[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15620-15622]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05167]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

14 CFR Parts 259, 260, 399

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2022-0089]
RIN 2105-AF04

Airline Ticket Refunds and Consumer Protections

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Public hearing; reopen comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a virtual public hearing on certain
issues related to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking on Airline Ticket Refunds and Consumer Protections.
By this notice, the virtual public hearing on this rulemaking,
originally scheduled for March 14, 2023, is rescheduled to March 21,
2023. Through this notice, the Department is also reopening the

comment period for this rulemaking from March 21 through March 28,
2023.

DATES: The virtual hearing will be held on March 21, 2023, from 10 a.m.
to 5 p.m. Eastern Time. The hearing is open to the public, subject to
any technical and/or capacity limitations. Requests to attend the
hearing must be submitted to https://usdot.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_qIdrspjdTPexlvXSL5YNXg. We encourage interested parties to
register by Thursday, March 16, 2023. Communication Access Real-time
Translation (CART) and sign language interpretation will be provided
during the hearing. Requests for additional accommodations because of a
disability must be received at [email protected] by Thursday,
March 16, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The virtual hearing will be open to the public and held via
the Zoom Webinar Platform. Virtual attendance information will be
provided upon registration. An agenda will be available on the
Department's Office of Aviation Consumer Protection website at https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/latest-news in advance of the
hearing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To register and attend this virtual
hearing, please use the link: https://usdot.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_qIdrspjdTPexlvXSL5YNXg. Attendance is open to the public
subject to any technical and/or capacity limitations. For further
information, please contact Clereece Kroha, Senior Trial Attorney, by
email at [email protected] or by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 22, 2022, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT or
Department) published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes to codify its longstanding
interpretation that it is an unfair business practice for a U.S. air
carrier, a foreign air carrier, or a ticket agent to refuse to provide
requested refunds to consumers when a carrier has cancelled or made a
significant change to a scheduled flight to, from, or within the United
States, and consumers found the alternative transportation offered by
the carrier or the ticket agent to be unacceptable (87 FR 51550). The
NPRM proposes to define, for the first time, the terms significant
change and cancellation. It would also require U.S. and foreign
airlines and ticket agents to inform consumers that they are entitled
to a refund if that is the case before making an offer for travel
credits, vouchers, or other compensation in lieu of refunds. The
Department further proposes to require that U.S. and foreign air
carriers and ticket agents provide non-expiring travel vouchers or
credits to consumers holding non-refundable tickets for scheduled
flights to, from, or within the United States who are unable to travel
as scheduled in certain circumstances related to a serious communicable
disease. If the carrier or ticket agent received significant financial
assistance from the government because of a public health emergency,
the Department proposes to require U.S. and foreign air carriers and
ticket agents provide refunds, in lieu of non-expiring travel vouchers
or credits. The NPRM proposes to allow carriers and ticket agents to
require consumers provide evidence to support their assertion of
entitlement to a travel voucher, credit, or refund. The comment period
for the NPRM, which was extended for approximately 4 weeks in response
to a request for additional opportunity to comment,\1\ closed on
December 16, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 87 FR 68944 (Nov. 17, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 16, 2022, Airlines for America (A4A) and International
Air Transport Association (IATA) (collectively ``Petitioners'') filed a
petition to request a public hearing on the NPRM pursuant to the
Department's regulation on rulemakings relating to unfair and deceptive
practices, 14 CFR 399.75.\2\ The Petitioners specifically raise three
issues regarding the NPRM and request that these issues be addressed in
the hearing. For each issue, Petitioners argue that it meets the
threshold set forth in section 399.75 for granting a public hearing
because the underlying proposed rule depends on conclusions concerning
one or more specific scientific, technical, economic, or other factual
issues that are genuinely in dispute; because the ordinary public
comment process is unlikely to provide an adequate examination of the
issue to permit a fully informed judgement; because the resolution of
the disputed factual issues would likely have a material effect on the
costs and benefits of the proposed rule; because the requested hearing
on the issue would advance the consideration of the proposed rule and
the General Counsel's ability to make the rulemaking determinations
required by the Department's regulation; and because granting the
petition would not unduly delay the rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, Airlines for America and the International Air
Transport Association Petition for Hearing, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOT-OST-2022-0089-5296.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By a notice dated March 3, 2023, the Department granted the
requests for a public hearing and originally scheduled the hearing for
March 14, 2023.\3\ The Department noted that the scope of the hearing
would be limited to the factual issues specified in the March 3 notice.
On March 6, 2023, A4A requested that the public hearing be rescheduled
and for additional explanation of the hearing procedure. A4A requested
that the hearing be rescheduled by two weeks, stating that the five
business days provided for the hearing was insufficient to identify
speakers and to compile data responsive to the subjects presented in
the March 3 notice. A4A also stated that it would have difficulty
finding participants due to the hearing being scheduled during the
Spring Break season. A4A noted that scheduling this hearing in close
proximity (within two days) of a DOT public hearing on a different
rulemaking \4\ is an unreasonable expectation for stakeholders who must
prepare for both hearings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 88 FR 13387.
    \4\ 88 FR 13389.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A4A also reiterated its request for a neutral hearing officer to
preside over the hearing, expressing its disagreement with the
appointment of Ms. Blane Workie, the Department's Assistant General
Counsel for the Office of Aviation Consumer Protection and the
Department's designated Aviation Consumer Advocate. On March 8, 2023,
IATA wrote to express support for A4A's requests.

II. Rescheduling of Public Hearing

    After careful consideration of the points raised by A4A, the
Department has decided to reschedule its public hearing on the Airline
Ticket Refunds and Consumer Protections NPRM to March 21, 2023. While
the Department was surprised to learn that the party that had requested
the public hearing was unprepared to present views on the topics for
which they had requested the hearing, the Department wants to ensure
that stakeholders, including A4A, have an adequate opportunity to be
heard on this rulemaking and for this reason, has determined that a
seven-day extension to assist with preparation for the hearing is
reasonable. As part of this rescheduling, the length of the hearing
will also be extended to ensure adequate time is afforded to those who
wish to comment. The hearing will be held from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET. As
noted in Section IV of this notice, if all participants have expressed
their views prior to the scheduled 5 p.m. end time,

the Department may end the hearing prior to 5 p.m.

III. Agenda, Hearing Officer, and Post-Hearing Actions

    The Department has considered A4A's request for the appointment of
a different hearing officer and has decided to retain the appointment
of Blane Workie as the designated Hearing Officer. The Department notes
that the Hearing Officer's role is to preside over the hearing. In that
regard, Ms. Workie's appointment is appropriate because: (1) she is a
career civil servant who will execute this role in a neutral, fair, and
professional manner; (2) her responsibilities as an Aviation Consumer
Advocate are those that she has had as an Assistant General Counsel of
the Office of the Aviation Consumer Protection and such
responsibilities do not make her biased; and (3) the Hearing Officer's
role is to conduct the meeting using generally accepted meeting
management techniques and to not serve as a decisionmaker. As stated in
the Department's regulations in 14 CFR 399.75, the General Counsel
considers the record of the hearing and makes a reasoned determination
whether to terminate the rulemaking, proceed with the rulemaking as
proposed, or modify the proposed rule.
    The regulations further require the General Counsel to explain, in
an appropriate rulemaking document published in the Federal Register,
the rationale for the post-hearing decision made by the General
Counsel. The rationale for the post-hearing decision made by the
General Counsel will be explained in any final rule or other
appropriate rulemaking document issued by the Department for this
action.

IV. Public Participation and Procedures

    The March 21, 2023, hearing will begin at 10 a.m. ET, and the
Department will provide time for opening remarks by the Hearing
Officer. The meeting will then transition to public comments and
presentations. Any oral comments presented should be limited to the
subjects described in the March 3 notice and be brief so that all
participants will have an opportunity to speak. If a meeting
participant wishes to speak on a particular topic identified in the
March 3, 2023, notice,\5\ the participant must register in advance to
speak on the topic. We ask individuals requesting to speak to specify
the length of time that they would like to have allotted to them. Based
on the number of participants who register to speak on a particular
topic, the Department will allot time to individual speakers in a way
that maximizes each speaker's ability to present their views and to
ensure a wide variety of perspectives. The Hearing Officer may ask
clarifying questions during the hearing but will otherwise reserve
speaking time after opening remarks for meeting participants. The
intent of the hearing is to ensure that the Department is able to hear
from petitioners and other interested parties regarding the issues
raised in the petition. If the volume of requests for oral comments
received and any additional comments, responses, and/or presentations
that participants may wish to make is such that all participants have
expressed their views prior to the scheduled 5 p.m. end time, the
Department may end the hearing prior to 5 p.m.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-03-03/pdf/2023-04494.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Individual members of the public who wish to present oral comments
must notify the Department of Transportation, no later than Thursday,
March 16 via the meeting's registration link and specify in the
registration those topics on which they wish to provide comments. All
written materials (e.g., PowerPoint presentations) presented at the
hearing will be made part of the meeting's record.
    As discussed in Section V of this notice and consistent with the
requirement of 14 CFR 399.75, the Department plans to reopen the
comment period for this rulemaking on March 21, 2023, the date of the
hearing. The comment period will remain open for seven (7) days,
through March 28, 2023. Interested parties who wish to file statements
or comments that are specifically related to the subject(s) discussed
at the hearing may submit their written comments electronically to the
NPRM Docket (DOT-OST-2022-0089).
    After the hearing and after the record of the hearing is closed,
the hearing officer will place on the rulemaking docket minutes of the
hearing reflecting the evidence and arguments presented on the issues.

V. Reopening of Public Comment Period

    Consistent with the procedural requirement under section 14 CFR
399.75, which provides that interested parties shall be given an
opportunity to file statements or comments after a hearing on the
proposed regulation, the Department is reopening the comment period for
the NPRM from March 21 through March 28, 2023. New comments submitted
to the Docket should pertain to subjects discussed in the petition for
hearing and during the March 21, 2023, hearing.

VI. Viewing Documents

    Documents associated with the NPRM on Enhancing Transparency of
Airline Ancillary Service Fees may be accessed in the rulemaking Docket
(DOT-OST-2022-0089). Dockets may be accessed at https://www.regulations.gov. After entering the relevant docket number click
the link to ``Open Docket Folder'' and choose the document to review.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on this 9th day of March 2023.
John E. Putnam,
General Counsel, U.S. Department of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2023-05167 Filed 3-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12986-12988]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06022]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82908; File No. SR-NSCC-2017-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To
Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a Recovery &
Wind-Down Plan and Related Rules

March 20, 2018.

I. Introduction

    On December 18, 2017, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') 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\
proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2017-017 to adopt a recovery and wind-down
plan and related rules (``Proposed Rule Change'').\3\ The Proposed Rule
Change was published for comment in the Federal Register on January 8,
2018.\4\ The Commission did not receive any comments on the Proposed
Rule Change. On February 8, 2018, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the Act,\5\ the Commission designated a longer
period within which to approve, disapprove, or institute proceedings to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the Proposed Rule Change.\6\
This order institutes proceedings, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of
the Act,\7\ to determine whether to approve or disapprove the Proposed
Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ On December 18, 2017, NSCC filed this proposal as an advance
notice (SR-NSCC-2017-805) with the Commission pursuant to Section
806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act
of 2010 (``Clearing Supervision Act'') and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) of
the Act (``Advance Notice''). On January 24, 2018, the Commission
extended the review period of the Advance Notice for an additional
60 days pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(H) of the Clearing Supervision
Act. See 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1); 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i); 12 U.S.C.
5465(e)(1)(H); and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82581
(January 24, 2018), 83 FR 4327 (January 30, 2018) (SR-NSCC-2017-
805).
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82430 (January 2, 2018),
83 FR 841 (January 8, 2018) (SR-NSCC-2017-017) (``Notice'').
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I).
    \6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82669 (February 8,
2018), 83 FR 6653 (February 14, 2018) (SR-DTC-2017-021; SR-FICC-
2017-021; SR-NSCC-2017-017).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule Change

    As described in the Notice,\8\ NSCC proposes to adopt a Recovery &
Wind-down Plan (``R&W Plan'') and three proposed rules that would
facilitate the implementation of the R&W Plan: (i) Proposed Rule 41
(Corporation Default) (``Corporation Default Rule''), (ii) proposed
Rule 42 (Wind-down of the Corporation) (``Wind-down Rule''), and (iii)
proposed Rule 60 (Market Disruption and Force Majeure) (``Force Majeure
Rule''). Additionally, NSCC proposes to re-number existing Rule 42
(Wind-down of a Member, Fund Member or Insurance Carrier/Retirement
Services Member) to Rule 40, which is currently reserved for future
use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The description of the Proposed Rule Change is based on the
statements prepared by NSCC in the Notice. See Notice, supra note 4.
Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein are
defined in NSCC's Rules & Procedures, available at www.dtcc.com/~/
media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/nscc_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC states that the R&W Plan is intended to be used by NSCC's
Board of Directors and management in the event that NSCC encounters
scenarios that could potentially prevent it from being able to provide
its critical services as a going concern.\9\ The R&W Plan would be
structured to provide a roadmap, define the strategy, and identify the
tools available to NSCC to either (i) recover in the event it
experiences losses that exceed its prefunded resources or (ii) wind-
down its business in a manner designed to permit the continuation of
its critical services in the event that such recovery efforts are not
successful.\10\ The R&W Plan would include tools that are provided for
in NSCC's existing rules, policies, procedures, and contractual
arrangements,\11\ as well as the proposed Corporation Default Rule, the
proposed Wind-down Rule, and the proposed Force Majeure Rule.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 842.
    \10\ Id. at 843.
    \11\ Contractual arrangements include, for example, NSCC's
existing committed or pre-arranged liquidity arrangements.
    \12\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 842.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC states that the proposed Corporation Default Rule, proposed
Wind-down Rule, and proposed Force Majeure Rule are designed to (i)
facilitate the implementation of the R&W Plan when necessary; (ii)
provide Members and Limited Members with transparency around critical
provisions of the R&W Plan that relate to their rights,
responsibilities and obligations; and (iii) provide NSCC with the legal
basis to implement the provisions of the R&W Plan that concern the
proposed Corporation Default Rule, the proposed Wind-down Rule, and the
proposed Force Majeure Rule, when necessary.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id. at 841.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC states that it is proposing to re-number existing Rule 42
(Wind-down of a Member, Fund Member or Insurance Carrier/Retirement
Services Member) to Rule 40 to align the order of NSCC's proposed rules
with the order of comparable rules in the rulebooks of The Depository
Trust Company and Fixed Income Clearing Corporation,\14\ which,
together with NSCC, are subsidiaries of The Depository Trust & Clearing
Corporation (``DTCC''), a user-owned and user-governed holding
company.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id. at 851.
    \15\ Id. at 843.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an overview, the R&W Plan would provide, among other matters,
(i) an overview of the business of NSCC and its parent DTCC; (ii) an
analysis of NSCC's intercompany arrangements and critical links to
other financial market infrastructures; (iii) a description of NSCC's
services, and the criteria used to determine which services are
considered critical; (iv) a description of the NSCC and DTCC governance
structure; (v) a description of the governance around the overall
recovery and wind-down program; (vi) a discussion of tools available to
NSCC to

mitigate credit/market \16\ and liquidity risks, including recovery
indicators and triggers, and the governance around management of a
stress event along a ``Crisis Continuum'' timeline; (vii) a discussion
of potential non-default losses and the resources available to NSCC to
address such losses, including recovery triggers and tools to mitigate
such losses; \17\ (viii) an analysis of the recovery tools'
characteristics, including how they are comprehensive, effective, and
transparent, how the tools provide appropriate incentives to Members
to, among other things, control and monitor the risks they may present
to NSCC, and how NSCC seeks to minimize the negative consequences of
executing its recovery tools; and (ix) the framework and approach for
the orderly wind-down and transfer of NSCC's business,\18\ including an
estimate of the time and costs to effect a recovery or orderly wind-
down of NSCC.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ NSCC states that NSCC manages its credit exposure to
Members as part of its market risk management strategy. Id. at 844.
    \17\ As described in more detail in the Notice, this section of
the R&W Plan would describe the proposed Force Majeure Rule, which
would govern how NSCC would address extraordinary events that may
occur outside its control. See Notice, supra note 4, at 851. The
proposed Force Majeure Rule would identify the events or
circumstances that would be considered a ``Market Disruption
Event,'' including, for example, events that lead to the suspension
or limitation of trading or banking in the markets in which NSCC
operates, or the unavailability or failure of any material payment,
bank transfer, wire or securities settlement systems. Id. Under the
proposed Force Majeure Rule, during the pendency of a Market
Disruption Event, NSCC would be entitled to (i) suspend the
provision of any or all services; and (ii) take, or refrain from
taking, or require Members and Limited Members to take, or refrain
from taking, any actions it considers appropriate to address,
alleviate, or mitigate the event and facilitate the continuation of
NSCC's services as may be practicable. Id.
    \18\ This section of the R&W Plan would refer to the proposed
Wind-down Rule and the proposed Corporation Default Rule. See
Notice, supra note 4, at 847-49 (discussing wind-down), 849-51
(discussing the proposed Corporation Default Rule and the proposed
Wind-down Rule). The proposed Wind-down Rule would provide a
mechanism to implement the framework and approach for an orderly
wind-down if recovery tools do not successfully return NSCC to
financial viability. Id. at 847-51. As described more fully in the
Notice, the proposed Corporation Default Rule would provide a
mechanism for the termination, valuation, and netting of unsettled,
guaranteed Continuous Net Settlement (``CNS'') transactions in the
event NSCC is unable to perform its obligations or otherwise suffers
a defined event of default, such as entering insolvency proceedings
(``Corporation Default''). Id. at 849. Upon Corporation Default, the
proposed Corporation Default Rule would provide that all unsettled,
guaranteed CNS transactions would be terminated and, no later than
forty-five days from the date on which the event that constitutes a
Corporation Default occurred, the Board of Directors would determine
a single net amount owed by or to each Member with respect to such
transactions pursuant to the valuation procedures set forth in the
proposed Corporation Default Rule. Id.
    \19\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 842.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The framework and approach for orderly wind-down would provide (i)
for the transfer of NSCC's business, assets, and membership to another
legal entity; (ii) that NSCC would effectuate the transfer in
connection with proceedings under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code; \20\ and (iii) that after effectuating this transfer, NSCC would
liquidate any remaining assets in an orderly manner in bankruptcy
proceedings.\21\ NSCC states that it believes that the proposed
transfer approach to a wind-down would meet its objectives of (i)
assuring that NSCC's critical services will be available to the market
as long as there are Members in good standing, and (ii) minimizing
disruption to the operations of Members and financial markets generally
that might be caused by NSCC's failure.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 11 U.S.C. 101 et seq.
    \21\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 847.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove the
Proposed Rule Change and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \23\ to determine whether the Proposed Rule
Change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of proceedings is
appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy issues raised
by the Proposed Rule Change. Institution of proceedings does not
indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with respect
to any of the issues involved. Rather, the Commission seeks and
encourages interested persons to comment on the Proposed Rule Change,
and provide the Commission with arguments to support the Commission's
analysis as to whether to approve or disapprove the Proposed Rule
Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\24\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration.
The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
analysis of, and input from commenters with respect to, the Proposed
Rule Change's consistency with Section 17A of the Act,\25\ and the
rules thereunder, including the following provisions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id.
    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act,\26\ which requires, among
other things, that the rules of a clearing agency, such as NSCC, must
be designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which
are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible and to protect investors and the public interest; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act,\27\ which requires a
covered clearing agency,\28\ such as NSCC, to, among other things,
establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to, as applicable, maintain a sound risk
management framework for comprehensively managing legal, credit,
liquidity, operational, general business, investment, custody, and
other risks that arise in or are borne by NSCC, which includes plans
for the recovery and orderly wind-down of NSCC necessitated by credit
losses, liquidity shortfalls, losses from general business risk, or any
other losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).
    \28\ See 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(a)(5) for the definition of a
covered clearing agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the Proposed Rule Change. In particular, the Commission invites
the written views of interested persons concerning whether the Proposed
Rule Change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act,\29\
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii) under the Act,\30\ or any other provision of the
Act, or the rules and regulations thereunder. Although there do not
appear to be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval that would
be facilitated by an oral presentation of views, data, and arguments,
the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(g) under the
Act,\31\ any request for an opportunity to make an oral
presentation.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \30\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(ii).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(g).
    \32\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act grants to the Commission
flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either oral or
notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate for
consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on
Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the Proposed Rule Change should be approved
or disapproved by April 16, 2018. Any person who wishes to file a
rebuttal to any other person's

submission must file that rebuttal by April 30, 2018.
    The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency of
NSCC's statements in support of the Proposed Rule Change, which are set
forth in the Notice,\33\ in addition to any other comments they may
wish to submit about the Proposed Rule Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Notice, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2017-017 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2017-017. 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 website (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on DTCC's website
(http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2017-017 and should be submitted on
or before April 16, 2018. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by
April 30, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\34\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-06022 Filed 3-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [ EPA R03 OAR 2006 0296; FRL ]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; NOx and VOC RACT Determinations for Eight Individual Sources AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan ( SIP). The revisions were submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection ( PADEP) to establish and require reasonably available control technology ( RACT) for seven sources of volatile organic compounds ( VOC) and one source of nitrogen oxides ( NOx)

pursuant to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's ( Pennsylvania or the Commonwealth)

SIPapproved generic RACT regulations. EPA is proposing to approve these revisions in accordance with the Clean Air Act ( CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before [ insert date 30 days from date of publication].

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in EDocket ( RME) ID Number EPA R03 OAR 2006 0296 by one of the following methods:

A. www. regulations. gov. Follow the on line instructions for submitting comments.

B. E mail: morris. makeba@ epa. gov C. Mail: EPA R03 OAR 2006 0296, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 2 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

D. Hand Delivery: At the previously listed EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to RME ID No. EPA R03 OAR 2006 0296. 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 information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www. regulations. gov or e mail. The www. regulations. gov website 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 e mail 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. 3 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 during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection,

Bureau of Air Quality, P. O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaKeshia N. Robertson, ( 215) 814 2113, or by e mail at robertson. lakeshia@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 27, 1995, August 1, 1995, January 10,

1996, March 21, 1996, October 18, 1996, June 22, 1999, and July 28, 1999, PADEP submitted revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP. These SIP revisions consist of source specific operating permits and/ or plan approvals issued by PADEP to establish and require RACT for eight sources pursuant to Pennsylvania's SIP approved generic RACT regulations.

I. Background Pursuant to sections 182( b)( 2) and 182( f) of the CAA, Pennsylvania is required to establish and implement RACT for all major VOC and NOx sources. The major source size is determined by its location, the classification of that area and whether it is located in the ozone transport region 4 ( OTR). Under section 184 of the CAA, RACT as specified in sections 182( b)( 2) and 182( f)

applies throughout the OTR. The entire Commonwealth is located within the OTR. Therefore,

RACT is applicable statewide in Pennsylvania.

State implementation plan revisions imposing RACT for three classes of VOC sources are required under section 182( b)( 2). The categories are:

( 1) All sources covered by a Control Technique Guideline ( CTG) document issued between November 15, 1990 and the date of attainment;

( 2) All sources covered by a CTG issued prior to November 15, 1990; and ( 3) All major non CTG sources.

The Pennsylvania SIP already has approved RACT regulations and requirements for all sources and source categories covered by the CTGs. The Pennsylvania SIP also has approved regulations to require major sources of NOx and additional major sources of VOC emissions ( not covered by a CTG) to implement RACT. These regulations are commonly termed the " generic RACT regulations". A generic RACT regulation is one that does not, itself, specifically define RACT for a source or source categories but instead establishes procedures for imposing case by case RACT determinations. The Commonwealth's SIP approved generic RACT regulations consist of the procedures PADEP uses to establish and impose RACT for subject sources of VOC and NOx. Pursuant to the SIP approved generic RACT rules, PADEP imposes RACT on each subject source in an enforceable document, usually a Plan Approval ( PA) or Operating Permit ( OP). The Commonwealth then submits these PAs and OPs to EPA for approval as source 5 specific SIP revisions. EPA reviews these SIP revisions to ensure that the Pennsylvania DEP has determined and imposed RACT in accordance with the provisions of the SIP approved generic RACT rules.

It must be noted that the Commonwealth has adopted and is implementing additional " post RACT requirements" to reduce seasonal NOx emissions in the form of a NOx cap and trade regulation,

25 Pa Code Chapters 121 and 123, based upon a model rule developed by the States in the OTR.

That regulation was approved as SIP revision on June 6, 2000 ( 65 FR 35842). Pennsylvania has also adopted 25 Pa Code Chapter 145 to satisfy Phase I of the NOx SIP call. That regulation was approved as a SIP revision on August 21, 2001 ( 66 FR 43795). Federal approval of a source specific RACT determination for a major source of NOx in no way relieves that source from any applicable requirements found in 25 PA Code Chapters 121, 123 and 145.

II. Summary of the SIP Revisions The following table identifies the sources and the individual plan approvals ( PAs) and operating permits ( OPs) which are the subject of this rulemaking.

PENNSYLVANIA  VOC AND NOx RACT DETERMINATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL SOURCES SOURCE'S NAME COUNTY Plan Approval ( PA #) Operating Permit ( OP #) SOURCE TYPE " MAJOR SOURCE" POLLUTANT Carlisle Tire & Rubber Company Cumberland 21 2003 Specialty Tire Manufacturing VOC 6 The Carbide/ Graphite Group, Inc. Elk OP 24 012 Graphite Electrode and Graphite Specialities Manufacturing Facility VOC Celotex Corporation Northumbe r land OP 49 0013 Fiberboard Manufacturing Facility VOC American Railcar Industries, Inc. Shippers Car Line Division Northumbe r land OP 49 0012 Railcar Cleaning and Refurbishment Operation VOC ACF Northumbe r land OP 49 0009 Railcar Manufacturing Operation VOC New Holland North America, Inc. Lancaster 36 2028 Surface Coating Operation VOC Allsteel, Inc. Luzerne 40 001 5 Metal Furniture Coatings VOC Ball Foster Glass Container Co. McKean OP 42 028 Glass Melting Furnaces NOx Interested parties are advised that copies of Pennsylvania's SIP submittals for these sources,

including the actual PAs and OPs imposing RACT, PADEP's evaluation memoranda and the sources' RACT proposals ( referenced in PADEP's evaluation memoranda) are included and may be viewed in their entirety in both the electronic and hard copy versions of the docket for this final rule.

As previously stated, all documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www. regulations. gov index. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www. regulations. gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division,

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 7 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality, P. O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

EPA is approving these RACT SIP submittals because PADEP established and imposed these RACT requirements in accordance with the criteria set forth in its SIP approved generic RACT regulations applicable to these sources. In accordance with its SIP approved generic RACT rule, the Commonwealth has also imposed record keeping, monitoring, and testing requirements on these sources sufficient to determine compliance with the applicable RACT determinations.

III. Proposed Action EPA is approving the revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP on March 27, 1995,

August 1, 1995, January 10, 1996, March 21, 1996, October 18, 1996, June 22, 1999, and July 28,

1999, to establish and require VOC and NOx RACT for eight individual sources pursuant to the Commonwealth's SIP approved generic RACT regulations. EPA is soliciting public comments on this proposed rule to approve these source specific RACT determinations established and imposed by PADEP in accordance with the criteria set forth in its SIP approved generic RACT regulations applicable to these sources. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed action is not a 8 " significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, " Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" ( 66 Fed.

Reg. 28355 ( May 22, 2001)). This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( Public Law 104 4). This proposed rule also does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 ( 65 FR 67249,

November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 ( 64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the 9 criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards ( VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 ( 61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,

and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 ( 53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the " Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings" issued under the executive order. 10 This proposed rule to approve eight source specific RACT determinations established and imposed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania pursuant to its SIP approved generic RACT regulations does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 ( 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

___________________________ ____________________________ Dated: April 19, 2006 William Early, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.