constitute a re-opening of the issue or an invitation to comment on the
underlying decision in which the EPA considered some cost of MATS
(e.g., in CAA section 112(d) beyond-the-floor analyses either
establishing or declining to establish a standard more stringent than
the MACT floor).
    Despite the very clear direction that the EPA provided in the
proposal and solicitation, numerous commenters submitted comments that
were beyond the limited scope identified in the proposed supplemental
finding. In many cases, the submissions contained comments on issues
that the EPA had considered in Petitions for Reconsideration (80 FR
24218) or that had been upheld in White Stallion and not disturbed by
the Supreme Court's decision in Michigan. Those comments are noted in
Section 5.0 of the Response to Comments document. However, the EPA has
no obligation to respond to comments beyond the scope of the rulemaking
and the EPA has not provided extensive responses to such comments.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statues and Executive Orders can
be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted
to OMB for review because it ``raises novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates.'' Any changes made in response to OMB
recommendations have been documented in the docket. The EPA does not
project any incremental costs or benefits associated with this
supplemental finding because this action does not impose standards or
other requirements on affected sources.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. There are no information collection requirements in this
action.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. The EPA does
not project any incremental costs or benefits associated with this
supplemental finding because this action does not impose standards or
other requirements on affected sources.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It would neither impose substantial direct
compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. This action is not anticipated to have
notable impacts on emissions, costs, or energy supply decisions for the
affected electric utility industry as this action does not impose
standards or other requirements on affected sources.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income,
or indigenous populations because it is limited in scope and only
considers the cost of whether it is appropriate to regulate HAP
emissions from EGUs.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

L. Determination Under CAA Section 307(d)

    Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V), the Administrator determines
that this action is subject to provisions of section 307(d). Section
307(d) establishes procedural requirements specific to rulemaking under
the CAA. CAA section 307(d)(1)(V) provides that the provisions of CAA
section 307(d) apply

to ``such other actions as the Administrator may determine.''

VI. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this proposed action is provided by
sections 112, 301, 302, and 307(d)(1) of the CAA as amended (42 U.S.C.
7412, 7601, 7602, 7607(d)(1)). This action is also subject to section
307(d) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7607(d)).

    Dated: April 14, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-09429 Filed 4-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 143 (Thursday, July 29, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40782-40783]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16024]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0544; Airspace Docket No. 19-AAL-93]
RIN 2120-AA66

Removal of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Route V-482; Alaska

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action revokes one Alaskan VHF Omnidirectional Range
(VOR) Federal airway V-482 in the state of Alaska. The removal is
required due to tree encroachment on the Johnstone Point VOR/Distance
Measuring Equipment (DME) that renders the airway unusable.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, October 7, 2021. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for inspection
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher McMullin, Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it supports modifying, removing, and establishing the air
traffic service route structure in Alaska to maintain the efficient
flow of air traffic.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No.
FAA-2020-0544 in the Federal Register (85 FR 37033; June 19, 2020),
removing VOR Federal airway V-482 in the state of Alaska. Interested
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the proposal. No comments were received.
    Alaskan VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(b) of
FAA Order 7400.11E dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Alaskan
VOR Federal airway listed in this document will be subsequently removed
from this Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by removing Alaskan VOR Federal
airway V-482.
    V-482: V-482 currently extends between Johnstone Point, AK to
Gulkana, AK. This action removes the entire route.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of revoking VOR Federal
airway V-482 in Alaska qualifies for categorical exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with
FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 5-6.5a, with categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify
classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see
14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas;
Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points). As such, this action
is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental
impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for
factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded
action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further
analysis. The FAA has determined that no extraordinary circumstances
exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(b) Alaskan VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-482 [Remove]

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 22, 2021.
George Gonzalez,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2021-16024 Filed 7-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72404-72405]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30141]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0877; FRL-9326-8]

Pesticides: Availability of Pesticide Registration Notice
Regarding the Non-Dietary Exposure Task Force

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Agency is announcing the availability of a Pesticide
Registration Notice (PR Notice) regarding the data development efforts
of the Non-Dietary Exposure Task Force (NDETF). This PR Notice (PR
Notice 2011-2) was issued by the Agency on November 10, 2011. PR
Notices are issued by the Office of Pesticide Programs to inform
pesticide registrants and other interested persons about important
policies, procedures, and registration related decisions, and serve to
provide guidance to pesticide registrants and OPP personnel. This
particular PR Notice updates PR Notice 2000-7 that initially announced
the formation of the NDETF. The updated Notice provides current
information concerning the NDETF's development of data supporting
pesticide registration, in which registrants may wish to participate.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Dumas, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this notice if you register
pesticide products intended for residential uses under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Since other
entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to
describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to
a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0877.

Publicly available docket materials are available either in the
electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available
in hard copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket
Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. What guidance does this PR notice provide?

    The Agency is announcing the issuance of Pesticide Registration
Notice (PR-2011-2) that addresses the data development efforts of the
NDETF. The formation of the NDETF was initially announced in PR Notice
2000-7 which was signed on August 4, 2000. When registering or
periodically reviewing an existing registration, the Agency evaluates
the potential risks to people from exposure to the pesticide in and
around the home. The NDETF was formed to develop information on
exposure to pesticides that can be used by EPA, and other regulatory
agencies responsible for assuring the safety of pesticides. Since the
initial notice in 2000, the membership of the task force has changed
and the specific data needs have been better defined. The purpose of
the PR Notice is to describe what data the NDETF has generated and
plans to generate, to describe how EPA expects to use the data, and to
inform registrants of the opportunity to join NDETF.

III. Do PR Notices contain binding requirements?

    The PR Notice discussed in this notice is intended to provide
information to EPA personnel and decision makers and to pesticide
registrants. While the requirements in the statutes and Agency
regulations are binding on EPA and the applicants, this PR Notice is
not binding on either EPA or pesticide registrants, and EPA may depart
from the guidance where circumstances warrant and without prior notice.
Likewise, pesticide registrants may assert that the guidance is not
appropriate generally or not applicable to a specific pesticide or
situation.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: November 10, 2011.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-30141 Filed 11-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 106 (Monday, June 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 33145]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13017]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 223, Airport Surface Wireless
Communications

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 223, Airport Surface
Wireless Communications.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
meeting of the RTCA Special Committee 223, Airport Surface Wireless
Communications.

DATES: The meeting will be held June 26-28, 2013, from 9:00 a.m.-5:00
p.m. daily.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Booz, Allen, Hamilton Offices,
1201 Maryland Avenue SW., Suite 5140, Washington, DC 20036 (Across from
the Portals Building) on June 26th and RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th
Street NW., Suite 910, Washington DC 20036 on June 27-28.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC, 20036, or by telephone at (202) 330-
0662/(202) 833-9339, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 223. The agenda will
include the following:

Wednesday, June 26, 2013 (Plenary at Booz Allen Facilities)

     Welcome, Introductions, Administrative Remarks.
     Agenda Overview.
     Review and Approve prior Plenary Meeting Summary and
Action Item Status.
     General Presentations of Interest.
     MOPS: Review and Disposition of Comments.

Thursday, June 27, 2013 (Plenary at RTCA Facilities)

     MOPS: Review and Disposition of Comments.

Friday, June 28, 2013 (Plenary at RTCA Facilities)

     Profiles: Review CCB actions and Dispositions.
     Review/Approval of Document--Minimum Operational
Performance Standards (MOPS) for the Aeronautical Mobile Airport
Communication System (AeroMACS) and Profiles for Publication.
     Review letter regarding WiMAX Forum Reference Resolution.
     Adjourn.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

     Issued in Washington, DC, on March 6, 2013.
Paige Williams,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Business Operations Group, Federal
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-13017 Filed 5-31-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 250)]
[Notices]
[Page 78474-78475]
[DOCID:fr29de06-116]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54995; File No. SR-Amex-2006-77]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange, LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To
Amend Rules 918 and 918--Ante Regarding Trading Rotations, Halts and
Suspensions

December 21, 2006.
    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 August 16, 2006, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Exchange. On December 5, 2006, Amex filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.\3\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \31\ In Amendment No. 1, Amex made clarifying changes to the
purpose section and made technical changes to the proposed rule
text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Amex Rules 918 and 918--ANTE
regarding trading rotations, halts and suspensions. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on Amex's Web site (http://www.amex.com (ACRS
), at Amex'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, Amex 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. Amex has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate reference to ``primary market''
set forth in Amex Rules 918(a) and 918--ANTE(a) and to amend the
reference to ``primary market'' in Amex Rules 918(b) and 918--ANTE(b).
    The Exchange proposes to amend Amex Rules 918(a) and 918--ANTE(a)
to delete the requirement that the opening of the trading rotation is
dependent on the opening of the underlying security in the primary
market. Currently, Amex Rules 918 and 918--ANTE(a) provide that a
trading rotation shall be employed at the opening of each business day
following the opening of the underlying security in the primary market.
``Primary market'' is defined in Amex Rules 900(b)(26) and 900--
ANTE(b)(26) as (i) the principal exchange market in which the
underlying security is traded so long as the underlying is principally
traded on a national securities exchange, and (ii) the market reflected
by the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation
System (the ``NASDAQ'') if it is equity securities principally traded
over-the-counter, or the market reflected by any widely recognized
quotation dissemination system if it is any other type of security.
    As a result of the trading of underlying securities on multiple
trading venues or markets (largely due to the introduction of
Electronic Communication Networks or ``ECNs''), it has become
increasingly difficult to determine, for purposes of Amex Rules 918(a)
and 918--ANTE(a), which marketplace is the ``primary market.'' As an
example, the Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') in connection with
its methodology for obtaining underlying security prices at expiration
changed to composite pricing.\4\ As a result of the number of
securities exchanges and ECNs trading a particular underlying security,
the Exchange submits that the analysis for determining the primary
market has become overly burdensome and uncertain, subjecting Exchange
staff to

instances of ``second guessing'' due to the varying degrees of
interpretation. Accordingly, for market certainty, the Exchange submits
that trading in an option should start once the underlying security has
opened for trading regardless of the particular market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A ``composite'' security price is defined as the last
reported sale price from any primary listing market (i.e., Amex,
NYSE and Nasdaq), participating regional exchanges or other markets.
See OCC Memo to Members 18930 (May 29, 2003) and Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 49045 (January 8, 2004), 69 FR 2377
(January 15, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Amex Rules 918(b) and 918--ANTE(b) provide that trading on any
Exchange option contract may be halted or suspended whenever the
Exchange deems such action appropriate. Included in these rules is a
list of factors that the Exchange may use to determine if a trading
halt or suspension is warranted. Pursuant to Amex Rules 918(b)(1) and
918--ANTE(b)(1), the Exchange may consider to halt or suspend trading
in an option contract if the underlying security has been halted or
suspended in the primary market. Similarly, the Exchange may also
consider, pursuant to Amex Rules 918(b)(2) and 918--ANTE(b)(2), halting
or suspending trading in an option contract if the opening of such
underlying stock in the primary market has been delayed due to unusual
circumstances.
    As set forth above, the Exchange submits that the use of the term
``primary market'' is ambiguous and subject to varying degrees of
interpretation. However, unlike openings, trading halts and suspensions
should not directly correspond to a halt or suspension in the
underlying in any market because such standard is too low for halting
or suspending trading in an option. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes
to implement trading halts and suspensions in any options contract if,
with respect to Amex Rules 918(b)(1) and 918--ANTE(b)(1), the
underlying security is subject to a trading halt or suspension across
several markets or in the primary listed market. Similarly, a trading
halt or suspension may also be implemented, with respect to Amex Rules
918(b)(2) and 918--ANTE(b)(2), if the opening of such underlying stock
across several markets or in the primary listed market has been delayed
due to unusual circumstances.
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate reference to ``primary market''
set forth in Amex Rule 918(a) and Rule 918--ANTE(a) and to amend the
reference to ``primary market'' in Amex Rule 918(b) and Rule 918--
ANTE(b). In addition, the Exchange also proposes to make clarifying
changes to these rules so that trading rotations, halts and suspensions
apply to any options on a stock, exchange traded fund and trust issued
receipt. In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange noted that adding references
to ``exchange traded fund and trust issued receipt'' to the proposed
rule text is intended to codify an existing practice on the Exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6 of the Act\5\ in general and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) \6\ in particular in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, and 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which Amex consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, as amended, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-Amex 2006-77 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex 2006-77. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. 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; 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-Amex 2006-77 and should be submitted on or before
January 19, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-22398 Filed 12-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 111 (Thursday, June 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35283-35284]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12405]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0042; Notice 1]

Continental Tire the Americas, LLC, Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Continental Tire the Americas, LLC (``CTA''), has determined
that certain Altimax RT 43 replacement passenger car tires do not fully
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New
Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. CTA filed an original
noncompliance report dated April 20, 2021, and subsequently petitioned
NHTSA on May 13, 2021, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This notice
announces receipt of CTA's petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before July 11, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except for Federal holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    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 comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the docket. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayton Lindley, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview

    CTA has determined that certain Altimax RT43 replacement passenger
car tires do not fully comply with the requirements of paragraph
S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light
Vehicles (49 CFR 571.139). CTA filed a noncompliance report dated April
20, 2021, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. CTA subsequently petitioned NHTSA on May
13, 2021, for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556,
Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
    This notice of receipt of CTA's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any Agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.

II. Tires Involved

    Approximately three (3) Altimax RT43 replacement passenger car
tires, size 175/65R14 82T, manufactured between March 8, 2020, and
March 14, 2020, are potentially involved.

III. Noncompliance

    CTA explains that the noncompliance is due to a mold error in which
the subject tires contain a tire identification number (TIN) that omits
the 3-digit plant code and the 6-symbol manufacturer's identification
mark as required by paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139 and paragraph
574.5(b). Specifically, the subject tires should have been labeled
``DOT 036 0F934V 1020'' on the outboard sidewall and ``DOT 036 0F934V''
on the inboard sidewall but were instead labeled ``DOT 1020'' on the
outboard sidewall and ``DOT'' on the inboard sidewall.

IV. Rule Requirements

    Paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139 includes the requirements
relevant to this petition.
     For tires manufactured on or after September 1, 2009, each
tire must be labeled with the tire identification number required by 49
CFR part 574 on the intended outboard sidewall of the tire.
     Except for retreaded tires, if a tire does not have an
intended outboard sidewall, the tire must be labeled with the tire
identification number required by 49 CFR part 574 on one sidewall and
with either the tire identification number or a partial tire
identification number, containing all characters in the tire
identification number except for the date code and, at the discretion
of the manufacturer, any optional code, on the other sidewall.

V. Summary of CTA's Petition

    The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of CTA's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by
CTA. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the
views of the Agency. CTA describes the subject noncompliance and
contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to
motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, CTA submitted the following reasoning:
    CTA says that in most instances, it ``tests its tires to standards
which exceed the FMVSS minimums.'' CTA asserts that ``the subject tires
contain all the necessary sidewall markings to show compliance with
FMVSS testing'' and that other than the incorrect TIN marking, the
tires ``meet or exceed'' FMVSS No. 139 performance and labeling
requirements.
    According to CTA, the serial sidewall of the subject tires displays
the correct DOT production week and year and when combined with other
markings available on the tire, they can be uniquely identified.
    CTA cites the following previous inconsequentiality petitions to
support its argument:
    a. Michelin North America, Inc., 85 FR 37495 (June 22, 2020).
    b. Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, 82 FR 52966 (November 15, 2017).
    c. Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, 82 FR 17510 (April 11, 2017).
    CTA states that it is not aware of any tire failures related to
performance that resulted in an accident, injury, property damage,
customer complaint, or any field reports associated with the
mislabeling.
    CTA says that they have quarantined its current inventory of the
noncompliant tires leaving three tires remaining in the market.
    CTA concludes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as
it relates to motor vehicle safety and that its petition to be exempted
from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject tires that CTA no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve equipment
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after CTA
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2022-12405 Filed 6-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33266-33267]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13553]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[DOT Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0012]

Proposed Collection of Information; Alcohol Impaired Driving
Countermeasures

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed collection of
information.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), on February 9, 2012 the agency published a 60
day notice in the Federal Register soliciting public comment on the
proposed information collection abstracted below. In further compliance
with the PRA, the agency now publishes this second notice announcing
the submission of its proposed collection to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and notifying the public about how to
submit comments in the proposed collection to OMB during the 30-day
comment period. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period was published on February 9, 2012 Vol. 77, No. 27, Page 6856.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before July 5, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket notice numbers cited at
the beginning of this notice and be

submitted to Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20590. Please identify the proposed collection of
information for which a comment is provided, by referencing its OMB
clearance Number. It is requested, but not required, that 2 copies of
the comment be provided. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10
a.m. to 5 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jackie Schraf at the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Regional Operations and
Program Delivery (NTI-200), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W46-496,
Washington, DC 20590. MS. Schraf's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Please identify the relevant collection of information by referring to
its OMB Control Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must first publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day public comment period and otherwise consult with
members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed
collection of information. The OMB has promulgated regulations
describing what must be included in such a document. Under OMB's
regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public comment
on the following:
    (i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected;
    (iv) How to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic
submission of responses.
    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the following proposed collections of information:
    Title: 23 CFR, Part 1313, Alcohol Impaired Driving
Countermeasures--Section 410.
    OMB Number: 2127-0501.
    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection of
information.
    Affected Public: The 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands.
    Abstract: An impaired driving incentive grant is available to
States that have an alcohol fatality rate of 0.5 or less per 100
million vehicle miles traveled as determined by using the most recent
Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data or that are one of the
ten States that have the highest alcohol related fatality rates as
determined by using the most recent FARS data. States designated as a
high fatality rate State must submit a grant expenditures plan for
conducting a high visibility impaired driving law enforcement program
and a report on the previous years activities. States may also qualify
through meeting specified program criteria. To demonstrate compliance
using program criteria a State must submit an application that shows
how they met three of eight criteria in FY2006, four of eight criteria
in FY2007 and five of eight criteria in FY2008, FY2009, and beyond.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 1261 hours annually.
    Estimated Number of respondents: 49.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Departments estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; and ways to enhance quality and
clarity of information.

Mary D. Gunnels,
Associate Administrator, Regional Operations and Program Delivery.
[FR Doc. 2012-13553 Filed 6-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


ATTACHMENT 3                                                        Premanufacture Notice (PMN) Form and Instructions                                EPA Form 7710-25                                         [For electronic copies of the PMN Form and Instructions, see http://epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/pmnforms.htm and follow the appropriate links.]


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 23555]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10689]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-1867-000]

Hunterstown Power, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Hunterstown Power, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is June 5, 2019.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 16, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-10689 Filed 5-21-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 1, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 168)]
[Notices]
[Page 45279]
[DOCID:fr01se09-122]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

4th Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 221: Aircraft Secondary
Barriers and Alternative Flight Deck Security Procedures

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 221 meeting: Aircraft
Secondary Barriers and Alternative Flight Deck Security Procedures.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 221: Aircraft Secondary Barriers and
Alternative Flight Deck Security Procedures.

DATES: The meeting will be held September 15-16, 2009. September 15th
from 12 a.m. to 5 p.m., September 16th from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., MacIntosh--NBAA and
Hilton--ATA Rooms, 1828 L Street, NW., Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW.,
Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (202)
833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice
is hereby given for a Special Committee 221: Aircraft Secondary
Barriers and Alternative Flight Deck Security Procedures meeting. The
agenda will include:
     Welcome/Introductions/Administrative Remarks;
     Approval of Summary of the Second Meeting held June 23-24,
2009, RTCA Paper No. 174-09/SC221-013;
     Leadership Comments;
     Review of Threat Work Group--Status Report;
     Review of Alternative Methods Work Group--Status Report;
     Review of Installed Physical Secondary Barrier (IPSB) Work
Group--Status Report;
     Presentation/Discussion of SC-221 Schedule and Milestones;
     Discussion of Working Group reports: re-allocation of
groups, capture learning points, discuss additional or follow-on goals;
     Approval and Tasking of Existing/Proposed Working Groups;
     Other Business--Including Proposed Agenda, Date and Place
for Next Meeting.

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 24, 2009.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. E9-21063 Filed 8-31-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67981-67985]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26727]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87673; File No. SR-OCC-2019-807]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of No Objection To Advance Notice Related to Proposed Changes to
The Options Clearing Corporation's Rules, Margin Policy, Margin
Methodology, Clearing Fund Methodology Policy, and Clearing Fund and
Stress Testing Methodology To Address Specific Wrong-Way Risk

December 6, 2019.

I. Introduction

    On October 10, 2019, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
advance notice SR-OCC-2019-807 (``Advance Notice'') pursuant to Section
806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act, entitled Payment, Clearing and Settlement
Supervision Act of 2010 (``Clearing Supervision Act'') \1\ and Rule
19b-4(n)(1)(i) \2\ under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'') \3\ to revise OCC's Rules, margin policy and
methodology, Clearing Fund policy, and Clearing Fund and stress testing
methodology to adopt new margin charges and other risk measures to
address the specific wrong-way risk presented by certain cleared
positions.\4\ The Advance Notice was published for public comment in
the Federal Register on November 12, 2019,\5\ and the

Commission has received no comments regarding the changes proposed in
the Advance Notice.\6\ The Commission is hereby providing notice of no
objection to the Advance Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.
    \4\ See Notice of Filing infra note 5, at 84 FR 61114.
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87476 (Nov. 6, 2019), 84
FR 61114 (Nov. 12, 2019) (File No. SR-OCC-2019-807) (``Notice of
Filing''). On October 10, 2019, OCC also filed a related proposed
rule change (SR-OCC-2019-010) with the Commission pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder
(``Proposed Rule Change''). 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) and 17 CFR 240.19b-
4, respectively. In the Proposed Rule Change, which was published in
the Federal Register on October 29, 2019, OCC seeks approval of
proposed changes to its rules necessary to implement the Advance
Notice. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87387 (Oct. 23, 2019),
84 FR 57890 (Oct. 29, 2019). The comment period for the related
Proposed Rule Change filing closed on November 19, 2019.
    \6\ Since the proposal contained in the Advance Notice was also
filed as a proposed rule change, all public comments received on the
proposal are considered regardless of whether the comments are
submitted on the Proposed Rule Change or the Advance Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in OCC's Rules and By-Laws, available at https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/bylaws.jsp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a central counterparty (``CCP''), OCC is exposed to its Clearing
Members' positions. To the extent that the value of a Clearing Member's
positions is positively correlated with the creditworthiness of the
Clearing Member, OCC faces specific wrong-way risk (``SWWR'').\8\ OCC
proposes changes to address such SWWR. Specifically OCC proposes to:
(1) Adopt a new SWWR margin add-on charge for OCC's margin methodology
(``SWWR Add-on''); (2) introduce stress test scenarios to measure the
SWWR, to the extent not addressed in margin, of cleared positions
involving Clearing Member-issued exchange-traded notes (``ETNs''); and
(3) impose restrictions on stock lending activity cleared by OCC.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ SWWR arises when an exposure to a participant is highly
likely to increase when the creditworthiness of that participant is
deteriorating. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78961
(September 28, 2016), 81 FR 70786, 70816, n. 317 (October 13, 2016)
(S7-03-14) (``Covered Clearing Agency Standards'').
    \9\ OCC also proposes clarifying and conforming changes to the
Clearing Fund Methodology Policy (``CFM Policy'') and Stress Testing
and Clearing Fund Methodology Description (``Methodology
Description'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. SWWR Margin Add-on

    As a general matter, OCC uses its System for Theoretical Analysis
and Numerical Simulations (``STANS'') methodology for calculating
Clearing Member margin requirements. OCC also incorporates add-on
charges to address risks not otherwise addressed by its STANS
methodology.\10\ OCC proposes to adopt a new margin add-on to address
SWWR at the Clearing Member account level (i.e., the SWWR Add-on). The
SWWR Add-on would address SWWR presented by cleared positions involving
equities and ETNs issued by a Clearing Member and its affiliates and
would comprise three components: (1) ``SWWR Equity Charge,'' (2) ``SWWR
ETN Charge,'' and (3) ``SWWR Residual.'' Each of these components is
discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See e.g. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86119 (Jun.
17, 2019), 84 FR 29267 (Jun. 21, 2019) (approving implementation of
an add-on charge ``to guard against potential shortfalls in margin
requirements that may arise due to the costs of liquidating the
portfolio of a defaulted Clearing Member.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. SWWR Equity Charge
    The proposed SWWR Equity Charge is based on the assumption that,
when a Clearing Member defaults, the value of any equity security
issued by the Clearing Member or its affiliates would fall to zero. For
purposes of calculating the SWWR Equity Charge, OCC would value a
Clearing Member's positions accordingly (i.e., all stocks, single stock
futures, call options, and put options would be valued at zero).\11\
Any potential gain from the SWWR positions would be excluded by
defining the minimum SWWR Equity Charge as zero. OCC stated that the
purpose of the SWWR Equity Charge would be to provide protection from
the risk of potential market exposure to products based on a Clearing
Member Group's own equity in a default or bankruptcy scenario.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Because the SWWR arising from equities issued by a Clearing
Member or its affiliates would be fully covered as part of margins,
OCC proposes to remove such positions from Clearing Fund
calculations under OCC's Clearing Fund methodology and would revise
its Methodology Description accordingly.
    \12\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 61116.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. SWWR ETN Charge
    The SWWR ETN Charge would be designed to address the risk that the
value of open positions related to uncollateralized ETNs issued by a
Clearing Member or its affiliates would be correlated with the Clearing
Member's credit quality. Similar to the SWWR Equity Charge, the SWWR
ETN Charge assumes that a degradation in the value of securities issued
by a Clearing Member or its affiliates would occur concurrently with
the Clearing Member's default. The SWWR ETN Charge, however, would not
assume a complete loss of value for the relevant securities (i.e., ETNs
issued by the Clearing Member or its affiliates). OCC states that such
uncollateralized ETNs are generally equivalent to unsecured senior
debt.\13\ OCC, in turn, proposes to utilize an industry standard
recovery rate assumption designed to reflect potential losses to ETN
positions for the purpose of setting the SWWR ETN Charge component of
the SWWR Add-on.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 61117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. SWWR Residual
    The SWWR Residual would ensure that implementation of the SWWR Add-
on would not reduce a Clearing Member's overall margin
requirements.\14\ To determine the SWWR Residual, OCC would first
calculate a ``base margin'' under on OCC's current methodology (i.e.,
not assuming any specific degradation in the value of securities issued
by a Clearing Member or its affiliates). Next, OCC would calculate a
``residual margin,'' which would represent the Clearing Member's margin
requirement for only those positions unaffected by the SWWR Equity
Charge and SWWR ETN Charge. Finally, the SWWR Residual would be the
difference between the residual margin and the base margin; however,
OCC would adjust the value of the SWWR Residual if the sum of the SWWR
Equity Charge, SWWR ETN Charge, and SWWR Residual would otherwise
reduce a Clearing Member's margin requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ OCC noted that where a customer of a Clearing Member has
net short positions referencing that Clearing Member's issued
equities, such positions may actually present ``right-way risk,''
whereby the position would result in a gain or margin credit for
that account as the credit quality of the Clearing Member
deteriorates. See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 61117, n. 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. SWWR Stress Test Scenarios

    As noted above, the proposed SWWR ETN Charge would not assume a
complete loss of value for ETNs issued by a Clearing Member or its
affiliates. The SWWR Add-on, in turn, would not generate margin
requirements designed to cover a scenario in which the recovery rate
for such ETNs would be zero. To address such a scenario, OCC proposes
to introduce new scenarios into the set of stress tests that OCC uses
to test the sufficiency of its financial resources (``SWWR Sufficiency
Scenarios''). To construct the SWWR Sufficiency Scenarios, OCC would
revise certain of its existing stress test scenarios by assuming a
value of zero for ETNs issued by a Clearing Member or its affiliates.
OCC stated that the introduction of SWWR Sufficiency Scenarios would
enable OCC to more accurately measure its credit risks as they relate
to SWWR and better test the sufficiency of its overall financial
resources as well as to call for additional resources as
appropriate.\15\

OCC believes, therefore, it would have sufficient financial resources
to cover the SWWR associated with SWWR ETN positions if such positions
were to be liquidated for less than the assumed recovery rate.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR 61117. OCC's current rules
authorize OCC to call for additional resources based on the results
of stress scenarios used to test the sufficiency of OCC's financial
resources. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83735 (Jul. 27,
2018), 83 FR 37855 (Aug. 2, 2018) (SR-OCC-2018-008). OCC's rules
also authorize adjustments to OCC's monthly Clearing Fund sizing
process based on the results of stress scenarios used to test the
sufficiency of OCC's financial resources. OCC believes, however,
that SWWR is more appropriately charged to the Clearing Member
presenting the risk. See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 61118. Based on
that belief, OCC proposes to revise the CFM Policy such that the
results of the SWWR Sufficiency Scenarios would not be used to
adjust OCC's monthly Clearing Fund sizing.
    \16\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 61117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Stock Lending Restrictions

    Through its stock loan programs,\17\ OCC novates stock loan
transactions and becomes the lender to each Borrowing Clearing Member
and the borrower to each Lending Clearing Member. OCC is exposed to
SWWR in such programs when a Clearing Member lends equity securities or
ETNs issued by the Clearing Member or its affiliates. To mitigate such
risks, OCC proposes prohibiting Clearing Members from lending equity
securities or ETNs issued by the Clearing Member or its affiliates
within OCC's stock loan programs. OCC does not believe that the
proposed prohibition would have a material impact on Clearing Members
because Clearing Members do not typically lend their own equity
securities, and borrowers do not typically accept equity securities
issued by their lending counterparty.\18\ Further, market participants
are able to engage in, and would continue to be able to engage in,
securities lending on an uncleared basis outside of OCC.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ OCC operates programs for clearing stock loan transactions
initiated either bilaterally between market participants or through
anonymous matching by a Loan Market. See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at
61115-16.
    \18\ See Notice of Filing, 84 FR at 61116.
    \19\ The proposed restrictions on lending activity cleared by
OCC would not prevent Clearing Members from lending equities or ETNs
issued by the Clearing Member or any affiliate outside of OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC proposes to implement the prohibition on Clearing Members
lending their own securities only on a going-forward basis. The
proposal would not affect stock lending activity cleared by OCC before
the implementation of the prohibition. Existing stock loan transaction
would, however, be subject to the SWWR Add-on described above.

III. Commission Findings and Notice of No Objection

    Although the Clearing Supervision Act does not specify a standard
of review for an advance notice, the stated purpose of the Clearing
Supervision Act is instructive: To mitigate systemic risk in the
financial system and promote financial stability by, among other
things, promoting uniform risk management standards for systemically
important financial market utilities (``SIFMUs'') and strengthening the
liquidity of SIFMUs.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See 12 U.S.C. 5461(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision Act \21\ authorizes
the Commission to prescribe regulations containing risk-management
standards for the payment, clearing, and settlement activities of
designated clearing entities engaged in designated activities for which
the Commission is the supervisory agency. Section 805(b) of the
Clearing Supervision Act \22\ provides the following objectives and
principles for the Commission's risk-management standards prescribed
under Section 805(a):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(a)(2).
    \22\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     To promote robust risk management;
     to promote safety and soundness;
     to reduce systemic risks; and
     to support the stability of the broader financial system.
    Section 805(c) provides, in addition, that the Commission's risk-
management standards may address such areas as risk-management and
default policies and procedures, among other areas.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has adopted risk-management standards under Section
805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision Act and Section 17A of the
Exchange Act (the ``Clearing Agency Rules'').\24\ The Clearing Agency
Rules require, among other things, each covered clearing agency to
establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures that are reasonably designed to meet certain minimum
requirements for its operations and risk-management practices on an
ongoing basis.\25\ As such, it is appropriate for the Commission to
review advance notices against the Clearing Agency Rules and the
objectives and principles of these risk management standards as
described in Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act. As
discussed below, the Commission believes the changes proposed in the
Advance Notice are consistent with the objectives and principles
described in Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act,\26\ and in
the Clearing Agency Rules, in particular Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4) and
(6).\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
68080 (October 22, 2012), 77 FR 66220 (Nov. 2, 2012) (S7-08-11). See
also Covered Clearing Agency Standards, 81 FR 70786. The Commission
established an effective date of December 12, 2016 and a compliance
date of April 11, 2017 for the Covered Clearing Agency Standards.
OCC is a ``covered clearing agency'' as defined in Rule 17Ad-
22(a)(5). The Commission established an effective date of December
12, 2016 and a compliance date of April 11, 2017 for the Covered
Clearing Agency Standards. OCC is a ``covered clearing agency'' as
defined in Rule 17Ad-22(a)(5).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \26\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Consistency With Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act

    The Commission believes that the proposal contained in OCC's
Advance Notice is consistent with the stated objectives and principles
of Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act. Specifically, as
discussed below, the Commission believes that the changes proposed in
the Advance Notice are consistent with promoting robust risk management
in the area of credit risk, promoting safety and soundness, reducing
systemic risks, and supporting the stability of the broader financial
system.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Commission believes that the adoption of the SWWR Add-on
would be consistent with the promotion of robust risk management at
OCC. To the extent that the value of a Clearing Member's positions is
positively correlated with the creditworthiness of the Clearing Member,
OCC faces SWWR. OCC's current margin methodology does not incorporate a
specific component designed to address SWWR for cleared positions. As
described above, the proposed SWWR Add-on would address SWWR arising
out of equities and ETNs issued by the relevant Clearing Member or its
affiliates underlying a Clearing Member's cleared positions. Further,
the SWWR Add-on would be designed to avoid any unintended reduction in
margin requirements resulting from ``right-way risk'' in a Clearing
Member's accounts.\29\ Adopting an add-on charge to address a risk not
captured elsewhere in OCC's margin methodology would provide for more
comprehensive management of OCC's risks, consistent with the promotion
of robust risk management.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See infra at note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Commission believes that introduction of the SWWR
Sufficiency Scenarios would be consistent with the

promotion of robust risk management at OCC. The ETN component of the
SWWR Add-on would not address the exposures presented by a complete
loss of value for ETNs issued by the Clearing Member or its affiliates.
To address the potential credit exposure represented by the value of
such ETNs going to zero, OCC proposes to introduce the new SWWR
Sufficiency Scenarios described above. OCC would use the SWWR
Sufficiency Scenarios to test its total financial resources.
Introducing new scenarios to test the sufficiency of OCC's financial
resources generally and to address assumptions underlying OCC's margin
methodology more specifically (i.e., a non-zero ETN recovery rate),
would be consistent with the promotion of robust risk management.
    Third, the Commission believes that the collection of resources to
address the exposures discussed above and the proposed prohibition of
certain stock lending activity as described above would be consistent
with the promotion of safety and soundness at OCC. The collection of
additional financial resources, whether in margin or Clearing Fund
contributions, would better enable OCC to manage the potential losses
arising out of a Clearing Member default. Prohibiting certain stock
loan activity that could generate losses in the event of a Clearing
Member default would avoid those potential losses all together.
Avoiding or holding resources to address such losses would promote
OCC's safety and soundness.
    Finally, the Commission believes that the proposal is generally
consistent with reducing systemic risk and supporting the broader
financial system. As discussed above, OCC proposes to identify and
manage SWWR posed by the cleared positions of its Clearing Members. OCC
proposes to collect resources to address such risks as margin and, for
more extreme scenarios, as Clearing Fund contributions. Additionally,
OCC would prohibit stock loan transactions that give rise to SWWR.
Prohibiting such activity and collecting additional margin to
collateralize exposures created by permitted activity could reduce the
probability that OCC would mutualize a loss arising out of the close-
out of a defaulted Clearing Member that generated SWWR. While
unavoidable under certain circumstances, reducing the probability of
loss mutualization during periods of market stress could reduce the
transmission of financial risks arising from a Clearing Member default
to non-defaulting Clearing Members, their customers, and the broader
options market. Further, OCC maintaining additional Clearing Fund
contributions would further reduce the potentiality that OCC would need
to call for additional resources from Clearing Members in times of
market stress. The Commission believes, therefore, that the proposed
changes would be consistent with the reduction of systemic risk and
supporting the stability of the broader financial system.
    Accordingly, and for the reasons stated above, the Commission
believes the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with
Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) Under the Exchange Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the Exchange Act requires, in part, that a
covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively
identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures to
participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and
settlement processes.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, OCC proposes to prohibit each Clearing Member
submitting for clearing any stock loan activity involving the lending
of equity securities or ETNs issued by such a Clearing Member or its
affiliates going forward. Under the proposal, OCC would identify those
stock loan transactions presenting SWWR and avoid any potential
exposures arising out of such transactions through the proposed
prohibition. Further, for those transactions that would not be affected
by the prohibition (i.e., existing transactions), OCC proposes to
measure, monitor, and manage its exposures through the use of the SWWR
Add-on described above and discussed below. Accordingly, the Commission
believes that OCC's proposal in the Advance Notice to prohibit certain
stock loan transactions is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) under the
Exchange Act.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and (iii) under the Exchange Act require
that a covered clearing agency's policies and procedures meet the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) by maintaining financial resources
at the minimum to enable OCC to cover a wide range of foreseeable
stress scenarios that include, but are not limited to, the default of
the participant family that would potentially cause the largest
aggregate credit exposure for OCC in extreme but plausible market
conditions.\33\ Further, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi) under the Exchange Act
requires that a covered clearing agency's policies and procedures meet
the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4) by testing the sufficiency of a
covered clearing agency's total financial resources available to meet
the minimum financial resource requirements under Rules 17Ad-
22(e)(4)(i) through (iii).\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-
22(e)(4)(iii).
    \34\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above and discussed below, the proposed SWWR Add-on is
designed to measure and manage OCC's credit exposures to Clearing
Members to the extent those exposures arise out of SWWR related to
cleared positions. One component of the SWWR Add-on--the SWWR ETN
Charge--would not, however, fully cover OCC's potential exposure
through margin because it would not assume a complete loss of value for
ETNs issued by the Clearing Member or its affiliates. To address the
potential credit exposure represented by the value of ETNs issued by
the Clearing Member or its affiliates going to zero, OCC proposes to
introduce the new SWWR Sufficiency Scenarios described above. OCC would
use the SWWR Sufficiency Scenarios to test its total financial
resources and to call for additional resources as necessary to ensure
the resources it holds would be sufficient to enable OCC to cover
exposures arising under the relevant stress scenarios. Accordingly, and
for the reasons stated above, the Commission believes the changes
proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(4)(i), (iii), and (vi) under the Exchange Act.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i); 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(iii);
17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6) Under the Exchange Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) under the Exchange Act requires that a
covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to cover, if the
covered clearing agency provides central counterparty services, its
credit exposure to participants by establishing a risk-based margin
system that, at a minimum, considers, and produces margin levels
commensurate with, the risks and particular attributes of each relevant
product, portfolio, and market.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, OCC faces SWWR to the extent that the value of a
Clearing Member's positions is positively

correlated with the creditworthiness of the Clearing Member. OCC
proposes to cover its exposure to such SWWR posted by its Clearing
Members through the introduction of the SWWR Add-on. The SWWR Add-on
consists of three components. Two of those components--the SWWR Equity
Charge and SWWR ETN Charge--are designed to produce margin levels
commensurate with the particular attributes of certain products that
OCC clears in terms of the likely recovery available in the event of a
default by the issuing Clearing Member. Further, the SWWR Residual
would ensure that the introduction of the SWWR Add-on could not
inadvertently weaken OCC's current margin methodology due to the
potential existence of ``right-way risk'' in a Clearing Member's
accounts.\37\ Accordingly, and for the reasons stated above, the
Commission believes the adoption of a margin add-on charge designed to
cover exposures arising out of SWWR is consistent with Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(6)(i) under the Exchange Act.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See infra at note 14.
    \38\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore noticed, pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(I) of the
Clearing Supervision Act, that the Commission does not object to
Advance Notice (SR-OCC-2019-807) and that OCC is authorized to
implement the proposed change as of the date of this notice or the date
of an order by the Commission approving proposed rule change SR-OCC-
2019-010 whichever is later.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-26727 Filed 12-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 229 (Monday, November 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74822-74824]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30243]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76507; File No. SR-ISE-2015-41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees

November 23, 2015.
    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 November 10, 2015, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(the ``Exchange'' or ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission the proposed rule change, as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ISE proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees as described in more
detail below. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Internet Web site at http://www.ise.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries,
set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects
of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Schedule of
Fees to introduce a new set of rebates to the Qualified Contingent
Cross (``QCC'') and/or other solicited crossing orders, including
solicited orders executed in the Solicitation, Facilitation or Price
Improvement Mechanisms, pricing initiative that offers rebates to
members who execute a specified volume of QCC and other solicited
crossing orders in a month. This new set of rebates, as proposed,
offers a lower rebate to members that execute a specified volume of QCC
and solicited orders between two Priority Customers \3\ (```Customer to
Customer' Orders''). The Exchange notes that there is no change to how
volume is calculated for the volume tiers. Thus, members will continue
to obtain the tier level based on all QCC and/or solicited crossing
orders' originating side volume. Members will receive the Non-
``Customer to Customer'' Order \4\ rebate for their Non-``Customer to
Customer'' Orders and the ``Customer to Customer'' Order rebate for
their ``Customer to Customer'' Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that
(i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not place
more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s).
    \4\ ``Non-`Customer to Customer' Orders'' are QCC and/or other
solicited crossing orders, including solicited orders executed in
the Solicitation, Facilitation or Price Improvement Mechanisms, and
excluding ``Customer to Customer'' Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange offers members rebates in QCC and/or other
solicited crossing orders (including ``Customer to Customer'' Orders),
i.e. orders executed in the Solicitation,

Facilitation, or Price Improvement Mechanisms where the agency order is
executed against an order solicited from another party. These rebates
are provided for each originating side of a crossing order, based on a
member's volume in the crossing mechanisms during a given month.
Currently, for members that execute 0 to 99,999 originating contract
sides (``Tier 1'') the rebate is $0.00 per contract, for members that
execute 100,00 to 199,999 originating contract sides (``Tier 2'') the
rebate is $0.05 per contract, for members that execute 200,000 to
499,999 originating contract sides (``Tier 3'') the rebate is $0.07 per
contract, for members that execute 500,000 to 699,999 originating
contract sides (``Tier 4'') the rebate is $0.08 per contract, for
members that execute 700,000 to 999,999 originating contract sides
(``Tier 5'') the rebate is $0.09 per contract, and for members that
execute 1,000,000 originating contract sides or more (``Tier 6'') the
rebate is $0.11 per contract.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The rebate is applied to the originating contract side of
QCC and solicited crossing orders traded in a given month once a
member reaches the specified volume threshold/Tier during that
month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to offer a new set of rebates for
``Customer to Customer'' Orders. These rebates will be provided to
members for each originating contract side of a ``Customer to
Customer'' Order in all symbols traded on the Exchange as follows: For
Tier 1 the rebate is $0.00, for Tiers 2 through 3 the rebate is $0.01,
and for Tiers 4 through 6 the rebate is $0.03.
    Finally, the Exchange notes that all originating contract side
volume will continue to contribute to the member's Tier level. For
example, if a member has 175,000 originating contract sides for Non-
``Customer to Customer'' Orders and 75,000 originating contract sides
for ``Customer to Customer'' Orders, the member's aggregated volume
will be 250,000 placing them in Tier 3 (200,000 to 499,999). As a
result, the member will receive a rebate of $0.07 per originating
contract side for its Non-``Customer to Customer'' Orders and a rebate
of $0.01 per originating contract side for its ``Customer to Customer''
Orders.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it is designed to provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to offer
lower rebates for certain ``Customer to Customer'' Orders because other
exchanges, including the CBOE for example, offer no rebate (credit) for
customer to customer executions.\8\ Further, the Exchange believes it
is reasonable and equitable to continue to provide for the opportunity
to receive rebates as these proposed rebates are designed to attract
additional order flow to the Exchange and continue to remain attractive
to market participants. The Exchange believes that the proposed fees
are not unfairly discriminatory because these fees would be uniformly
applied to all ``Customer to Customer'' Orders. Additionally, as fees
for Priority Customer orders continue to decrease, it has become
necessary for the Exchange to lower rebates for ``Customer to
Customer'' Orders in order to balance the decrease in fees for Priority
Customer orders and the rebates provided for ``Customer to Customer''
Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See CBOE Fee Schedule, QCC Rate Table, Notes at https://www.cboe.com/publish/feeschedule/CBOEFeeSchedule.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\9\ the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
believes that the proposed rebates remain competitive with the many
rebates (if any) offered by other options exchanges as discussed above.
Further, the rebates remain attractive to market participants. The
Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily direct their order flow to competing venues.
In such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and
consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain competitive with
other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed fee changes reflect this competitive environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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)(ii) of the Act,\10\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\11\ because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-ISE-2015-41 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-ISE-2015-41. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written

communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-ISE-2015-41 and should be submitted by December 21,
2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-30243 Filed 11-27-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P