[Federal Register: February 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 21)]
[Notices]
[Page 4741]
[DOCID:fr01fe07-95]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55155; File No. SR-BSE-2006-49]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order
Granting Approval To Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment No.
1 Thereto, To Implement a Pilot Program To Quote Options in Pennies

 January 23, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On November 17, 2006, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend the Boston Options Exchange (``BOX'')
Rules to permit certain option classes to be quoted in pennies on a
pilot basis. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on November 27, 2006.\3\ The Commission received no
comment letters on the proposed rule change. On January 5, 2007, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\4\ This
order approves the proposed rule change as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54789 (November 20,
2006), 71 FR 68654.
    \4\ Amendment No. 1 proposed to replace Glamis Gold, which was
delisted, with Agilent Tech, Inc. in the list of options classes
permitted to be quoted in pennies. Amendment No. 1 is technical in
nature, and the Commission is not publishing Amendment No. 1 for
public comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    BOX proposes to amend its rules to permit certain option classes to
be quoted in pennies during a six-month pilot (``Penny Pilot
Program''), which would commence on January 26, 2007. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to amend Section 6 (``Minimum Trading Increments'')
and to add a new section, Section 33, (``Penny Pilot Program'') to
Chapter V (``Doing Business on BOX'') of the BOX Rules.
    Currently, all six options exchanges, including BOX, quote options
in nickel and dime increments. The minimum price variation for
quotations in options series that are quoted at less than $3 per
contract is $0.05 and the minimum price variation for quotations in
options series that are quoted at $3 per contract or greater is $0.10.
Under the Penny Pilot Program, beginning on January 26, 2007, market
participants would be able to begin quoting in penny increments in
certain series of option classes.
    The Penny Pilot Program would include the following thirteen
options: Ishares Russell 2000 (IWM); NASDAQ-100 Index Tracking Stock
(QQQQ); SemiConductor Holders Trust (SMH); General Electric Company
(GE); Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD), (Microsoft Corporation
(MSFT); Intel Corporation (INTC); Caterpillar, Inc. (CAT); Whole Foods
Market, Inc. (WFMI); Texas Instruments, Inc. (TXN); Flextronics
International Ltd. (FLEX); Sun Microsystems, Inc. (SUNW); and Agilent
Technologies, Inc. (A).
    The minimum price variation for all classes included in the Penny
Pilot Program, except for the QQQQs, would be $0.01 for all quotations
in option series that are quoted at less than $3 per contract and $0.05
for all quotations in option series that are quoted at $3 per contract
or greater. The QQQQs would be quoted in $0.01 increments for all
options series.
    BOX commits to deliver a report to the Commission during the fourth
month of the pilot, which would be composed of data from the first
three months of trading. The report would analyze the impact of penny
pricing on market quality and options system capacity.

III. Discussion

    After careful review of the proposal, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\5\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ which requires, among other things, that
the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the implementation of a limited six-
month Penny Pilot Program by BOX and the five other options exchanges
will provide valuable information to the exchanges, the Commission and
others about the impact of penny quoting in the options market. In
particular, the Penny Pilot Program will allow analysis of the impact
of penny quoting on: (1) Spreads; (2) transaction costs; (3) payment
for order flow; and (4) quote message traffic.
    The Commission believes that the thirteen options classes to be
included in the penny pilot program represent a diverse group of
options classes with varied trading characteristics. This diversity
should facilitate analyses by the Commission, the options exchanges and
others. The Commission also believes that the Penny Pilot Program is
sufficiently limited that it is unlikely to increase quote message
traffic beyond the capacity of market participants' systems and disrupt
the timely receipt of quote information.
    Nevertheless, because the Commission expects that the Penny Pilot
Program will increase quote message traffic, the Commission has already
approved the Exchange's proposal to reduce the number of quotations it
disseminates.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ BOX submitted its proposed quote mitigation strategy in SR-
BSE-2006-48. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55073 (January
9, 2007), 72 FR 2047 (January 17, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\8\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BSE-2006-49), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved on a six-month pilot
basis, which will commence on January 26, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-1592 Filed 1-31-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


market system plan or any amendment thereto is in the public interest
under Sec.  242.608(b)(2), the Commission shall consider the impact of
the national market system plan or amendment, as applicable, on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
    (b) Operation and administration of the national market system
plan.
    (1) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a governance structure to ensure fair
representation of the plan sponsors, and administration of the central
repository, including the selection of the plan processor.
    (2) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a provision addressing the requirements for the
admission of new sponsors of the plan and the withdrawal of existing
sponsors from the plan.
    (3) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a provision addressing the percentage of votes
required by the plan sponsors to effectuate amendments to the plan.
    (4) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a provision addressing the manner in which the
costs of operating the central repository will be allocated among the
national securities exchanges and national securities associations that
are sponsors of the plan, including a provision addressing the manner
in which costs will be allocated to new sponsors to the plan.
    (5) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require the appointment of a Chief Compliance Officer to
regularly review the operation of the central repository to assure its
continued effectiveness in light of market and technological
developments, and make any appropriate recommendations for enhancements
to the nature of the information collected and the manner in which it
is processed.
    (6) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a provision requiring the plan sponsors to
provide to the Commission, at least every two years after effectiveness
of the national market system plan, a written assessment of the
operation of the consolidated audit trail. Such document shall include,
at a minimum:
    (i) An evaluation of the performance of the consolidated audit
trail including, at a minimum, with respect to data accuracy
(consistent with paragraph (e)(6) of this section), timeliness of
reporting, comprehensiveness of data elements, efficiency of regulatory
access, system speed, system downtime,

system security (consistent with paragraph (e)(4) of this section), and
other performance metrics to be determined by the Chief Compliance
Officer, along with a description of such metrics;
    (ii) A detailed plan, based on such evaluation, for any potential
improvements to the performance of the consolidated audit trail with
respect to any of the following: improving data accuracy; shortening
reporting timeframes; expanding data elements; adding granularity and
details regarding the scope and nature of Customer-IDs; expanding the
scope of the national market system plan to include new instruments and
new types of trading and order activities; improving the efficiency of
regulatory access; increasing system speed; reducing system downtime;
and improving performance under other metrics to be determined by the
Chief Compliance Officer;
    (iii) An estimate of the costs associated with any such potential
improvements to the performance of the consolidated audit trail,
including an assessment of the potential impact on competition,
efficiency, and capital formation; and
    (iv) An estimated implementation timeline for any such potential
improvements, if applicable.
    (7) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include an Advisory Committee which shall function in
accordance with the provisions set forth in this paragraph (b)(7). The
purpose of the Advisory Committee shall be to advise the plan sponsors
on the implementation, operation, and administration of the central
repository.
    (i) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall set forth the term and composition of the Advisory
Committee, which composition shall include representatives of the
member firms of the plan sponsors.
    (ii) Members of the Advisory Committee shall have the right to
attend any meetings of the plan sponsors, to receive information
concerning the operation of the central repository, and to provide
their views to the plan sponsors; provided, however, that the plan
sponsors may meet without the Advisory Committee members in executive
session if, by affirmative vote of a majority of the plan sponsors, the
plan sponsors determine that such an executive session is required.
    (c) Data recording and reporting.
    (1) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall provide for an accurate, time-sequenced record of orders
beginning with the receipt or origination of an order by a member of a
national securities exchange or national securities association, and
further documenting the life of the order through the process of
routing, modification, cancellation, and execution (in whole or in
part) of the order.
    (2) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require each national securities exchange, national
securities association, and member to report to the central repository
the information required by paragraph (c)(7) of this section in a
uniform electronic format, or in a manner that would allow the central
repository to convert the data to a uniform electronic format, for
consolidation and storage.
    (3) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require each national securities exchange, national
securities association, and member to record the information required
by paragraphs (c)(7)(i) through (v) of this section contemporaneously
with the reportable event. The national market system plan shall
require that information recorded pursuant to paragraphs (c)(7)(i)
through (v) of this section must be reported to the central repository
by 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time on the trading day following the day such
information has been recorded by the national securities exchange,
national securities association, or member. The national market system
plan may accommodate voluntary reporting prior to 8:00 a.m. Eastern
Time, but shall not impose an earlier reporting deadline on the
reporting parties.
    (4) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require each member of a national securities exchange or
national securities association to record and report to the central
repository the information required by paragraphs (c)(7)(vi) through
(viii) of this section by 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time on the trading day
following the day the member receives such information. The national
market system plan may accommodate voluntary reporting prior to 8:00
a.m. Eastern Time, but shall not impose an earlier reporting deadline
on the reporting parties.
    (5) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require each national securities exchange and its members
to record and report to the central repository the information required
by paragraph (c)(7) of this section for each NMS security registered or
listed for trading on such exchange or admitted to unlisted trading
privileges on such exchange.
    (6) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require each national securities association and its
members to record and report to the central repository the information
required by paragraph (c)(7) of this section for each NMS security for
which transaction reports are required to be submitted to the
association.
    (7) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require each national securities exchange, national
securities association, and any member of such exchange or association
to record and electronically report to the central repository details
for each order and each reportable event, including, but not limited
to, the following information:
    (i) For original receipt or origination of an order:
    (A) Customer-ID(s) for each customer;
    (B) The CAT-Order-ID;
    (C) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the broker-dealer receiving or
originating the order;
    (D) Date of order receipt or origination;
    (E) Time of order receipt or origination (using time stamps
pursuant to paragraph (d)(3) of this section); and
    (F) Material terms of the order.
    (ii) For the routing of an order, the following information:
    (A) The CAT-Order-ID;
    (B) Date on which the order is routed;
    (C) Time at which the order is routed (using time stamps pursuant
to paragraph (d)(3) of this section);
    (D) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the broker-dealer or national securities
exchange routing the order;
    (E) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the broker-dealer, national securities
exchange, or national securities association to which the order is
being routed;
    (F) If routed internally at the broker-dealer, the identity and
nature of the department or desk to which an order is routed; and
    (G) Material terms of the order.
    (iii) For the receipt of an order that has been routed, the
following information:
    (A) The CAT-Order-ID;
    (B) Date on which the order is received;
    (C) Time at which the order is received (using time stamps pursuant
to paragraph (d)(3) of this section);
    (D) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the broker-dealer, national securities
exchange, or national securities association receiving the order;
    (E) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the broker-dealer or national securities
exchange routing the order; and

    (F) Material terms of the order.
    (iv) If the order is modified or cancelled, the following
information:
    (A) The CAT-Order-ID;
    (B) Date the modification or cancellation is received or
originated;
    (C) Time the modification or cancellation is received or originated
(using time stamps pursuant to paragraph (d)(3) of this section);
    (D) Price and remaining size of the order, if modified;
    (E) Other changes in material terms of the order, if modified; and
    (F) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the broker-dealer or Customer-ID of the
person giving the modification or cancellation instruction.
    (v) If the order is executed, in whole or part, the following
information:
    (A) The CAT-Order-ID;
    (B) Date of execution;
    (C) Time of execution (using time stamps pursuant to paragraph
(d)(3) of this section);
    (D) Execution capacity (principal, agency, riskless principal);
    (E) Execution price and size;
    (F) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the national securities exchange or
broker-dealer executing the order; and
    (G) Whether the execution was reported pursuant to an effective
transaction reporting plan or the Plan for Reporting of Consolidated
Options Last Sale Reports and Quotation Information.
    (vi) If the order is executed, in whole or part, the following
information:
    (A) The account number for any subaccounts to which the execution
is allocated (in whole or part);
    (B) The CAT-Reporter-ID of the clearing broker or prime broker, if
applicable; and
    (C) The CAT-Order-ID of any contra-side order(s).
    (vii) If the trade is cancelled, a cancelled trade indicator.
    (viii) For original receipt or origination of an order, the
following information:
    (A) Information of sufficient detail to identify the customer; and
    (B) Customer account information.
    (8) All plan sponsors and their members shall use the same
Customer-ID and CAT-Reporter-ID for each customer and broker-dealer.
    (d) Clock synchronization and time stamps. The national market
system plan submitted pursuant to this section shall require:
    (1) Each national securities exchange, national securities
association, and member of such exchange or association to synchronize
its business clocks that are used for the purposes of recording the
date and time of any reportable event that must be reported pursuant to
this section to the time maintained by the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, consistent with industry standards;
    (2) Each national securities exchange and national securities
association to evaluate annually the clock synchronization standard to
determine whether it should be shortened, consistent with changes in
industry standards; and
    (3) Each national securities exchange, national securities
association, and member of such exchange or association to utilize the
time stamps required by paragraph (c)(7) of this section, with at
minimum the granularity set forth in the national market system plan
submitted pursuant to this section, which shall reflect current
industry standards and be at least to the millisecond. To the extent
that the relevant order handling and execution systems of any national
securities exchange, national securities association, or member of such
exchange or association utilize time stamps in increments finer than
the minimum required by the national market system plan, the plan shall
require such national securities exchange, national securities
association, or member to utilize time stamps in such finer increments
when providing data to the central repository, so that all reportable
events reported to the central repository by any national securities
exchange, national securities association, or member can be accurately
sequenced. The national market system plan shall require the sponsors
of the national market system plan to annually evaluate whether
industry standards have evolved such that the required time stamp
standard should be in finer increments.
    (e) Central repository.
    (1) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall provide for the creation and maintenance of a central
repository. Such central repository shall be responsible for the
receipt, consolidation, and retention of all information reported
pursuant to paragraph (c)(7) of this section. The central repository
shall store and make available to regulators data in a uniform
electronic format, and in a form in which all events pertaining to the
same originating order are linked together in a manner that ensures
timely and accurate retrieval of the information required by paragraph
(c)(7) of this section for all reportable events for that order.
    (2) Each national securities exchange, national securities
association, and the Commission shall have access to the central
repository, including all systems operated by the central repository,
and access to and use of the data reported to and consolidated by the
central repository under paragraph (c) of this section, for the purpose
of performing its respective regulatory and oversight responsibilities
pursuant to the federal securities laws, rules, and regulations. The
national market system plan submitted pursuant to this section shall
provide that such access to and use of such data by each national
securities exchange, national securities association, and the
Commission for the purpose of performing its regulatory and oversight
responsibilities pursuant to the federal securities laws, rules, and
regulations shall not be limited.
    (3) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a provision requiring the creation and
maintenance by the plan processor of a method of access to the
consolidated data stored in the central repository that includes the
ability to run searches and generate reports.
    (4) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include policies and procedures, including standards, to
be used by the plan processor to:
    (i) Ensure the security and confidentiality of all information
reported to the central repository by requiring that:
    (A) All plan sponsors and their employees, as well as all employees
of the central repository, agree to use appropriate safeguards to
ensure the confidentiality of such data and agree not to use such data
for any purpose other than surveillance and regulatory purposes,
provided that nothing in this paragraph (e)(4)(i)(A) shall be construed
to prevent a plan sponsor from using the data that it reports to the
central repository for regulatory, surveillance, commercial, or other
purposes as otherwise permitted by applicable law, rule, or regulation;
    (B) Each plan sponsor adopt and enforce rules that:
    (1) Require information barriers between regulatory staff and non-
regulatory staff with regard to access and use of data in the central
repository; and
    (2) Permit only persons designated by plan sponsors to have access
to the data in the central repository;
    (C) The plan processor:
    (1) Develop and maintain a comprehensive information security
program for the central repository, with dedicated staff, that is
subject to regular reviews by the Chief Compliance Officer;

    (2) Have a mechanism to confirm the identity of all persons
permitted to access the data; and
    (3) Maintain a record of all instances where such persons access
the data; and
    (D) The plan sponsors adopt penalties for non-compliance with any
policies and procedures of the plan sponsors or central repository with
respect to information security.
    (ii) Ensure the timeliness, accuracy, integrity, and completeness
of the data provided to the central repository pursuant to paragraph
(c) of this section; and
    (iii) Ensure the accuracy of the consolidation by the plan
processor of the data provided to the central repository pursuant to
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (5) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall address whether there will be an annual independent
evaluation of the security of the central repository and:
    (i) If so, provide a description of the scope of such planned
evaluation; and
    (ii) If not, provide a detailed explanation of the alternative
measures for evaluating the security of the central repository that are
planned instead.
    (6) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall:
    (i) Specify a maximum error rate to be tolerated by the central
repository for any data reported pursuant to paragraphs (c)(3) and
(c)(4) of this section; describe the basis for selecting such maximum
error rate; explain how the plan sponsors will seek to reduce such
maximum error rate over time; describe how the plan will seek to ensure
compliance with such maximum error rate and, in the event of
noncompliance, will promptly remedy the causes thereof;
    (ii) Require the central repository to measure the error rate each
business day and promptly take appropriate remedial action, at a
minimum, if the error rate exceeds the maximum error rate specified in
the plan;
    (iii) Specify a process for identifying and correcting errors in
the data reported to the central repository pursuant to paragraphs
(c)(3) and (c)(4) of this section, including the process for notifying
the national securities exchanges, national securities association, and
members who reported erroneous data to the central repository of such
errors, to help ensure that such errors are promptly corrected by the
reporting entity, and for disciplining those who repeatedly report
erroneous data; and
    (iv) Specify the time by which data that has been corrected will be
made available to regulators.
    (7) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require the central repository to collect and retain on a
current and continuing basis and in a format compatible with the
information consolidated and stored pursuant to paragraph (c)(7) of
this section:
    (i) Information, including the size and quote condition, on the
national best bid and national best offer for each NMS security;
    (ii) Transaction reports reported pursuant to an effective
transaction reporting plan filed with the Commission pursuant to, and
meeting the requirements of, Sec.  242.601; and
    (iii) Last sale reports reported pursuant to the Plan for Reporting
of Consolidated Options Last Sale Reports and Quotation Information
filed with the Commission pursuant to, and meeting the requirements of,
Sec.  242.608.
    (8) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall require the central repository to retain the information
collected pursuant to paragraphs (c)(7) and (e)(7) of this section in a
convenient and usable standard electronic data format that is directly
available and searchable electronically without any manual intervention
for a period of not less than five years.
    (f) Surveillance. Every national securities exchange and national
securities association subject to this section shall develop and
implement a surveillance system, or enhance existing surveillance
systems, reasonably designed to make use of the consolidated
information contained in the consolidated audit trail.
    (g) Compliance by members.
    (1) Each national securities exchange and national securities
association shall file with the Commission pursuant to section 19(b)(2)
of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)) and Sec.  240.19b-4 of this chapter on
or before 60 days from approval of the national market system plan a
proposed rule change to require its members to comply with the
requirements of this section and the national market system plan
approved by the Commission.
    (2) Each member of a national securities exchange or national
securities association shall comply with all the provisions of any
approved national market system plan applicable to members.
    (3) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a provision requiring each national securities
exchange and national securities association to agree to enforce
compliance by its members with the provisions of any approved plan.
    (4) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a mechanism to ensure compliance with the
requirements of any approved plan by the members of a national
securities exchange or national securities association.
    (h) Compliance by national securities exchanges and national
securities associations.
    (1) Each national securities exchange and national securities
association shall comply with the provisions of the national market
system plan approved by the Commission.
    (2) Any failure by a national securities exchange or national
securities association to comply with the provisions of the national
market system plan approved by the Commission shall be considered a
violation of this section.
    (3) The national market system plan submitted pursuant to this
section shall include a mechanism to ensure compliance by the sponsors
of the plan with the requirements of any approved plan. Such
enforcement mechanism may include penalties where appropriate.
    (i) Other securities and other types of transactions. The national
market system plan submitted pursuant to this section shall include a
provision requiring each national securities exchange and national
securities association to jointly provide to the Commission within six
months after effectiveness of the national market system plan a
document outlining how such exchanges and associations could
incorporate into the consolidated audit trail information with respect
to equity securities that are not NMS securities, debt securities,
primary market transactions in equity securities that are not NMS
securities, and primary market transactions in debt securities,
including details for each order and reportable event that may be
required to be provided, which market participants may be required to
provide the data, an implementation timeline, and a cost estimate.
    (j) Definitions. As used in this section:
    (1) The term CAT-Order-ID shall mean a unique order identifier or
series of unique order identifiers that allows the central repository
to efficiently and accurately link all reportable events for an order,
and all orders that result from the aggregation or disaggregation of
such order.
    (2) The term CAT-Reporter-ID shall mean, with respect to each
national securities exchange, national securities association, and
member of a national securities exchange or national

securities association, a code that uniquely and consistently
identifies such person for purposes of providing data to the central
repository.
    (3) The term customer shall mean:
    (i) The account holder(s) of the account at a registered broker-
dealer originating the order; and
    (ii) Any person from whom the broker-dealer is authorized to accept
trading instructions for such account, if different from the account
holder(s).
    (4) The term customer account information shall include, but not be
limited to, account number, account type, customer type, date account
opened, and large trader identifier (if applicable).
    (5) The term Customer-ID shall mean, with respect to a customer, a
code that uniquely and consistently identifies such customer for
purposes of providing data to the central repository.
    (6) The term error rate shall mean the percentage of reportable
events collected by the central repository in which the data reported
does not fully and accurately reflect the order event that occurred in
the market.
    (7) The term material terms of the order shall include, but not be
limited to, the NMS security symbol; security type; price (if
applicable); size (displayed and non-displayed); side (buy/sell); order
type; if a sell order, whether the order is long, short, short exempt;
open/close indicator; time in force (if applicable); if the order is
for a listed option, option type (put/call), option symbol or root
symbol, underlying symbol, strike price, expiration date, and open/
close; and any special handling instructions.
    (8) The term order shall include:
    (i) Any order received by a member of a national securities
exchange or national securities association from any person;
    (ii) Any order originated by a member of a national securities
exchange or national securities association; or
    (iii) Any bid or offer.
    (9) The term reportable event shall include, but not be limited to,
the original receipt or origination, modification, cancellation,
routing, and execution (in whole or in part) of an order, and receipt
of a routed order.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: July 18, 2012.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.

    Note: The following exhibit will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.

Exhibit A

Key to Comment Letters Cited in Adopting Release Proposal To Implement
Consolidated Audit Trail (File No. S7-11-10)
    1. Letter from Rep. Melissa L. Bean, U.S. Congress, to Mary
Schapiro, Chairman, Commission, dated May 20, 2010 (``Bean
Letter'').
    2. Letter from Norris W. Beach to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated May 26, 2010 (``Beach Letter'').
    3. Letter from Steven Vannelli to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated May 26, 2010 (``Vannelli Letter'').
    4. Letter from Simhan Mandyam, Managing Partner, Triage Life
Sciences LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
May 26, 2010 (``Triage Letter'').
    5. Letter from Paul Drescher, Registered Principal, Foothill
Securities, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated May 28, 2010 (``Foothill Letter'').
    6. Letter from Chandler Green to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 1, 2010 (``Green Letter'').
    7. Letter from Dan T. Nguyen, Wealth Management Company, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated June 5, 2010
(``Wealth Management Letter'').
    8. Letter from Nicos Anastaspoulos to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 6, 2010 (``Anastaspoulos
Letter'').
    9. Letter from Ning Wen, Sales Director, Know More Software,
Inc., to Heather Seidel, Division of Trading and Markets, Assistant
Director, Commission, dated June 9, 2010 (``Know More Letter'').
    10. Letter from John McCrary to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 11, 2010 (``McCrary Letter'').
    11. Letter from Howard Meyerson, General Counsel, and Vlad
Khandros, Market Structure and Public Policy Analyst, Liquidnet, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated July 19, 2010
(``Liquidnet Letter'').
    12. Letters from Justin S. Magruder, President, Noetic Partners,
Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated July 22,
2010 and August 3, 2010 (``Noetic Partners Letter I'' and ``Noetic
Partners Letter II).
    13. Letter from Martin Koopman, Director, Aditat, to Elizabeth
M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated July 28, 2010 (``Aditat
Letter'').
    14. Letter from Courtney Doyle McGuinn, FPL Operations Director,
FIX Protocol Limited, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated August 5, 2010 (``FIX Letter'').
    15. Letter from Senator Edward E. Kaufman, U.S. Senate, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 5, 2010
(``Kaufman Letter'').
    16. Letter from Mahesh Kumaraguru to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated August 5, 2010 (``Kumaraguru Letter'').
    17. Letter from R. T. Leuchtkafer to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated August 5, 2010 (``Leuchtkafer
Letter'').
    18. Letter from Horst Simon, Associate Laboratory Director for
Computing Sciences and Division Director, Computational Research
Department, and David Leinweber, Director, LBNL Center for
Innovative Financial Technology Computing Sciences, Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 8, 2010 (``Berkeley Letter'').
    19. Letter from Peter A. Bloniarz, Dean, College of Computing &
Information, University of Albany, George Berg, Associate Professor
and Chair, Department of Computer Science, University of Albany,
Sandor P. Schuman, Affiliated Faculty, Department of Informatics,
University of Albany, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated August 9, 2010 (``Albany Letter'').
    20. Letter from Christopher Nagy, Managing Director Order
Strategy, Co-Head Government Relations, and John Markle, Deputy
General Counsel, Co-Head Government Relations, TD AMERITRADE, Inc.,
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 9, 2010
(``Ameritrade Letter'').
    21. Letter from James J. Angel, Associate Professor of Finance,
Georgetown University, Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``Angel
Letter'').
    22. Letter from Eric J. Swanson, Senior Vice President and
General Counsel, BATS Exchange, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``BATS Letter'').
    23. Letter from Anthony D. McCormick, Chief Executive Officer,
Boston Options Exchange Group, LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``BOX Letter'').
    24. Letter from Charlie J. Marchesani, President Broadridge
Financial Solutions, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``Broadridge Letter'').
    25. Letter from Eric W. Hess, General Counsel, Direct Edge
Holdings, LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
August 9, 2010 (``Direct Edge Letter'').
    26. Letter from Marcia E. Asquith, Senior Vice President and
Corporate Secretary, FINRA, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``FINRA Letter'').
    27. Letter from Marcia E. Asquith, Senior Vice President and
Corporate Secretary, FINRA, and Janet McGinness Kissane, Senior Vice
President and Corporate Secretary, NYSE Euronext, to Elizabeth M.
Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``FINRA/NYSE
Euronext Letter'').
    28. Letter from Ted Myerson, Chief Executive Officer, Doug
Kittelsen, Chief Technology Officer, and M. Gary LaFever, General
Counsel and Chief Corporate Development Officer, FTEN, to Elizabeth
M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``FTEN
Letter'').
    29. Letter from Karrie McMillan, General Counsel, Investment
Company Institute, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,

Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``ICI Letter'').
    30. Letter from Stuart J. Kaswell, Executive Vice President,
Managing Director and General Counsel, Managed Funds Association, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 9, 2010
(``Managed Funds Association Letter'').
    31. Letter from Dror Segal and Lou Pizzo, Mansfield Consulting,
LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 9,
2010 (``Mansfield Letter'').
    32. Letter from Andrew C. Small, General Counsel, Scottrade, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 9, 2010
(``Scottrade Letter'').
    33. Letter from Devin Wenig, Chief Executive Officer, Markets
Division, Thomson Reuters, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``Thomson Reuters Letter'').
    34. Letter from Jon Feigelson, Senior Vice President, General
Counsel and Head of Corporate Governance, TIAA-CREF Individual and
Institutional Services, LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 9, 2010 (``TIAA-CREF Letter'').
    35. Letter from Ronald C. Long, Director, Regulatory Affairs,
Wells Fargo Advisors, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated August 9, 2010 (``Wells Fargo Letter'').
    36. Letter from John A. McCarthy, General Counsel, GETCO, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated August 10, 2010
(``GETCO Letter'').
    37. Letter from Michael Erlanger, Managing Principal,
Marketcore, Inc., to Commission, dated August 10, 2010 (``Marketcore
Letter'').
    38. Letter from Edward J. Joyce, President and Chief Operating
Officer, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., to Commission, dated
August 11, 2010 (``CBOE Letter'').
    39. Letter from Leonard J. Amoruso, Senior Managing Director and
General Counsel, Knight Capital Group, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated August 11, 2010 (``Knight Letter'').
    40. Letter from Jose Manso, Executive Vice President, Sales and
Marketing, Middle Office Solutions LLC, to Commission, dated August
11, 2010 (``Middle Office Letter'').
    41. Letter from Manisha Kimmel, Executive Director, Financial
Information Forum, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, dated August
12, 2010 (``FIF Letter'').
    42. Letter from John Harris, Chief Executive Officer, BondMart
Technologies, Inc., to Commission, dated August 12, 2010 (``BondMart
Letter'').
    43. Letter from Joan C. Conley, Senior Vice President and
Corporate Secretary, NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, dated August 12, 2010 (``Nasdaq Letter I'').
    44. Letter from Patrick J. Healy, Chief Executive Officer,
Issuer Advisory Group LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 15, 2010 (``IAG Letter'').
    45. Letter from James T. McHale, Managing Director and Associate
General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial Markets
Association, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
August 17, 2010 (``SIFMA Letter'').
    46. Letter from Mike Riley, Chief Executive Officer, Endace
Technology Limited, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated August 30, 2010 (``Endace Letter'').
    47. Letter from Terry Keene, Chief Executive Officer,
Integration Systems LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated November 12, 2010 (``iSys Letter'').
    48. Letter from Bonnie K. Wachtel, Wachtel & Co., Inc., to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated November 24, 2010
(``Wachtel Letter'').
    49. Letter from Richard A. Ross to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated December 6, 2010 (``Ross Letter'').
    50. Letter from James T. McHale, Managing Director and
Associated General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association, to David Shillman, Associate Director, Division
of Trading and Markets, Commission, dated January 12, 2011 (``SIFMA
Drop Copy Letter'').
    51. Letter from Daniel J. Connell, Chief Executive Officer,
Correlix, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
February 4, 2011 (``Correlix Letter'').
    52. Letter from Richard A. Ross, Founder, High Speed Analytics,
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated February 9,
2011 (``High Speed Letter'').
    53. Letter from Michael Belanger, President, Jarg Corporation;
Joseph Carrabis, Chief Regulatory Officer and Founder, NextStage
Evolution; Wayne Ginion, Vice President, Enterprise Infrastructure
Services; and David Morf, Partner, Senior Regional Economics
Advisor, Founding Member, Center for Adaptive Solutions, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated April 6, 2011
(``Belanger Letter'') (note, this letter is an amended letter that
replaces a letter submitted by the same parties on March 30, 2011).
    54. Letter from Richard G. Ketchum, Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer, FINRA, to Robert Cook, Director, Division of Trading and
Markets, and Carlo DiFlorio, Director, Office of Compliance
Inspections and Examinations, Commission, dated April 6, 2011
(``FINRA Proposal Letter'').
    55. Letter from Senator Charles E. Schumer, U.S. Senate, to Mary
L. Schapiro, Chairman, Commission, dated May 9, 2011 (``Schumer
Letter'').
    56. Letter from Joan C. Conley, Senior Vice President and
Corporate Secretary, NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated November 18, 2011 (``Nasdaq Letter
II'').
    57. Letter from Geraldine M. Lettieri to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated November 29, 2011 (``Lettieri
Letter'').
    58. Letter from James T. McHale, Managing Director and
Associated General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association, to Robert Cook, Director, Division of Trading
and Markets, Commission, dated February 7, 2012 (``SIFMA February
2012 Letter'').
    59. Letter from John M. Damgard, President, Futures Industry
Association, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
February 22, 2012 (``FIA Letter'').
    60. Letter from Manisha Kimmel, Executive Director, Financial
Information Forum, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated March 2, 2012 (``FIF Letter II'').
    61. Letter from Jennifer Setzenfand, Chairman, Security Traders
Association, dated March 7, 2012 (``STA Letter'').
    62. Letter from Dr. Gil Van Bokkelen, Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer, Athersys, Inc., to Mary Schapiro, Chairman,
Commission, dated March 14, 2012 (``Van Bokkelen Letter'').

[FR Doc. 2012-17918 Filed 7-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 158 (Tuesday, August 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54639-54640]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19440]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78530; File No. SR-DTC-2016-006]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Add a Participants Fund Maintenance Fee

August 10, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 29, 2016, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been
prepared by the clearing agency. DTC filed the proposed rule change
pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder.\4\ The proposed rule change was effective upon filing with
the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The proposed rule change consists of modifications to the Fee
Schedule \5\ of DTC in order to add a new fee that will be charged to
Participants in connection with the maintenance of the Participants
Fund, as described in greater detail below.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/
legal/fee-guides/dtcfeeguide.pdf?la=en.
    \6\ Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the
Rules, By-Laws and Organization Certificate of DTC (the ``Rules''),
available at www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/
dtc_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The proposed rule change will add a fee that will be charged to
Participants in connection with the maintenance of the Participants
Fund.
Participants Fund Maintenance Fee
    Pursuant to the proposed rule change, DTC proposes to introduce a
new fee, to be known as the Participants Fund Maintenance Fee, which
will be charged to Participants in arrears on a monthly basis.
    The proposed rule change will (i) diversify DTC's revenue sources
and mitigate DTC's dependence on revenues driven by settlement volumes
and (ii) add a stable revenue source that will contribute to DTC's
operating margin by offsetting increasing costs and expenses, as
further described below.
Diversify Revenue Sources
    DTC's current revenues from settlement are variable, but, as a
utility, DTC's expenses are largely fixed. The combination of fixed
costs and variable revenues represents a financial risk for DTC. To
mitigate such financial risk, DTC is seeking to further diversify its
variable revenues with the proposed new fee, which will introduce a
revenue source that is not dependent on settlement volumes. The
Participants Fund Maintenance Fee will be ratably based on the
Participant's average Actual Participants Fund Deposit.
Offset Increasing Costs and Expenses
    DTC seeks to achieve a target operating margin to cover operating
expenses and fund capital expenditures as well as investments in its
services and risk management infrastructure; however, DTC faces
continued increasing risk management costs as well as regulatory and
compliance-related expenses that need to be offset by revenue growth in
order to meet the target operating margin. Such increased costs and
expenses, if not offset by revenue growth, could weaken DTC's financial
position over time. As such, DTC is seeking to implement the
Participants Fund Maintenance Fee to add an additional revenue source
to offset increasing costs and expenses.
    Proceeds of the Participants Fund Maintenance Fee will be used
primarily to offset risk management costs, regulatory and compliance
expenses and for general operating expenses.
Calculation
    The amount of the monthly Participants Fund Maintenance Fee for a
Participant will be calculated monthly, in arrears, as the product of
0.25% and the average of the Participant's Actual Participants Fund
Deposit as of the end of each day of the month, multiplied by the
number of days in that month and divided by 360; provided that, the
investment rate of return on investment by DTC of the Participants Fund
for that month is equal to or greater than 0.25%. No fee will be
charged to any Participant for a month in which the monthly rate of
return on investment of the Participants Fund is less than 0.25%.
    Based on the 2015 average Actual Participants Fund Deposit, the
expected annual revenue to be generated by the

Participants Fund Maintenance Fee is approximately $5 million.
Participant Impact
    The proposed rule change will impose the Participants Fund
Maintenance Fee on all Participants.
    The Participants Fund Maintenance Fee is a monthly fee based
ratably upon the amount of the Participant's daily Actual Participants
Fund Deposit; it is applicable when the monthly rate of return on
investment of the Participants Fund is equal to or greater than 0.25%.
    Because the Participants Fund Maintenance Fee per Participant is
proportional to the average monthly Actual Participants Fund Deposit,
Participants that, based on their usage of DTC's settlement service,
place a greater demand on the settlement system will generally be
subject to a higher fee, because such Participants are required to
maintain higher deposits to the Participants Fund pursuant to the
Rules.
    DTC views the proposed implementation of the Participants Fund
Maintenance Fee as a prudent way to minimize the magnitude of, and
mitigate the need for, potential future increases in other fees.
    The proposed change will take effect on August 1, 2016.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act \7\ requires that DTC's Rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its participants. The proposed fee is equitably
allocated among Participants because it is based on each Participant's
utilization of DTC's settlement service, as measured by their deposits
to the Participants Fund. In addition, DTC believes that the proposed
fee is reasonable because it will enable DTC to better align its
revenue with the costs and expenses required for DTC to provide
services to its Participants with a nominal impact on Participants.
Therefore, DTC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
section 17A(b)(3)(D).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    DTC does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose a
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, because the proposed fee will
be equitably allocated among Participants as described above. That is,
a Participant that, based on its usage of DTC's settlement service,
places a greater demand on the settlement system will generally be
subject to a higher fee, because such a Participant is required to
maintain higher deposits to the Participants Fund pursuant to the
Rules. Participants that place a lesser demand on the settlement system
will pay less.

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

    DTC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to
this proposal. DTC will notify the Commission of any written comments
received by DTC.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) \9\ of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \10\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-DTC-2016-006 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2016-006. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of DTC and on DTCC's
Web site (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2016-006 and should be
submitted on or before September 6, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-19440 Filed 8-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24382-24385]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9618]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0140(b); FRL-9662-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
North Carolina; Annual Emissions Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a portion of a
state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted on January 31, 2008,
by the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Division of
Air Quality (NCDAQ), to meet the emissions statements requirement for
Charlotte, North Carolina. EPA is approving the addition of Cabarrus,
Lincoln, Rowan, and Union Counties in their entireties and Davidson
Township and Coddle Creek Township in Iredell County to the annual
emissions reporting requirement into the North Carolina SIP. This
action is being taken pursuant to section 110 and section 182 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective June 25, 2012 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 24, 2012. If
EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number, ``EPA-
R04-OAR-2009-0140,'' by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0140,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number, ``EPA-R04-
OAR-2009-0140.'' EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at 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 through
www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, 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 email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.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 either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to

schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sara Waterson of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Sara Waterson can be reached
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for EPA's action?
II. What is EPA's analysis of the emissions statements for North
Carolina?
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for EPA's action?

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone,
setting the standard at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an
8-hour timeframe. This revised standard was established based on
scientific evidence demonstrating that ozone causes adverse health
effects at lower ozone concentrations and over longer periods of time,
than was understood when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone standard was
promulgated (62 FR 38855).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA issued a revised 8-hour ozone standard on March 27, 2008
(73 FR 16436). The designation and implementation process for that
standard is underway and does not relate to this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 30, 2004, EPA published designations and classifications
for the revised 1997 8-hour ozone standard (69 FR 23858). These actions
became effective on June 15, 2004. North Carolina was required to
develop nonattainment SIP revisions addressing the CAA requirements for
its nonattainment areas. Among other things, North Carolina was
required to address the emissions statements requirement pursuant to
CAA section 182(a)(3)(B).
    Section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA, requires states with areas
designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS (under subpart 2 of the
Act) to submit a SIP revision to require emissions statements to be
submitted to the state by sources within that nonattainment area.
Specifically, CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) reads:

    (i) Within 2 years after November 15, 1990, the State shall
submit a revision to the State implementation plan to require that
the owner or operator of each stationary source of oxides of
nitrogen or volatile organic compounds provide the State with a
statement, in such form as the Administrator may prescribe (or
accept an equivalent alternative developed by the State), for
classes or categories of sources, showing the actual emissions of
oxides of nitrogen and volatile organic compounds from that source.
The first statement shall be submitted within 3 years after November
15, 1990. Subsequent statements shall be submitted at least every
year thereafter. The statement shall contain a certification that
the information contained in the statement is accurate to the best
knowledge of the individual certifying the statement.
    (ii) The State may waive the application of clause (i) to any
class or category of stationary sources which emit less than 25 tons
per year of volatile organic compounds or oxides of nitrogen if the
State, in its submissions under subparagraph (1) or (3)(A), provides
an inventory of emissions from such class or category of sources
based on the use of the emission factors established by the
Administrator or other methods acceptable to the Administrator.

    In a March 14, 2006,\2\ memorandum from Thomas C. Curran, Director
Air Quality Assessment Division to EPA Regional Air Division Directors
(Curran Memo), EPA clarified that the emissions statements requirement
under the CAA section 182(a)(3)(B), is applicable to all areas
designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and classified
marginal or higher under subpart 2, part D, title I of the CAA.
Consistent with EPA's interpretation of the submission period for other
subpart 2 obligations, the Curran Memo states that the 2-year
submission period for the emissions statements rule for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard will run from the date an area was designated
nonattainment and classified under subpart 2 for the 8-hour standard.
Thus, states were required to submit their emissions statements rule by
June 15, 2006, and the rule is required to provide that sources submit
their first emissions statements to the state by no later than June 15,
2007 (for the 2006 calendar year). The Curran Memo further states that
if an area has a previously approved emissions statements rule for the
1-hour standard that covers all portions of the designated 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area, such rule should be sufficient for purposes
of the emissions statements requirement for the 1997 8-hour standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The March 14, 2006, Curran Memo can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/eidocs/eiguid/8hourozone_naaqs_031406.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    North Carolina's annual emissions reporting requirement was
approved into the SIP on August 1, 1997. See 64 FR 41277. The counties
included in the August 1, 1997, approval included Davidson, Durham,
Forsyth, Gaston, Guilford, Mecklenburg, and Wake County, the Dutchville
Township in Granville County, and that part of Davie County bounded by
the Yadkin River, Dutchmans Creek, North Carolina Highway 801, Fulton
Creek and back to the Yadkin River. On January 31, 2008, North Carolina
submitted additional counties to be included in the annual emissions
reporting requirements to be consistent with the requirements of the
CAA as a result of EPA's designation boundary for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. In today's action, EPA is approving the addition of Cabarrus,
Lincoln, Rowan, and Union Counties in their entireties and Davidson
Township and Coddle Creek Township in Iredell County to the annual
emissions reporting portion of the SIP revision submitted by the State
of North Carolina on January 31, 2008, as required by section
182(a)(3)(B). EPA will take action on the remaining portions of North
Carolina's January 31, 2008, SIP revision in a separate action.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The January 31, 2008, SIP submittal includes amendments to
North Carolina Rules 15A NCAC 02D .0902, .0909, .1402, .1403, and
02Q .0207. This action is approving the amendments to NCAC 02Q
.0207.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What is EPA's analysis of the Emissions Statements for North
Carolina?

    North Carolina's SIP revision updates its regulation at 15A North
Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02Q .0207, to include Cabarrus,
Lincoln, Rowan, and Union Counties in their entireties and Davidson
Township and Coddle Creek Township in Iredell County and requires all
owners or operators of stationary sources located in these areas with
actual emissions of 25 tons per year or more of volatile organic
compounds or nitrogen oxides, to submit a statement of actual emissions
by June 30th of each year. EPA has evaluated North Carolina's January
31, 2008, SIP revision as it relates to the emissions statements and
has made the determination that it meets the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B).

III. Final Action

    EPA is taking direct final action to approve a portion of a SIP
revision, submitted on January 31, 2008, by the State of North
Carolina, through the NCDAQ, to meet the emissions statements
requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This action is being taken
pursuant to section 110 and section 182 of the CAA.

    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a non-controversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comment be filed. This rule will be effective on June 25, 2012
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comment by
May 24, 2012. If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a
document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the
rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. If no such comments
are received, the public is advised this rule will be effective on June
25, 2012 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this final action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 25, 2012. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: March 4, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart II--North Carolina

0
2. Section 52.1770(c) Table 1, is amended under Subchapter 2Q, section
.0200 by revising the entry for ``Sect .0207'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                Table 1--EPA Approved North Carolina Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Subchapter 2Q Air Quality Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Section .0200 Permit Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sect .0207.......................  Annual Emissions             7/1/07  4/24/2012 [Insert
                                    Reporting.                           citation of
                                                                         publication].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-9618 Filed 4-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67012-67013]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23582]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2016-0023]

Tennessee State Plan; Change in Level of Federal Enforcement:
Marine Construction

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document gives notice of OSHA's approval of a change to
the state of Tennessee's occupational safety and health State Plan to
include marine construction in its State Plan. Marine construction was
previously exempted from the State Plan by the Tennessee Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1972. Therefore, OSHA amends the Tennessee
State Plan's coverage to reflect this change in the level of federal
enforcement.

DATES: Effective Date: September 29, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For press inquiries, contact Francis Meilinger, Director, Office of
Communications, Room N-3647, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-
1999; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general and technical information, contact Douglas J.
Kalinowski, Director, Directorate of Cooperative and State Programs,
Room N-3700, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. 667 (OSH Act), provides that states that
wish to assume responsibility for developing and enforcing their own
occupational safety and health standards may do so by submitting and
obtaining federal approval of a State Plan. State Plan approval occurs
in stages that include initial approval under Section 18(c) of the Act
and, ultimately, final approval under Section 18(e).
    The Tennessee State Plan was initially approved under Section 18(c)
of the OSH Act and 29 CFR part 1902 on July 5, 1973. The Tennessee
State Plan is administered by the Tennessee Department of Labor and
Workforce Development, Division of Occupational Safety and Health
(TOSHA). On July 22, 1985, OSHA announced the final approval of the
Tennessee State Plan pursuant to Section 18(e) and amended Subpart P of
29 CFR part 1952 to reflect the Assistant Secretary's decision (50 FR
29659-01). As a result, OSHA relinquished its concurrent standards and
enforcement authority with regard to occupational safety and health
issues covered by the Tennessee State Plan.
    OSHA retained its authority over safety and health in private
sector maritime employment; federal government employers and workers;
the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), including USPS employees and contract
employees at contractor-operated facilities engaged in USPS mail
operations; railroad employment; employment at Tennessee Valley
Authority facilities; and on military bases.
    Under the Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1972,
workers protected by the Longshore and Harbor

Workers' Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. 901 et seq.) were exempt from
coverage by the Tennessee State Plan (T.C.A. Sec.  50-3-104(6) (2014)).
That included workers who were engaged in marine construction. However,
Tennessee subsequently removed this prohibition from the statute (2015
Tenn. Pub. Acts, c. 23, Sec.  1). Now, TOSHA is requesting that its
coverage be modified to include coverage over marine construction.
TOSHA has in place standards for construction (TN ADC 0800-01-06-.02
adopts OSHA's construction standards in 29 CFR 1926 with minor
exceptions not relevant here), including for marine operations and
equipment (29 CFR 1926.605). OSHA is transferring coverage over marine
construction to the Tennessee State Plan. Accordingly, notice is hereby
given of the change in State Plan authority over marine construction,
and coverage is transferred to the Tennessee State Plan.

Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this
notice. OSHA is issuing this notice under the authority specified by
Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.
667), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912), and 29 CFR
parts 1902 and 1953.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on September 26, 2016.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2016-23582 Filed 9-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-29-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 22972]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08925]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-831-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Daily Service Apr 9-30 2016
to be effective 4/9/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5095.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-832-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Compliance filing NAESB 3.0 Compliance Filing to be
effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5096.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-833-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Section4(d) Rate Filing: Correct Sheet No. 18 to be
effective 2/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-412-001.
    Applicants: Golden Triangle Storage, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing GTS. Compliance Filing Pursuant to
Order in Dkt. No. RP16-412-000 to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5245.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-476-001.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Compliance filing 20160411. Compliance Filing to be
effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-509-001.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Compliance filing Texas Eastern RP16-509. Compliance
Filing to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5088.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-513-001.
    Applicants: Steckman Ridge, LP.
    Description: Compliance filing Steckman Ridge RP16-513. Compliance
Filing to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5089.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-514-001.
    Applicants: Big Sandy Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Big Sandy RP16-514. Compliance
Filing to be effective 4/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 4/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20160411-5090.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/25/16.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 12, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-08925 Filed 4-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P