[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 112 (Tuesday, June 11, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27169-27172]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12192]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86038; File No. SR-C2-2019-013]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
To Adopt Limit-on-Close (``LOC'') and Market-on-Close (``MOC'') Orders

June 5, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 29, 2019, Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``C2'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``C2'') proposes to
adopt limit-on-close (``LOC'') and market-on-close (``MOC'') orders.
The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/ctwo/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    In 2016, the Exchange's parent company, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
(``Cboe Global''), also the parent company of Cboe Exchange, Inc.
(``Cboe Options''), acquired Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX or EDGX
Options''), Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA''), Cboe BZX Exchange,
Inc. (``BZX or BZX Options''), and Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX''
and, together with Cboe Options, the Exchange, EDGX, EDGA, and BZX, the
``Cboe Affiliated Exchanges''). The Cboe Affiliated Exchanges are
working to align certain system functionality, retaining only intended
differences between the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, in the context of a
technology migration. Cboe Options intends to migrate its technology to
the same trading platform used by the Exchange, EDGX Options, and BZX
Options in the fourth quarter of 2019. The proposal set forth below is
intended to add certain functionality to the Exchange's System that is
available on Cboe Options in order to ultimately provide a consistent
technology offering for market participants who interact with the Cboe
Affiliated Exchanges.\5\ Although the Exchange intentionally offers
certain features that differ from those offered by its affiliates and
will continue to do so, the Exchange believes that offering similar
functionality to the extent practicable will reduce potential confusion
for Users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange also notes that its affiliated exchanges, BZX
Options and EDGX Options, are simultaneously proposing to make
similar changes in order to align functionality with Cboe Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to adopt LOC and MOC orders. The proposed
amendments to Rule 6.10(d) define an LOC order as a limit order, and an
MOC order as a market order, respectively, that may only execute on the
Exchange no earlier than three minutes prior to Regular Trading Hours
(``RTH'') market close. The System enters LOC and MOC orders into the
Book in time sequence (based on the times at which the Exchange
initially received them), where they may be processed in accordance
with Rule 6.12.\6\ The Exchange notes that it does not have a closing
auction in which market participants may participate in an auction
rotation that determines the closing price for a series, like that of
the equities space, but that the proposed MOC and LOC orders merely
become executable three minutes prior to the close of RTH. The Exchange
queues LOC and MOC orders in the System until three minutes before the
RTH market close. At that time, the System handles a LOC or MOC order
as a limit order or market order, as applicable, and processes them in
accordance with Rule 6.12. The Exchange believes that three minutes
prior to the RTH market close is a reasonable time prior to the market
close to trigger MOC and LOC orders, as it provides those orders with
sufficient time to interact with contra-side interest and potentially
execute at a time close to the RTH market close.\7\ The proposed LOC
and MOC order definitions also provide that the System cancels an LOC
order or an MOC order (or an unexecuted portion of an LOC or MOC order)
that does not execute by the RTH market close. This is consistent with
the purpose of these orders, which is to execute near the RTH market
close on the day they were submitted to the Exchange. As the execution
of MOC and LOC orders is linked to the RTH market close, such orders
will be valid only during RTH; however, the System will accept such
orders during any trading session.\8\ A User may not designate an MOC
or LOC order as ``All Sessions''; \9\ any MOC or LOC order designated
as All Sessions will be rejected. In addition to this, the Exchange
notes that Users may not designate bulk messages as MOC or LOC, which
is consistent with the current requirement that bulk messages must have
a time-in-force of Day to encourage Users to provide liquidity to the
Exchange's market throughout the trading day and update bulk messages
in response to changed market conditions day-to-day.\10\ The proposed
order types are based on substantially similar order types available on
Cboe Options.\11\ MOC and LOC orders allow a User to execute orders in
a series close to the close time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Rule 6.12 describes how the System processes orders and
quotes in the Book.
    \7\ The Exchange notes that Cboe Options currently triggers the
MOC and LOC orders three minutes prior to the RTH market close.
    \8\ The Exchange notes that an RTH Only MOC or LOC order
submitted during Global Trading Hours (``GTH'') will remain on the
book until the close of RTH.
    \9\ See Rule 6.10(b) which defines ``All Sessions'' as an order
a User designates as eligible to trade during both Global Trading
Hours (``GTH'') and RTH. The Exchange also notes that Rule 6.10(b)
defines ``RTH Only'' as an order a User designates as eligible to
trade only during RTH or not designated as All Sessions. Therefore,
the default instruction is RTH Only and an unmarked MOC or LOC order
will be treated as RTH Only. See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 85788 (May 6, 2019), 84 FR 20673 (May 10, 2019) (Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Exchange's Opening Process and Add a Global Trading Hours
Session for DJX Options) (SR-C2-2019-009).
    \10\ See Rule 6.10(d), which defines time-in-force of ``Day'' as
an order that, if not executed, expires at the RTH market close. All
bulk messages have a Time-in-Force of Day. See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 85038 (February 2, [sic] 2019), 84 FR 2598
(February 7, 2019) (Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
a Proposed Rule Change To Discontinue Bulk Order Functionality and
Implement Bulk Message Functionality) (SR-C2-2018-025). Note Users
may submit bulk messages within three minutes of the RTH market
close, which would ultimately be handled in the same manner as an
LOC order.
    \11\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.53, which defines a ``market-on-
close'' order as a market or limit order to be executed as close as
possible to the close of the market near to or at the closing price
for the particular option series. The Exchange notes that in
connection with migration, Cboe Options intends to propose the same
definitions of market- and limit-on-close orders as proposed in this
rule filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to add subparagraph (C) to Rule
6.12(c)(5) to include additional order handling regarding MOC orders
during a limit up-limit down state.\12\ The proposed change provides
that if the underlying security is in a limit up-limit down state three
minutes prior to the RTH market close a MOC order will not be elected,
and that if the underlying security exits the limit up-limit down state
prior to

the RTH market close, the System will attempt to re-evaluate, elect,
and execute the order.\13\ The Exchange notes that the proposed
handling of MOC orders in a limit up-limit down state is consistent
with the Regulation NMS Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility
(``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'') and is based on the corresponding Cboe
Options rule regarding handling of MOC orders.\14\ The Exchange also
proposes to add a reference to MOC orders to Rule 6.39(a), which lists
the order types that will be handled specially during a limit up-limit-
down state, to reflect the proposed change to Rule 6.12(c)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Rule 6.39 which defines a ``limit up-limit down state''
to mean the period of time when the underlying security of an option
enters a limit or straddle state as defined in the Regulation NMS
Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility (the ``Limit Up-
Limit Down Plan'' or the ``Plan'').
    \13\ The Exchange also amends the heading to subparagraph (c)(5)
to reflect the addition of MOC order handling during a limit up-
limit down state. The Exchange notes that during a limit up-limit
down state limit orders are not impacted and continue to be eligible
for execution.
    \14\ See Cboe Options Rule 6.45(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\15\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \16\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \17\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes that the proposed adoption of
MOC and LOC orders serves to benefit investors by allowing Users
flexibility to have orders only be eligible for execution near the
close, a time in which maximum significant number of participants
interact on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed
change promotes just and equitable principles of trade because it
encourages increased participation near the close, thereby contributing
to enhanced price discovery and transparency that will result in a
closing price point that more closely reflects the interest of market
participants. The Exchange also believes that the proposed change will
benefit investors by fostering increased liquidity near the close. As
stated, the proposed change is based on Cboe Options rules.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the Exchange believes specifying that the MOC and LOC
may execute no more than three minutes from the RTH close removes
impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and
national market system and protects investors because it will allow
Users greater flexibility regarding the execution of their orders and/
or their customers' orders. The Exchange believes this three minute
time-frame prior to the RTH market close is a reasonable time prior to
the market close to trigger MOC and LOC orders, because it provides
those orders with sufficient times to interact with contra-side
interest and to potentially execute at a time close to RTH market
close.
    The Exchange also believes not permitting bulk messages to be MOC
and LOC orders will remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and protect investors because it is consistent
with the purpose of bulk messages. As stated, bulk messages are
currently restricted to designation as time-in-force of Day in order to
encourage Users to provide liquidity to the Exchange's market during
RTH and update bulk messages in response to day-to-day changed market
conditions.\19\ Because MOC and LOC orders are only available for
execution for three minutes prior to the RTH market close, as opposed
to during the entire RTH session, Exchange believes that not permitting
bulk messages to be MOC or LOC orders ensures that functionality
available to Users is consistent with the purpose of bulk messages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the Exchange also believes that rejecting MOC and LOC
orders if designated as ``All Sessions'' serves to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and protect
investors by providing functionality that is consistent with the
purpose of MOC and LOC orders. As described above, because MOC and LOC
orders are linked to the RTH close, allowing MOC or LOC orders to be
marked for All Sessions (i.e., RTH and GTH) would be inconsistent with
the function of MOC and LOC orders. Therefore, the Exchange believes
that not permitting MOC and LOC orders to be marked as All Sessions
will protect investors by ensuring instructions for MOC and LOC orders
are consistent with their purpose.
    Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed additional
order handling for MOC during a limit up-limit down state protects
investors because it is consistent with the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan
and prevents a market order from executing outside of the specified
price bands. This order handling is consistent with that of Cboe
Options rules.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change is
generally intended to align the functionality offered by the Exchange
with functionality currently offered by Cboe Options in order to
provide a consistent technology offering for the Cboe Affiliated
Exchanges.\21\ A consistent technology offering, in turn, will simplify
the technology implementation, changes, and maintenance by Users of the
Exchange that are also participants on Cboe Affiliated Exchanges.\22\
The Exchange believes this consistency will promote a fair and orderly
national options market system. When Cboe Options migrates to the same
technology as that of the Exchange and other Cboe Affiliated Exchanges,
Users of the Exchange and other Cboe Affiliated Exchanges will have
access to similar functionality on all Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. As
such, the proposed rule change would foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities and would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See supra note 5.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket
competition, as the proposed rule change will apply in the same manner
to all orders submitted as MOC or as LOC. MOC and LOC orders will be
available to all Users, and MOC and LOC orders from all Users will be
handled in the same manner. The use of

MOC and LOC orders will be voluntary. The Exchange does not believe the
proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket competition
because the proposed change is based on rules that allow for
substantially the same order types that are available on another
options exchange.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \24\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \26\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \27\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
as it will allow the Exchange to offer two order types that are
substantially similar to order types that are currently available on
Cboe Options. Thus, as represented by the Exchange, the proposed rule
change does not introduce any new functionality or present any novel
issues. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule
change to be operative on June 20, 2019, the day before the Exchange
would like to implement MOC and LOC orders.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

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-C2-2019-013 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-C2-2019-013. 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 the Exchange. 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-C2-2019-013 and should be submitted on
or before July 2, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-12192 Filed 6-10-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47491-47493]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17191]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0055; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming
Model Year 2008-2011 Ferrari 599 Passenger Cars Are Eligible for
Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that
model year (MY) 2008-2011 Ferrari 599 passenger cars (PC) that were not
originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety standards (FMVSS), are eligible for importation into the
United States because they are substantially similar to vehicles that
were originally manufactured for sale in the United States and that
were certified by their manufacturer as complying with the safety
standards (the U.S.-certified version of the 2008-2011 Ferrari 599 PC)
and they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the
standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is August 22,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above
and be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Comments must be written in the English language, and
be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to
the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are
submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are
provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your comments were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments

received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    How to Read Comments submitted to the Docket: You may read the
comments received by Docket Management at the address and times given
above. You may also view the documents from the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets. The docket ID number and title of this notice are shown at the
heading of this document notice. Please note that even after the
comment closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in
the Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit
late comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically search
the Docket for new material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Stevens, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS shall be
refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided that
the motor vehicle is substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for importation into and sale in the United
States, certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of the same model year as
the model of the motor vehicle to be compared, and is capable of being
readily altered to conform to all applicable FMVSS.
    Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
    J.K. Technologies (JK), Inc. of Baltimore, MD (Registered Importer
R-90-006) has petitioned NHTSA to decide whether nonconforming 2008-
2011 Ferrari 599 PC's are eligible for importation into the United
States. The vehicles which JK believes are substantially similar are MY
2008-2011 Ferrari 599 PC's sold in the United States and certified by
their manufacturer as conforming to all applicable FMVSS.
    The petitioner claims that it compared non-U.S. certified MY 2008-
2011 Ferrari 599 PC's to their U.S.-certified counterparts, and found
the vehicles to be substantially similar with respect to compliance
with most FMVSS.
    JK submitted information with its petition intended to demonstrate
that non-U.S. certified MY 2008-2011 Ferrari 599 PC's, as originally
manufactured, conform to many applicable FMVSS in the same manner as
their U.S.-certified counterparts, or are capable of being readily
altered to conform to those standards. Specifically, the petitioner
claims that the non U.S.-certified MY 2008-2011 Ferrari 599 PC's, as
originally manufactured, conform to: Standard Nos. 102 Transmission
Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking
Effect, 103 Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104 Windshield
Wiping and Washing Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 109 New pneumatic and
certain specialty tires, 113 Hood Latch System, 116 Motor Vehicle Brake
Fluids, 124 Accelerator Control Systems, 126 Electronic Stability
Control Systems, 135 Light vehicle brake systems, 201 Occupant
Protection in Interior Impact, 202a Head Restraints, 203 Impact
protection for the driver from the steering control system, 204
Steering Control Rearward Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials, 206 Door
Locks and Door Retention Components, 210 Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages,
212 Windshield Mounting, 213 Child restraint systems, 214 Side Impact
Protection, 216 Roof Crush Resistance, 219 Windshield Zone Intrusion,
and 302 Flammability of Interior Materials.
    The petitioner also contends that the subject non-U.S certified
vehicles are capable of being readily altered to meet the following
standards, in the manner indicated:
    Standard No. 101 Controls and Displays: Replacement of the
instrument cluster with U.S. model components and reprogramming as
described in the petition and its attachments.
    Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated
Equipment: Replacement of the front and rear side marker lamps,
headlamps and tail lamps with U.S.-conforming components and
reprogramming the associated ECU software as described in the petition
and its attachments.
    Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and Rims: Installation of the
required tire information placard.
    Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors: Inscription of the required
warning statement on the face of the passenger side rearview mirror or
replacement of the mirror with the U.S. model mirror.
    Standard No. 114 Theft Protection: Reprogramming the body and ECU
programs to activate the key warning and seat belt warning systems as
described in the petition and its attachments.
    Standard No. 118 Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof panel
System: Reprogramming of the vehicle ECU, as described in the petition
and its attachments to meet the requirements of the standard.
    Standard No. 138 Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems: Reprogramming of
the vehicle ECUs and replacement or addition of TPMS components with
U.S.-model components as necessary to meet the requirements of the
standard as described in the petition and its attachments.
    Standard No. 207 Seating Systems: Replacement of all seats with
U.S.-model seats if necessary to meet the requirements of the standard
and FMVSS No. 208, as described in the petition and its attachments.
    Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Protection: Replacement of any seat
belts, airbags, sensors, control units (ECU), wiring harnesses, knee
bolsters, braces and software that are not identical to the U.S. model
components with U.S. model components.
    After installation of any new components, verification of system
compliance will be completed as stated in the petition and its
attachments.
    Standard No. 209 Seat Belt Assemblies: Replacement of the passenger
seat belt assembly with U.S. model components as necessary to meet the
requirements of the standard.
    Standard No. 225 Child Restraint Anchorage Systems: Replacement of
or addition of anchorage components with U.S. model components as
necessary to meet the requirements of the standard.
    Standard No. 301 Fuel System Integrity: The fuel system will need
to be modified as described in the petition and its attachments as
necessary to meet the requirements of the standard.

    Standard No. 401 Interior Trunk Release: A trunk release mechanism
must be installed to meet the requirements of the standard.
    All comments received before the close of business on the closing
date indicated above will be considered, and will be available for
examination in the docket at the above addresses both before and after
that date. To the extent possible, comments filed after the closing
date will also be considered. Notice of final action on the petition
will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated below.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), (a)(1)(B), and (b)(1); 49
CFR 593.7; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-17191 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P