC options (the ``.RX'' modifier) are
reported in accordance with Section 3. Unlike the .RO Modifier,
these modifiers do not compete with other trade report modifiers.
Accordingly, FINRA is not proposing to eliminate the .RA and .RX
modifiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, FINRA is proposing to amend its trade reporting rules
\11\ to eliminate the requirement that members use the .RO Modifier on
reports of odd-lot transactions. FINRA also is proposing to amend its
trade reporting rules \12\ to require that members report odd-lot
transactions ``for publication'' or as ``tape eligible,'' as
applicable. Thus, members will report odd-lot transactions in the same
manner that they report round-lot transactions today. Although odd-lot
transactions will be marked ``tape eligible'' pursuant to the proposed
rule change, the FINRA Facilities will suppress such transactions from
public dissemination. Today, with the exception of certain OTC Equity
Securities, odd-lot transactions are not publicly disseminated by FINRA
or the appropriate Securities Information Processor.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ NASD Rules 6130(g) (relating to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF and
ORF), 6130A(c) (relating to the ADF), 6130C(f) (relating to the
NASD/NSX TRF), and 6130E(f) (relating to the NASD/NYSE TRF).
    \12\ NASD Rules 4632(e) (relating to the NASD/Nasdaq TRF),
4632A(i) (relating to the ADF), 4632C(e) (relating to the NASD/NSX
TRF), and 4632E(f) (relating to the NASD/NYSE TRF).
    \13\ FINRA currently disseminates trade information relating to
transactions of fewer than 100 shares in certain high-priced OTC
Equity Securities. In some cases, trades in certain high-priced
issues are almost exclusively for fewer than 100 shares and
therefore, without this dissemination policy, trading data for such
issues would be effectively unavailable to market participants. The
proposed rule change does not amend this dissemination policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change will ensure consistency in FINRA's trade
reporting rules applicable to over-the-counter transactions in NMS
stocks and OTC Equity Securities, promote a more complete and accurate
audit trail, and enable FINRA to properly assess applicable
transaction-related fees. FINRA notes that the proposed rule change
will not impose a new requirement that members report odd-lot
transactions, but merely will change the manner in which such
transactions are reported to the FINRA Facilities.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Members should continue to report the offsetting
``riskless'' leg of an odd-lot riskless principal transaction as
they do today, i.e., by submitting a non-tape (or clearing-only)
report, as applicable. See NASD Rules 4632(d)(3)(B) (relating to the
NASD/Nasdaq TRF), 4632A(e)(1)(C)(ii) (relating to the ADF),
4632C(d)(3)(B) (relating to the NASD/NSX TRF), 4632E(e)(3)(B)
(relating to the NASD/NYSE TRF), and 6620(d)(3)(B) (relating to the
ORF).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, FINRA also is proposing certain technical, non-substantive
changes to NASD Rules 6130A(c), 6130C(f), and 6130E(f) to maintain
consistency in the trade reporting rules relating to the FINRA
Facilities to the extent practicable.
    FINRA is filing the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness. FINRA will announce the operative date of the proposed
rule change on its Web site. In recognition of the systems changes that
the proposed rule change

will require, the operative date will be at least 90 days after the
date of filing.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\15\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will
promote a more complete and accurate audit trail and enable FINRA to
properly assess applicable transaction-related fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days after the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission
may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\17\ FINRA believes that the filing is appropriately
designated as ``non-controversial'' because the proposed rule change is
not imposing a new requirement on members to report odd-lot
transactions, but merely is changing the manner in which members must
report such transactions to the FINRA Facilities. In accordance with
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\18\ FINRA submitted written notice of its intent
to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and
text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to
the date of filing.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \18\ 17 CFR 210.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \19\ See e-mail dated August 13, 2007 from Lisa C. Horrigan,
Associate General Counsel, FINRA to Katherine A. England, Assistant
Director, Division of Market Regulation, Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in the furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments:

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-FINRA-2007-017 on the subject line.

Paper comments:

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2007-017. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2007-017 and should be
submitted on or before November 14, 2007.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant
to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-20899 Filed 10-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


May 23, 2012

MEMORANDUM

TO:			Air Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0542

SUBJECT:	Summary of Modeling Inputs and Assumptions for the Notice of Data Availability (NODA) Concerning Renewable Fuels Produced from Grain Sorghum Under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program

This memorandum provides information on the key inputs and assumptions used for modeling the lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with renewable fuel produced from grain sorghum.  Assumptions include energy use, energy sources, fertilizer use, co-product production, and other important factors used in the lifecycle analysis.

Outline of this Document

      I. System Boundaries
      II. Data and Assumptions
            A. Model Modifications
            B. Agriculture Model Assumptions
            C. Volume Scenarios
            D. Grain Sorghum Ethanol Processing
      III. References

I. System Boundaries

The general system boundaries for lifecycle GHG analysis of biofuels under the RFS program were determined as part of the March 26, 2010 final rule (EPA 2010).  Applying these system boundaries to our analysis of ethanol produced from grain sorghum was straightforward because the lifecycle system for grain sorghum ethanol are similar to those of other biofuels that were analyzed in EPA (2010).

This document focuses on our assumptions related to the various stages in the grain sorghum ethanol lifecycle, including fuel and feedstock production and distribution.  To analyze the indirect agricultural and land use change impacts, we used the same agricultural economic models that were used for the final RFS2 rule.  The Forest and Agricultural Sector Optimization Model (FASOM), developed by Professor Bruce McCarl of Texas A&M University and others, provides detailed information on domestic agricultural and greenhouse gas impacts of renewable fuels.  The Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute international models, as maintained by the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development at Iowa State University (FAPRI-CARD), consist of a number of econometric models that are capable of providing detailed information on impacts on international agricultural markets from the wider use of renewable fuels in the U.S.  For more discussion on our use of the FAPRI-CARD model refer to the grain sorghum NODA preamble (EPA 2012).

II. Data and Assumptions

This section includes a summary of key assumptions and data inputs used in our lifecycle GHG assessment of grain sorghum ethanol.  Our analysis considers direct and significant indirect emissions related to the production and use of grain sorghum ethanol.  As such, we also considered GHG emissions impacts related to the production and use of other agricultural commodities (e.g., corn, soybeans) that are indirectly impacted by an increase in grain sorghum ethanol production and use.  For information on the data inputs and assumptions used to evaluate these other aspects of our analysis refer to the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the RFS2 final rule (EPA 2010).

A. Model Modifications

Since the analysis for the RFS2 final rulemaking was completed, there was an update to the land categories defined in the FASOM model with the addition of a new `pasture' category.  All other land use category definitions remain unchanged from the final RFS2 rulemaking.  Updated land use definitions are as follows:

   :: Cropland is actively managed cropland, used for both traditional crops (e.g., corn and soybeans) and dedicated energy crops (e.g., switchgrass).

   :: Cropland pasture is managed pasture land used for livestock production, but which can also be converted to cropland production without additional improvement.

   :: Pasture is land used only for pasture or grazing that cannot be converted into cropland.

   :: Forestland contains a number of sub-categories, tracking the number of acres of private forestland existing at the starting point of the model that remain in standing forests (i.e., have not yet been harvested), the number of acres harvested, the number of harvested acres that are reforested, and the area converted from other land uses (afforested).  Public forestland area is not explicitly tracked because it is assumed to remain constant over time, although exogenous estimates of forest products production from these lands are included in the model

   :: Rangeland is unmanaged land that can be used for livestock grazing production.  While the amount of rangeland idled or used for production may vary, it is assumed that rangeland may not be used for any other purpose than for animal grazing due to its low productivity.  In addition, much of the rangeland in the U.S. is publicly owned.

   :: Developed (urban) land is assumed to have an inherently higher value than land used for any other use.  Thus, the rate of urbanization is assumed to be exogenous based on projections of population and income growth and does not change between the cases analyzed.

   :: Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) refers to land that is voluntarily taken out of crop production and placed in the USDA CRP.  Land in the CRP is generally marginal cropland retired from production and converted to vegetative cover, such as grass, trees, or woody vegetation to conserve soil, improve water quality, enhance wildlife habitat, or produce other environmental benefits.

B. Agriculture Model Assumptions

Major assumptions consistently implemented in the FASOM and FAPRI-CARD models include ethanol conversion yields, and byproduct yields.  In the case of grain sorghum, distiller grains (DG) are the only byproduct from the ethanol conversion.

                                    Table 1
Assumption
Value
Source
Ethanol Yield
2.71 gal/bu
Same value used in RFS2 final rulemaking analysis as corn ethanol
Dried Distillers Grains Yield
17 lbs/bu
Same yield, nutritional value, displacement rates, and inclusion rates as used in the RFS2 final rulemaking analysis as corn ethanol.

All other assumptions, such as fertilizer application rates and energy use, in the FASOM and FAPRI-CARD models are documented in the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the RFS2 final rule (EPA 2010), as well as technical reports for the FASOM (RTI 2010) and FAPRI-CARD (FAPRI-CARD Staff 2010) models in the RFS2 final rule docket.

1. Perfect Substitution between Grain Sorghum and Corn in the U.S. Animal Feed Market

Based on information from industry stakeholders, as well as in consultation with USDA, both the FASOM and FAPRI-CARD models assume perfect substitution in the use of grain sorghum and corn in the animal feed market in the U.S.  Therefore, when more grain sorghum is used for ethanol production, grain sorghum used in feed decreases.  Either additional corn or sorghum will be used in the feed market to make up for this decrease, depending upon the relative cost of additional production.  This assumption is based on conversations with industry and the USDA, reflecting the primary use of sorghum in the U.S. as animal feed, just like corn.

2. Grain Sorghum Production, Trade and Consumption in India and Nigeria

The United States is one of the largest producers and exporters of grain sorghum.  However, two large producers of grain sorghum, India and Nigeria, do not actively participate in the global trade market for sorghum.  Rather, all grain sorghum in those two countries is produced for domestic consumption.  Therefore, as the U.S. diverts some of its exports of grain sorghum for the purposes of ethanol production, we would expect close to no reaction in the production levels of grain sorghum in India and Nigeria.  Historical data on prices, production, and exports from USDA, FAOSTAT, and FAPRI support this assumption.

C. Volume Scenarios

To assess the impacts of an increase in renewable fuel volume from business-as-usual (what is likely to have occurred without the RFS biofuel mandates) to levels required by the statute, we established reference and control cases for a number of biofuels analyzed for the RFS2 final rulemaking.  The reference case includes a projection of renewable fuel volumes without the RFS renewable fuel volume mandates.  The control cases are projections of the volumes of renewable fuel that might be used in the future to comply with the volume mandates.  The final rule reference case volumes were based on the Energy Information Administration's (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2007 reference case projections.  In the RFS2 rule, for each individual biofuel, we analyzed the incremental GHG emission impacts of increasing the volume of that fuel to the total mix of biofuels needed to meet the EISA requirements.

For the analysis of grain sorghum ethanol, a new control case was developed to account for the current production of grain sorghum ethanol which is approximately 200 million gallons per year (see Chapter 1 of the RFS2 RIA).  All other volumes for each individual biofuel in this new control case remain identical to the control case used in the RFS2 rule.  For the "grain sorghum" case, our modeling assumes approximately 300 million gallons of sorghum ethanol would be consumed in the United States in 2022.  The modeled scenario includes 2.06 billion lbs of grain sorghum to be used to produce the additional 100 million gallons of ethanol in 2022.

Our volume scenario of approximately 200 million gallons of grain sorghum ethanol in the new control case, and 300 million gallons in the grain sorghum case in 2022, is based on several factors including historical volumes of grain sorghum ethanol production, potential feedstock availability and other competitive uses (e.g., animal feed or exports).  Based in part on consultation with experts at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and industry representatives, we believe that these volumes are reasonable for the purposes of evaluating the impacts of producing additional volumes of ethanol from grain sorghum.

The FASOM and FAPRI-CARD models, described above, project how much grain sorghum will be supplied to ethanol production from a combination of increased production, decreases in others uses (e.g., animal feed), and decreases in exports, in going from the control case to the grain sorghum case.

D. Grain Sorghum Ethanol Processing

We expect the dry milling process will be the basic production method for producing ethanol from grain sorghum and therefore this is the ethanol production process considered here.  In the dry milling process, the grain sorghum is ground and fermented to produce ethanol.  The remaining DG are then either left wet if used in the near-term or dried for longer term use as animal feed.

For this analysis the amount of grain sorghum used for ethanol production as modeled by the FASOM and FAPRI-CARD models was based on yield assumptions built into those two models.  Specifically, the models assume sorghum ethanol yields of 2.71 gallons per bushel for dry mill plants (yields represents pure ethanol).

As per the analysis done in the RFS2 final rule, the energy consumed and emissions generated by a renewable fuel plant must be allocated not only to the renewable fuel produced, but also to each of the by-products.  For grain sorghum ethanol production, this analysis accounts for the DG co-product use directly in the FASOM and FAPRI-CARD agricultural sector modeling described above.  DG are considered a replacement animal feed and thus reduce the need to make up for the grain sorghum production that went into ethanol production.  Since FASOM takes the production and use of DG into account, no further allocation was needed at the ethanol plant and all plant emissions are accounted for there.

In terms of the energy used at grain sorghum ethanol facilities, significant variation exists among plants with respect to the production process and type of fuel used to provide process energy (e.g., coal versus natural gas).  Variation also exists between the same type of plants using the same fuel source based on the design of the production process such as the technology used to separate the ethanol from the water, the extent to which the DG are dried and whether other co-products are produced.  Such different pathways were considered for ethanol made from corn.  Since for the most part these same production processes are available for ethanol produced from sorghum, our analyses considered a similar set of different production pathways for grain sorghum ethanol production.  Our focus was to differentiate among facilities based on key differences, namely the type of plant and the type of process energy fuel used.

Ethanol production is a relatively resource-intensive process that requires the use of water, electricity, and steam.  In most cases, water and electricity are purchased from the municipality and steam is produced on-site using boilers fired by natural gas, coal, or in some cases, alternative fuels (described in more detail below).

Purchased process fuel and electricity use for grain sorghum ethanol production was based on the energy use information for corn ethanol production from the RFS2 final rule analysis.  For the RFS2 final rule, EPA modeled future plant energy use to represent plants that would be built to meet requirements of increased ethanol production, as opposed to current or historic data on energy used in ethanol production.  The energy use at dry mill ethanol plants was based on ASPEN models developed by USDA and updated to reflect changes in technology out to 2022 as described in the RFS 2 final rule RIA Chapter 1.

The work done on grain ethanol production for the RFS2 final rule was based on converting corn to ethanol.  Converting grain sorghum to ethanol will result in slightly different energy use based on difference in the grains and how they are processed.  For example, grain sorghum has less oil content than corn and therefore requires less processing and mass transfer of the oil which results in a decrease in energy use compared to processing corn to ethanol.  The same ASPEN USDA models used for corn ethanol in the final rule were also developed for grain sorghum ethanol.  Based on the numbers from USDA, a sorghum ethanol plant uses 96.3% of the thermal process energy of a corn ethanol plant (3.7% less), and 99.3% of the electrical energy (0.7% less).

The GHG emissions from production of ethanol from grain sorghum were calculated in the same way as other fuels analyzed as part of the RFS2 final rule.  The GHG emissions were calculated by multiplying the BTUs of the different types of energy inputs at the grain sorghum ethanol plant by emissions factors for combustion of those fuel sources.  The BTU of energy input was determined based on analysis of the industry and work done as part of the RFS2 final rule as well as considering the impact of different technology options on plant energy needs.  The emission factors for the different fuel types are the same as those used in the RFS2 final rule and were based on assumed carbon contents of the different process fuels.  The emissions from producing electricity in the U.S. were also the same as used in the RFS2 final rule, which were taken from the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation Model (GREET) and represent average U.S. grid electricity production emissions.

One of the energy drivers of ethanol production is drying of the DG.  Plants that are co-located with feedlots have the ability to provide the co-product without drying.  This energy use has a large enough impact on overall results in previous analyses that we defined a specific category for wet versus dry co-product as part of the RFS2 final rule.  For grain sorghum ethanol production we also consider wet versus dry DG.  For corn ethanol production, as discussed in the RFS2 final rule, the industry average for wet DG is approximately 37%.  Industry provided data that approximately 92% of grain sorghum DG is wet.  However, in the case of grain sorghum ethanol production, the current data shows that energy used for DG drying does not change whether a facility meets the 20% GHG emission threshold (conventional renewable fuel) or the 50% GHG emission threshold (advanced renewable fuel).  The amount of btu per gallon of ethanol produced for processes where DG are dried, and where they are not, can be found in Table 2 below.

For this NODA, we analyzed several combinations of different advanced process technologies and fuels to determine their impacts on lifecycle GHG emissions from grain sorghum ethanol.  As noted above, many of the same technologies that were considered as part of the RFS2 final rule for corn ethanol can also be applied to grain sorghum ethanol production.  Based on discussion with industry, we understand there is interest in building grain sorghum ethanol plants which incorporate such advanced technologies.  Therefore, as was the case with corn ethanol in the RFS2 final rule, our intent is to provide different processing technology options that producers could use to meet the lifecycle threshold requirements required by EISA.  This section describes the different GHG impacts associated with alternative processing technology and fuel options and outlines specific process pathways that would be needed to meet different GHG threshold requirements.  If finalized, these pathways would allow producers to use the updated Table 1 in Section 80.1426 to determine whether their combination of technologies and process fuels would allow them to qualify as an advanced grain sorghum ethanol pathway.

Several technologies and fuel choices affect emissions from process energy use.  Fuel choice has a significant impact on process energy emissions; switching from natural gas to biogas, for example, will reduce lifecycle GHG emissions by approximately 20 percentage points.  Another factor that influences GHG impacts from process energy use is the percentage of DG that is dried.  If a plant is able to reduce the amount of DG it dries, process energy use, and therefore GHG emissions, decrease.  The impact of going from 100% dry DG to 100% wet DG is larger for natural gas plants (approximately a 10% reduction in overall GHG emissions relative to the petroleum baseline) compared to biogas plants because biogas plants already have low emissions from process energy.

Production facilities that utilize combined heat and power (CHP) systems can also reduce GHG emissions relative to less efficient system configurations.  CHP, also known as cogeneration, is a mechanism for improving overall plant efficiency by using a single fuel to generate both power and thermal energy.  The most common configuration in ethanol plants involves using the boiler to power a turbine generator unit that produces electricity, and using waste heat to produce process steam.  While the thermal energy demand for an ethanol plant using CHP technology is slightly higher than that of a conventional plant, the additional energy used is far less than what would be required to produce the same amount of electricity in an offsite (central) power plant.  The increased efficiency is due to the ability of the ethanol plant to effectively utilize the waste heat from the electricity generation process.

In addition to CHP (or sometimes in combination), a growing number of ethanol producers are turning to alternative fuel sources to replace traditional boiler fuels (i.e., natural gas and coal), to improve their carbon footprint and/or become more self-sustainable.  Alternative boiler fuels currently used or being pursued by the ethanol industry include biomass, co-products from the ethanol production process (bran, thin stillage or syrup), manure biogas (methane from nearby animal feedlots), and landfill gas (generated from the digestion of municipal solid waste).  The CO2 emissions from biomass combustion as a process fuel source are not specifically shown in the lifecycle GHG inventory of the biofuel production plant; rather, CO2 emissions from biomass use are accounted for as part of the land use change calculations for each feedstock.

Since CHP technologies on natural gas plants reduce purchased electricity but increase process energy use emissions (because of increased natural gas use on-site), the net result is a small reduction in overall emissions.  CHP at biogas facilities result in greater reductions since the increased biogas use for electricity production does not result in significant increases in on-site emissions.

Although not exhaustive, Table 2 shows the amount of process fuel and purchased electricity used at a grain sorghum ethanol facility for the different technology and fuel options in terms of Btu/gal of ethanol produced.

Table 2. Process Fuel and Electricity Options at Grain Sorghum Ethanol Facilities
                      (Btu / Gallon of Ethanol Produced)
Fuel Type and Technology
                                Natural Gas Use
                                  Biogas Use
                                   Coal Use
                             Purchased Electricity
Sorghum Ethanol  -
Dry Mill Natural Gas

No CHP, 100% Wet DG
                                    16,449

                                     2,235
Yes CHP, 100% Wet DG
                                    18,605

                                      508
No CHP, 92% Wet DG
                                    17,341

                                     2,235
Yes CHP, 92% Wet DG
                                    19,497

                                      508
No CHP, 0% Wet DG
                                    27,599

                                     2,235
Yes CHP, 0% Wet DG
                                    29,755

                                      508

Sorghum Ethanol  -
Dry Mill Biogas

No CHP, 100% Wet DG

                                    16,449

                                     2,235
Yes CHP, 100% Wet DG

                                    18,605

                                      508
No CHP, 92% Wet DG

                                    17,341

                                     2,235
Yes CHP, 92% Wet DG

                                    19,497

                                      508
No CHP, 0% Wet DG

                                    27,599

                                     2,235
Yes CHP, 0% Wet DG

                                    29,755

                                      508

Sorghum Ethanol  -
Dry Mill Coal

No CHP, 100% Wet DG

                                    20,561
                                     2,675
Yes CHP, 100% Wet DG

                                    24,011
                                      203
No CHP, 92% Wet DG

                                    21,676
                                     2,675
Yes CHP, 92% Wet DG

                                    25,126
                                      203
No CHP, 0% Wet DG

                                    34,499
                                     2,675
Yes CHP, 0% Wet DG

                                    37,949
                                      203

III. References

Food and Agricultural Policy and Research Institute international models as maintained by the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development at Iowa State University (FAPR-CARD) Staff. 2010. Technical Report: An Analysis of EPA Renewable Fuel Scenarios with the FAPRI - CARD International Models. January, 2010. Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0161-3177.

RTI International. 2010. U.S. Agricultural and Forestry Impacts of the Energy Independence and Security Act: FASOM Results and Model Description. January 2010. Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0161-3178.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2012. Notice of Data Availability Concerning Renewable Fuels Produced from Grain Sorghum Under the RFS Program.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2010.  Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) Regulatory Impact Analysis. EPA-420-R-10-006. http://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420r10006.pdf


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16613-16617]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06680]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2017-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1705]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice lists communities where the addition or
modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths,
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or
the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard
determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and
where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for
each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical
data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have
been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through
issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR). The LOMR will be used by
insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance
premium rates for new buildings and the contents of those buildings.
For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown
in the table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

DATES: These flood hazard determinations will become effective on the
dates listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS
report in effect prior to this determination for the listed
communities.
    From the date of the second publication of notification of these
changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in
which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate
Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The
flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day
period.

ADDRESSES: The affected communities are listed in the table below.
Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of
the community as listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The specific flood hazard determinations are
not described for each community in this notice. However, the online
location and local community map repository address where the flood
hazard determination information is available for inspection is
provided.
    Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must
be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed
in the table below.
    The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood
Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance
with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.,
and with 44 CFR part 65.
    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management
measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show
evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified
for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
    These flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by
other Federal, State, or regional entities. The flood hazard
determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood
hazard determination information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: March 13, 2017.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Chief executive                         Online location of
        State and county           Location and case       officer of         Community map        letter of map        Effective date of     Community
                                          No.               community          repository             revision             modification          No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado:
    Arapahoe....................  City of Centennia    The Honorable       Southeast Metro,    http://                May 19, 2017.........       080315
                                   (16-08-1082P).       Cathy Noon,         Stormwater          www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Authority, 7437     lomc.
                                                        Centennial, 13133   South Fairplay
                                                        East Arapahoe       Street,
                                                        Road, Centennial,   Centennial, CO
                                                        CO 80112.           80112.
    Boulder.....................  City of Boulder (16- The Honorable       Planning and        http://                May 17, 2017.........       080024
                                   08-0675P).           Suzanne Jones,      Development         www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Services            lomc.
                                                        Boulder, P.O. Box   Department, 1739
                                                        791, Boulder, CO    Broadway Street,
                                                        80306.              Boulder, CO 80302.
    Teller......................  City of Woodland     The Honorable Neil  Public Works        http://                May 18, 2017.........       080175
                                   Park (16-08-1217P).  Levy, Mayor, City   Department, 220 W   www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        of Woodland Park,   South Avenue,       lomc.
                                                        P.O. Box 9007,      Woodland Park, CO
                                                        Woodland Park, CO   80866.
                                                        80866.
    Teller......................  Unincorporated       The Honorable Norm  Teller County,      http://                May 18, 2017.........       080173
                                   areas of Teller      Steen, Chairman,    Administrative      www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-08-       Teller County       Department, 112     lomc.
                                   1217P).              Board of            North A Street,
                                                        Commissioners,      Cripple Creek, CO
                                                        P.O. Box 959,       80813.
                                                        Cripple Creek, CO
                                                        80813.
Florida:
     Bay........................  City of Callaway     The Honorable Bob   Public Works        http://                Jun 1, 2017..........       120005
                                   (16-04-6043P).       Pelletier, Mayor,   Department, 324     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        City of Callaway,   South Berthe        lomc.
                                                        6601 East Highway   Avenue, Callaway,
                                                        22, Callaway, FL    FL 32404.
                                                        32404.
    Bay.........................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Bay County          http://                Jun 1, 2017..........       120004
                                   areas of Bay         William T.          Planning and        www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-04-       Dozier, Chairman,   Zoning Division,    lomc.
                                   6043P).              Bay County Board    840 West 11th
                                                        of Commissioners,   Street, Panama
                                                        840 West 11th       City, FL 32401.
                                                        Street, Panama
                                                        City, FL 32401.
    Broward.....................  City of Plantation   The Honorable       Engineering         http://                May 25, 2017.........       120054
                                   (16-04-7674P).       Diane Veltri        Department, 401     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Bendekovic,         Northwest 70th      lomc.
                                                        Mayor, City of      Terrace,
                                                        Plantation, 400     Plantation, FL
                                                        Northwest 73rd      33317.
                                                        Avenue,
                                                        Plantation, FL
                                                        33317.
    Collier.....................  City of Marco        The Honorable       City Hall, 50 Bald  http://                May 12, 2017.........       120426
                                   Island (17-04-       Larry Honig,        Eagle Drive,        www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   0130P).              Chairman, City of   Marco Island, FL    lomc.
                                                        Marco Island        34145.
                                                        Council, 50 Bald
                                                        Eagle Drive,
                                                        Marco Island, FL
                                                        34145.
     Lee........................  City of Sanibel (16- The Honorable       Planning and Code   http://                May 12, 2017.........       120402
                                   04-7280P).           Kevin Ruane,        Enforcement         www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Department, 800     lomc.
                                                        Sanibel, 800        Dunlop Road,
                                                        Dunlop Road,        Sanibel, FL 33957.
                                                        Sanibel, FL 33957.

    Lee.........................  Town of Fort Myers   The Honorable       Community           http://                May 25, 2017.........       120673
                                   Beach (16-04-        Dennis C. Boback,   Development         www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   7620P).              Mayor, Town of      Department, 2525    lomc.
                                                        Fort Myers Beach,   Estero Boulevard,
                                                        2525 Estero         Fort Myers Beach,
                                                        Boulevard, Fort     FL 33931.
                                                        Myers Beach, FL
                                                        33931.
    Lee.........................  Town of Fort Myers   The Honorable       Community           http://                May 25, 2017.........       120673
                                   Beach (17-04-        Dennis C. Boback,   Development         www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   0306P).              Mayor, Town of      Department, 2525    lomc.
                                                        Fort Myers Beach,   Estero Boulevard,
                                                        2525 Estero         Fort Myers Beach,
                                                        Boulevard, Fort     FL 33931.
                                                        Myers Beach, FL
                                                        33931.
    Monroe......................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Monroe County       http://                May 2, 2017..........       125129
                                   areas of Monroe      George Neugent,     Building            www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-04-       Mayor, Monroe       Department, 2798    lomc.
                                   7184P).              County Board of     Overseas Highway,
                                                        Commissioners, 25   Suite 300,
                                                        Ships Way, Big      Marathon, FL
                                                        Pine Key, FL        33050.
                                                        33043.
    Monroe......................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Monroe County       http://                May 30, 2017.........       125129
                                   areas of Monroe      George Neugent,     Building            www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (17-04-       Mayor, Monroe       Department, 2798    lomc.
                                   0522P).              County Board of     Overseas Highway,
                                                        Commissioners, 25   Suite 300,
                                                        Ships Way, Big      Marathon, FL
                                                        Pine Key, FL        33050.
                                                        33043.
    Pinellas....................  City of Clearwater   The Honorable       Engineering         http://                May 25, 2017.........       125096
                                   (17-04-0745P).       George N.           Department, 100     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Cretekos, Mayor,    South Myrtle        lomc.
                                                        City of             Avenue, Suite
                                                        Clearwater, P.O.    220, Clearwater,
                                                        Box 4748,           FL 33756.
                                                        Clearwater, FL
                                                        33758.
    St. Johns...................  Unincorporated       The Honorable Jeb   St. Johns County    http://                May 30, 2017.........       125147
                                   areas of St. Johns   Smith, Chairman,    Building Services   www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-04-       St. Johns County    Department, 4040    lomc.
                                   7407P).              Board of            Lewis Speedway,
                                                        Commissioners,      St. Augustine, FL
                                                        500 San Sebastian   32084.
                                                        View, St.
                                                        Augustine, FL
                                                        32084.
     Seminole...................  City of Casselberry  The Honorable       Public Works        http://                May 22, 2017.........       120291
                                   (16-04-3548P).       Charlene Glancy,    Department, 95      www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Triplet Lake        lomc.
                                                        Casselberry, 95     Drive,
                                                        Triplet Lake        Casselberry, FL
                                                        Drive,              32707.
                                                        Casselberry, FL
                                                        32707.
Georgia:
    Bryan.......................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Bryan County        http://                May 5, 2017..........       130016
                                   areas of Bryan       Jimmy Burnsed,      Planning and        www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-04-       Chairman, Bryan     Zoning              lomc.
                                   6054P).              County Board of     Department, 66
                                                        Commissioners,      Captain Matthew
                                                        P.O. Box 430,       Freeman Drive,
                                                        Pembroke, GA        Suite 201,
                                                        31321.              Richmond Hill, GA
                                                                            31324.
     Fayette....................  City of Peachtree    The Honorable       Engineering         http://                Apr. 13, 2017........       130078
                                   City, (16-04-        Vanessa Fleisch,    Department, 151     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   5178P).              Mayor, City of      Willowbend Road,    lomc.
                                                        Peachtree City,     Peachtree City,
                                                        151 Willowbend      GA 30269.
                                                        Road, Peachtree
                                                        City, GA 30269.
     Fayette....................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Fayette County      http://                Apr. 13, 2017........       130432
                                   areas of Fayette     Charles Oddo,       Environmental       www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-04-       Chairman, Fayette   Management          lomc.
                                   5178P).              County Board of     Department, 140
                                                        Commissioners,      Stonewall Avenue
                                                        140 Stonewall       West, Suite 203,
                                                        Avenue West,        Fayetteville, GA
                                                        Suite 100,          30214.
                                                        Fayetteville, GA
                                                        30214.
Massachusetts:
    Essex.......................  City of Beverly (16- The Honorable       Public Services     http://                May 5, 2017..........       250077
                                   01-2010P).           Michael P.          Department, 191     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Cahill, Mayor,      Cabot Street,       lomc.
                                                        City of Beverly,    Beverly, MA 01915.
                                                        191 Cabot Street,
                                                        Beverly, MA 01915.
    Essex.......................  City of Beverly (17- The Honorable       Public Services     http://                May 5, 2017..........       250077
                                   01-0046P).           Michael P.          Department, 191     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Cahill, Mayor,      Cabot Street,       lomc.
                                                        City of Beverly,    Beverly, MA 01915.
                                                        191 Cabot Street,
                                                        Beverly, MA 01915.
    Plymouth....................  Town of Marion (17-  The Honorable       Town Hall, 2        http://                May 5, 2017..........       255213
                                   01-0065P).           Jonathan E.         Spring Street,      www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Dickerson,          Marion, MA 02738.   lomc.
                                                        Chairman, Town of
                                                        Marion Board of
                                                        Selectmen, 2
                                                        Spring Street,
                                                        Marion, MA 02738.
North Carolina:

    Onslow......................  Town of North        The Honorable Fred  Planning            http://                May 4, 2017..........       370466
                                   Topsail Beach (17-   J. Burns, Mayor,    Department, 2008    www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   04-0504P).           Town of North       Loggerhead Court,   lomc.
                                                        Topsail Beach,      North Topsail
                                                        2008 Loggerhead     Beach, NC 28460.
                                                        Court, North
                                                        Topsail Beach, NC
                                                        28460.
    Union.......................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Union County        http://                May 1, 2017..........       370234
                                   areas of Union       Frank Aikmus,       Planning            www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-04-       Chairman, Union     Department, 500     lomc.
                                   5693P).              County Board of     North Main
                                                        Commissioners,      Street, Suite 70,
                                                        500 North Main      Monroe, NC 28112.
                                                        Street, Suite
                                                        921, Monroe, NC
                                                        28112.
    Wake........................  Town of Holly        The Honorable       Engineering         http://                May 25, 2017.........       370403
                                   Springs (16-04-      Richard G. Sears,   Department, 128     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   7667P).              Mayor, Town of      South Main          lomc.
                                                        Holly Springs,      Street, Holly
                                                        P.O. Box 8, Holly   Springs, NC 27540.
                                                        Springs, NC 27540.
Ohio:
    Greene......................  City of Fairborn     Mr. Pete Bales,     Government Center,  http://                May 19, 2017.........       390195
                                   (16-05-6238P).       CPRP, Interim       44 West Hebble      www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Manager, City of    Avenue, Fairborn,   lomc.
                                                        Fairborn, 44 West   OH 45324.
                                                        Hebble Avenue,
                                                        Fairborn, OH
                                                        45324.
Rhode Island:
    Providence..................  City of Cranston     The Honorable       City Hall, 869      http://                Apr. 21, 2017........       445396
                                   (16-01-1503P).       Allan W. Fung,      Park Avenue,        www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Cranston, RI        lomc.
                                                        Cranston, 869       02910.
                                                        Park Avenue,
                                                        Cranston, RI
                                                        02910.
Texas:
    Bexar.......................  City of San Antonio  The Honorable Ivy   Transportation and  http://                May 18, 2017.........       480045
                                   (16-06-1449P).       R. Taylor, Mayor,   Capital             www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        City of San         Improvements        lomc.
                                                        Antonio, P.O. Box   Department, Storm
                                                        839966, San         Water Division,
                                                        Antonio, TX 78283.  1901 South Alamo
                                                                            Street, 2nd
                                                                            Floor, San
                                                                            Antonio, TX 78204.
    Collin......................  City of Frisco (16-  The Honorable       City Hall, 6101     http://                May 22, 2017.........       480134
                                   06-3251P).           Maher Maso,         Frisco Square       www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Boulevard, 3rd      lomc.
                                                        Frisco, 6101        Floor, Frisco, TX
                                                        Frisco Square       75034.
                                                        Boulevard, 3rd
                                                        Floor, Frisco, TX
                                                        75034.
    Collin......................  City of McKinney     The Honorable       Engineering         http://                May 8, 2017..........       480135
                                   (16-06-3366P).       Brian               Department, 221     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Loughmiller,        North Tennessee     lomc.
                                                        Mayor, City of      Street, McKinney,
                                                        McKinney, P.O.      TX 75069.
                                                        Box 517,
                                                        McKinney, TX
                                                        75070.
    Collin......................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Collin County       http://                May 8, 2017..........       480130
                                   areas of Collin      Keith Self,         Engineering         www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-06-       Collin County       Department, 4690    lomc.
                                   3366P).              Judge, 2300         Community Avenue,
                                                        Bloomdale Road,     Suite 200,
                                                        Suite 4192,         McKinney, TX
                                                        McKinney, TX        75071.
                                                        75071.
    Denton......................  Town of Argyle (16-  The Honorable       Planning and        http://                May 26, 2017.........       480775
                                   06-3285P).           Peggy Krueger,      Zoning Division,    www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, Town of      308 Denton          lomc.
                                                        Argyle, P.O. Box    Street, Argyle,
                                                        609, Argyle, TX     TX 76226.
                                                        76226.
    Fort Bend...................  City of Missouri     The Honorable       Engineering         http://                May 17, 2017.........       480304
                                   City (17-06-0015P).  Allen Owen,         Department, 1522    www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Texas Parkway,      lomc.
                                                        Missouri City,      Missouri City, TX
                                                        1522 Texas          77489.
                                                        Parkway, Missouri
                                                        City, TX 77489.
    Fort Bend...................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Fort Bend County    http://                May 17, 2017.........       480228
                                   areas of Fort Bend   Robert Hebert,      Engineering         www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (17-06-       Fort Bend County    Department, 301     lomc.
                                   0015P).              Judge, 401          Jackson Street,
                                                        Jackson Street,     4th Floor,
                                                        Richmond, TX        Richmond, TX
                                                        77469.              77469.
    Harris......................  City of Missouri     The Honorable       Engineering         http://                Jun. 2, 2017.........       480304
                                   City (16-06-2490P).  Allen Owen,         Department, 1522    www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Texas Parkway,      lomc.
                                                        Missouri City,      Missouri City, TX
                                                        1522 Texas          77489.
                                                        Parkway, Missouri
                                                        City, TX 77489.
    Johnson and Tarrant.........  City of Burleson     The Honorable Ken   Engineering         http://                May 8, 2017..........       485459
                                   (17-06-0126P).       Shetter, Mayor,     Services            www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        City of Burleson,   Department, 141     lomc.
                                                        141 West Renfro     West Renfro
                                                        Street, Burleson,   Street, Burleson,
                                                        TX 76028.           TX 76028.
    Montgomery..................  City of Conroe (16-  The Honorable Toby  Public Works        http://                May 4, 2017..........       480484
                                   06-1009P).           Powell, Mayor,      Department, 300     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        City of Conroe,     West Davis          lomc.
                                                        P.O. Box 3066,      Street, Conroe,
                                                        Conroe, TX 77305.   TX 77301.

    Montgomery..................  City of Shenandoah   The Honorable       City Hall, 29955 I- http://                May 4, 2017..........       481256
                                   (16-06-1009P).       Ritch Wheeler,      45 North            www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Shenandoah, TX      lomc.
                                                        Shenandoah, 29955   77381.
                                                        I-45 North
                                                        Shenandoah, TX
                                                        77381.
    Montgomery..................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Montgomery County   http://                May 4, 2017..........       480483
                                   areas of             Craig Doyal,        Engineering         www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   Montgomery County    Montgomery County   Department, 501     lomc.
                                   (16-06-1009P).       Judge, 501 North    North Thompson
                                                        Thompson Street,    Street, Suite
                                                        Suite 401,          103, Conroe, TX
                                                        Conroe, TX 77301.   77301.
    Tarrant.....................  City of Fort Worth   The Honorable       Transportation and  http://                May 8, 2017..........       480596
                                   (17-06-0126P).       Betsy Price,        Public Works        www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, City of      Department, 1000    lomc.
                                                        Fort Worth, 1000    Throckmorton
                                                        Throckmorton        Street, Fort
                                                        Street, Fort        Worth, TX 76102.
                                                        Worth, TX 76102.
    Tom Green...................  City of San Angelo   Mr. Daniel          City Hall, 72 West  http://                May 3, 2017..........       480623
                                   (17-06-0008P).       Valenzuela,         College Avenue,     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Manager, City of    San Angelo, TX      lomc.
                                                        San Angelo, 72      76903.
                                                        West College
                                                        Avenue, San
                                                        Angelo, TX 76903.
    Tom Green...................  Unincorporated       The Honorable       Tom Green County    http://                May 3, 2017..........       480622
                                   areas of Tom Green   Stephen C. Floyd,   Courthouse, 122     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (17-06-       Tom Green County    West Beauregard     lomc.
                                   0008P).              Judge, 122 West     Avenue, San
                                                        Beauregard          Angelo, TX 76903.
                                                        Avenue, San
                                                        Angelo, TX 76903.
Utah:
    Salt Lake...................  Town of Herriman     The Honorable       City Hall, 13011    http://                May 4, 2017..........       490252
                                   (16-08-1375P).       Carmen Freeman,     South Pioneer       www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Mayor, Town of      Street, Herriman,   lomc.
                                                        Herriman, 13011     UT 84096.
                                                        South Pioneer
                                                        Street, Herriman,
                                                        UT 84096.
Wyoming:
    Albany......................  City of Laramie (16- Ms. Janine Jordan,  City Hall, 406      http://                May 17, 2017.........       560002
                                   08-0896P).           Manager, City of    Ivinson Avenue,     www.msc.fema.gov/
                                                        Laramie, P.O. Box   Laramie, WY 82073.  lomc.
                                                        C, Laramie, WY
                                                        82073.
    Albany......................  Unincorporated       The Honorable Tim   Albany County       http://                May 17, 2017.........       560001
                                   areas of Albany      Chesnut,            Planning            www.msc.fema.gov/
                                   County (16-08-       Chairman, Albany    Department, 1002    lomc.
                                   0896P).              County Board of     South 3rd Street,
                                                        Commissioners,      Laramie, WY 82070.
                                                        525 East Grand
                                                        Avenue, Suite
                                                        202, Laramie, WY
                                                        82070.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-06680 Filed 4-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75462-75464]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26135]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79152; File No. SR-OPRA-2016-01]

Options Price Reporting Authority; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Amendment to the Plan for Reporting of
Consolidated Options Last Sale Reports and Quotation Information To
Amend the Professional Subscriber Device-Based Fees and Policies with
Respect to Device-Based Fees

October 25, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 608 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 29, 2016, the Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'')
submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') an
amendment to the Plan for Reporting of Consolidated Options Last Sale
Reports and Quotation Information (``OPRA Plan'').\3\ The OPRA Plan
Amendment would implement changes to the Professional Subscriber
Device-Based Fee effective January 1, 2017. The OPRA Plan Amendment
would also implement minor clarifying changes to the Policies with
Respect to Device-Based Fees, effective immediately. The Commission is
publishing this notice to provide interested persons an opportunity to
submit written comments on the OPRA Plan amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ The OPRA Plan is a national market system plan approved by
the Commission pursuant to Section 11A of the Act and Rule 608
thereunder. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 17638 (March 18,
1981), 22 S.E.C. Docket 484 (March 31, 1981). The full text of the
OPRA Plan is available at http://www.opradata.com. The OPRA Plan
provides for the collection and dissemination of last sale and
quotation information on options that are traded on the participant
exchanges. The fourteen participants to the OPRA Plan are BATS
Exchange, Inc., BOX Options Exchange, LLC, Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated, EDGX
Exchange, Inc., International Securities Exchange, LLC, ISE Gemini,
LLC, ISE Mercury,LLC, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC,
NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC, NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc.

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

I. Description and Purpose of the Plan Amendment

(a) Fee Schedule Amendments

    The primary purpose of the proposed Fee Schedule amendments is to
specify OPRA's Professional Subscriber Device-Based Fee effective
commencing January 1, 2017 and make conforming changes in OPRA's
Enterprise Rate Professional Subscriber Fee. OPRA's Enterprise Rate
Professional Subscriber Fee is available to those Professional
Subscribers that elect that rate in place of the regular OPRA device-
based fees.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ OPRA's Enterprise Rate is based on the number of a
Professional Subscriber's U.S. registered representatives and
independent investment advisers who contract with the Subscriber to
provide advisory services to the Subscriber's customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, OPRA proposes, effective January 1, 2017, to: (1)
Increase the current $29.50 monthly per device fee by $1.00; (2) to
increase the Enterprise Rate, currently a monthly fee of $29.50 times
the number of a Professional Subscriber's U.S.-based registered
representatives, to be a monthly fee of $30.50 times the number of the
Subscriber's U.S.-based registered representatives; and (3) make
conforming changes to the minimum monthly fee under the Enterprise
Rate. ``Professional Subscribers'' are persons who subscribe to OPRA
data, do not qualify for the reduced fees charged to ``Nonprofessional
Subscribers,'' and do not redistribute the OPRA data to third parties.
OPRA permits the counting of ``User IDs'' as a surrogate for counting
``devices'' for purposes of its Professional Subscriber Device-based
Fees.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See footnote 2 in the OPRA Fee Schedule and OPRA's Policies
with respect to Device-based Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number of devices reported to OPRA as subject to Professional
Subscriber Device-Based Fees has been steadily trending downwards over
many years. In 2008, OPRA received device-based fees, including
enterprise fees, with respect to approximately 210,500 devices. In
2014, OPRA received device-based fees, including enterprise fees, with
respect to approximately 148,400 devices, and in 2015 OPRA received
device-based fees, including enterprise fees, with respect to
approximately 141,300 devices. OPRA is receiving device-based fees in
the third calendar quarter of 2016 with respect to approximately
135,500 devices--already a reduction of approximately 4.1% from 2015.
OPRA believes that this long-term downward trend is the result of the
increasing use of trading algorithms and automated trading platforms
and other fundamental changes in the securities industry, and OPRA
anticipates that this trend is likely to continue.
    The proposed increase in the Professional Subscriber Device-Based
Fees is consistent with OPRA's past practice of making incremental
$1.00 increases in its monthly Professional Subscriber Device-Based
Fees,\6\ and OPRA believes that OPRA's Professional Subscribers should
not be surprised by the increase. The proposed increase in the
Professional Subscriber Device-Based Fee--which is an increase of
approximately 3.4%--will partially offset the impact on revenue of the
reduction in the number of devices in 2016 as compared to 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The year 2015 was an exception: For 2015, OPRA implemented
an increase of $1.50 in its Professional Subscriber Device-Based
Fee, because during 2015 one of OPRA's member exchanges initiated
after-hours trading, causing OPRA to incur additional expenses
associated with data dissemination during expanded trading hours.
OPRA implemented $1.00/month increases in its Professional
Subscriber Device-Based Fee for each of the years 2008-2014 and for
the year 2016. See, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72826, 79 FR
48777 (August 18, 2014) (File No. OPRA-2014-06) and Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 77585, 81 FR 22668 (April 18, 2016) (File
No. OPRA-2015-02).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A secondary purpose of the proposed Fee Schedule amendments is to
add the word ``display'' in the statements of the monthly Professional
Subscriber Device-Based Fees for the periods commencing on January 1,
2016 and January 1, 2017. A few OPRA Professional Subscribers have
asked whether, if a device is subject to the Professional Subscriber
Device-Based Fees, it is therefore not subject to the OPRA Non-Display
Use Fees, and suggested that a Subscriber could perhaps avoid payment
of Non-Display Use Fees by attaching a display monitor to a server even
if the server is being used for Non-Display Use of OPRA data. OPRA
believes that this suggestion is not consistent even with the current
wording of the Fee Schedule, but that the addition of the word
``display'' will make the wording clearer in this respect.

(b) Changes in the Policies With respect to Device-Based Fees

    The proposed changes in the Policies with respect to Device-Based
Fees are for a purpose similar to the purpose described above of adding
the word ``display'' in the OPRA Fee Schedule, namely to avert
misreading the Policies as saying that, if a Professional Subscriber is
paying Device-Based Fees with respect to a device, the payment of the
Device-Based Fees in and of itself is a sufficient basis for not paying
Non-Display Use Fees even if the Non-Display Use Fees would otherwise
be applicable. No Professional Subscriber has actually suggested such a
reading to OPRA, and OPRA believes that the suggestion would be
untenable even in terms of the current phrasing of the Policies, but
OPRA believes that it is appropriate to revise the Policies to make
clearer that the Device-based Fees may not be the only fees applicable
to a particular device that receives OPRA data.
    The text of the amendment to the OPRA Plan is available at OPRA,
the Commission's Public Reference Room, the OPRA Web site at http://opradata.com, and on the Commission's Web site at www.sec.gov.

II. Implementation of the OPRA Plan Amendment

    Pursuant to paragraph (b)(3)(i) of Rule 608 of Regulation NMS under
the Act, OPRA designated this amendment as establishing or changing
fees or other charges collected on behalf of all of the OPRA
participant exchanges in connection with access to or use of OPRA
facilities. OPRA proposes to implement the changes in the Professional
Subscriber Device-Based Fee on January 1, 2017. Implementation of the
changes in the Professional Subscriber Device-Based Fee on January 1 is
consistent with OPRA's prior practice with respect to changes in this
fee, and will provide ample opportunity to give persons subject to this
fee advance notice of the change. OPRA also proposes to implement the
changes in the Policies with respect to Device-Based Fees immediately.
    The Commission may summarily abrogate the amendment within sixty
days of its filing and require refiling and approval of the amendment
by Commission order pursuant to Rule 608(b)(2) under the Act \7\ if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or the
maintenance of fair and orderly markets, to remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanisms of, a national market system, or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 17 CFR 242.608(b)(2).
    \8\ See 17 CFR 242.608(b)(3)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the OPRA Plan
amendment 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 No. SR-OPRA-2016-01 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-OPRA-2016-01. 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 OPRA Plan amendment that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the OPRA Plan amendment 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 office of OPRA. 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-OPRA-2016-01 and should be
submitted on or before November 21, 2016.

    By the Commission.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-26135 Filed 10-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P