[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 143 (Tuesday, July 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44638-44640]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18816]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64937; File No. SR-CHX-2011-17]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Regarding the
Submission by the Exchange of Clearing-Related Information for Trades
Executed on the Exchange as Well as for Trades Executed Otherwise Than
on the Exchange

July 20, 2011.
    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 July 7, 2011, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``CHX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The 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

    The Exchange proposes to add new Rule 6 to Article 21 (Clearance
and Settlement) to set forth the terms upon which the Exchange shall
submit information for clearing and settlement, and to amend Article 1,
Rule 1 (Definitions), and Article 21, Rule 1 (Trade Recording with a
Qualified Clearing Agency) to define certain relevant terms. The text
of this proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
(http://www.chx.com), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary and in
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 CHX included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received regarding the proposal. The text of
these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV
below. The CHX 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 is proposing to add new Rule 6 to Article 21
(Clearance and Settlement) to set forth the terms upon which the
Exchange shall submit information for clearing and settlement, and to
amend Article 1, Rule 1 (Definitions), and Article 21, Rule 1 (Trade
Recording with a Qualified Clearing Agency) to define certain relevant
terms. New Article 21, Rule 6 provides for the submission of clearing
related information to a Qualified Clearing Agency (currently, the
National Securities Clearing Corp. or NSCC).\3\ Proposed Rule 6(a)
addresses the submission to NSCC of clearing information for trades
executed on the Exchange and is based upon the provisions of CBOE Rule
6.50 (Submission for Clearance).\4\ Proposed Rule 6(a) specifies that
all transactions executed on the Exchange shall be submitted for
clearance to a Qualified Clearing Agency, and all such transactions
shall be subject to the rules of the Qualified Clearing Agency.\5\ The
Clearing Participant shall be responsible for the clearance of the
Exchange transactions of such Clearing Participant and of each
Participant who gives up such Clearing Participant's name pursuant to
either a Letter of Guarantee filed under Article 7, Rule 10 with the
Exchange or other authorization given by such Clearing Participant to
such Participant.\6\ These provisions are typical in the clearance and
settlement of exchange transactions and fairly place the responsibility
for paying for, or delivery of, securities on the Participant in which
name the trades are submitted for clearance and settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In proposed Article 1, Rule 1 (ff), a Qualified Clearing
Agency is defined a clearing agency as defined in Section 3(a)(23)
of the Exchange Act which is registered with the Commission pursuant
to the provisions of the Section 17A(b)(2) of the Exchange Act or
has obtained from the Commission an exemption from registration
granted specifically to allow the clearing agency to provide
confirmation and affirmation services. CHX is proposing to delete
the existing, but somewhat outdated, definitions of the terms
Qualified Clearing Agency, Registered Clearing Agency and Fully
Interfaced Clearing Agency from the Interpretations and Polices
[sic] section of Article 21, Rule 1 and replace them with the
definition of Qualified Clearing Agency in Article 1, Rule 1 in
order to update its rules and ensure that the definition applies
concurrently to proposed new Rule 6.
    \4\ The Exchange notes that existing Article 21, Rule 1(d)
provides that the Exchange shall submit trade data regarding every
transaction that is executed on, and reported to, the Exchange to a
Qualified Clearing Agency for recording. We propose to add Rule 6(a)
in order to provide absolute clarity regarding the nature and scope
of the Exchange's activity regarding clearing submissions.
    \5\ The CHX submits clearing information to NSCC through the
Regional Interface Operation (``RIO'') system.
    \6\ We proposed to define the term Clearing Participant in
Article 1, Rule 1(ee) as a Participant which has been admitted to
membership in a Qualified Clearing Agency pursuant to the provisions
of the Rules of the Qualified Clearing Agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed new Rule 6(b) addresses clearing submissions made via CHX
systems for transactions executed on another trading center or in the
over-the-counter marketplace and is based upon Nasdaq Rule 7038 (Step-
Outs and Sales Fee Transfers). Such submissions may be made by the
Exchange only on behalf of a CHX-registered Institutional Broker acting
as an authorized agent of a Clearing Participant.\7\ The Institutional
Broker may submit a clearing-only entry into the Exchange's systems for
the purpose of transferring securities from one Clearing Participant to
another provided that the trade has been properly reported for
transaction reporting purposes. Once all of the final clearing
allocations have been entered into the Exchange systems for submission
to NSCC, the submissions are deemed to be ``locked in'' for purposes of
comparison and settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ CHX-registered Institutional Brokers are an elective sub-
category of Exchange Participants requiring registration with the
Exchange and are subject to the obligations of Article 17 of the CHX
rules, in addition to the other provisions of Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These submissions of non-Exchange executions may occur in several
circumstances. First, an Institutional Broker may buy or sell
securities on another trading center as a correspondent of a clearing
member of that trading center. Any resulting execution report would be
``flipped'' from the executing clearing member via entries in the
Exchange's systems to the trading account of the Institutional Broker
or the CHX Clearing Participant on whose behalf it is acting. Second,
an Institutional Broker may instruct a third party broker-dealer (which
is not an Institutional Broker) to execute a cross transaction in the
over-the-counter market and report the transaction to a Trade Reporting
Facility (``TRF'') using its trading symbol or the symbol of its

clearing firm for purposes of reporting it to the Consolidated Tape.
The Institutional Broker may then enter the transaction information
into the Exchange's systems, and transfer the positions from its own
trading account (or the account of its clearing firm) to the accounts
of ultimate beneficiaries of the trade. Once all components of the
transaction are properly allocated, the information will be forwarded
to the National Securities Clearing Corp. (``NSCC'') via the Exchange's
systems for clearance and settlement. Third, transactions may be
executed on another trading center by a third party broker-dealer,
which then utilizes an Institutional Broker as its agent for handling
the allocation of the clearing information. These third party
transactions may include both cross transactions executed in the over-
counter-market [sic] and reported to a TRF by the third party broker-
dealer, as well as purchases or sales of securities by the third party
broker-dealer on another exchange or other trading center.\8\ The third
party broker-dealer instructs an Institutional Broker to handle any
substitution of Clearing Participants and allocation of the trade.
Clearing information for third party cross trades and single-sided
purchases or sales is then processed within the CHX Brokerplex[supreg]
system \9\ and submitted to NSCC in the same manner as if the trades
had been executed by an Institutional Broker as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Institutional Broker may be instructed to allocate the
trades at an average price of the transactions executed by the third
party broker-dealer.
    \9\ The Brokerplex[supreg] system is an order entry, management
and recordation system provided by the Exchange for use by
Institutional Brokers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to ensure that the actions of the Institutional Broker are
fully authorized by the Clearing Participant, proposed Rule 6(b)
requires that Institutional Brokers making such submissions must be a
party to an agreement with the Clearing Participant in which name the
entries are submitted under which the Institutional Broker has received
authorization from the Clearing Participant to act on its behalf.\10\
Copies of these agreements shall be filed by the Institutional Broker
with the Exchange. The Exchange represents that it will monitor
clearing submissions made pursuant to Rule 6(b) to ensure that the
Institutional Brokers involved in those transactions have the
appropriate agreements in place, and will take disciplinary action to
enforce this requirement in appropriate circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In addition, the Exchange requires Clearing Participants to
sign a clearing agreement by which the latter accepts responsibility
for non-Exchange transactions submitted to NSCC through the auspices
of an authorized Institutional Broker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that while the systems used by the CHX in making
such clearance submissions do not contain fully-automated comparison
features, there are procedural safeguards which occur as part of these
submissions to ensure that the manual comparison is valid. For example,
many of these transactions represent the cash equities component of
combination stock-options orders or a hedge on a derivatives position.
The Institutional Broker entering into Brokerplex the clearing
information it receives from its customer is responsible for ensuring
that all of the final allocations made via the step-out process are
accurate and complete. Clearing information will not normally be
forwarded to the Clearing Agency until all of the allocations are
confirmed with the order sender. Institutional Brokers shall be
required to maintain agreements with both Clearing Participants and any
non-Participant customers which authorize the Institutional Broker to
make the clearing-only submissions and bind the Parties to the trade.
Furthermore, the Institutional Broker normally communicates the
allocation information to the Clearing Participant in which name the
submissions are made to NSCC in order to prevent breaks or disputes
regarding the allocations.
    A Participant is prohibited from using a non-tape, clearing-only
submission for the purpose of effecting a transaction required to be
trade reported and that has not been trade reported or reporting a
trade for regulatory purposes.\11\ Submission of non-tape, clearing-
only records to the Exchange by a Participant does not satisfy any
obligation such members may have to report transactions as required by
the applicable rules of other self-regulatory organizations. New
Interpretation and Policy .01 to Rule 6 will require that an
Institutional Broker submitting an entry for a transaction executed
otherwise than on the Exchange obtain documentary evidence of the non-
Exchange trade execution no later than the close of trading. This will
ensure that, irrespective of historical practices described above, the
Institutional Broker will have to receive written evidence of the non-
Exchange trade it submitted for clearing, thus strengthening the
safeguards imbedded in the process of submitting such trades for
comparison. New Interpretation and Policy .02 reinforces the implied
requirement that .02 [sic] when an Institutional Broker enters a non-
tape, clearing-only record, the Institutional Broker shall be
responsible for ensuring that all clearing information is accurate and
complete prior to its submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Exchange plans to monitor the activity of Participants
which make clearing-only submissions for compliance with applicable
trade reporting rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section (c) of Proposed Rule 6 governs non-tape riskless
submissions.\12\ These provisions would permit an Institutional Broker
registered with the Exchange to make non-tape submissions into the
Exchange's systems for submission to clearing to facilitate riskless
transactions taking place on other national securities exchanges, or
the over-the-counter market. For riskless transactions in which an
Institutional Broker, after having received an order to buy a security,
purchases the security at the same price to satisfy the order to buy
or, after having received an order to sell, sells the security at the
same price to satisfy the order to sell, the Institutional Broker may
submit, for the offsetting ``riskless'' portion of the transaction, a
clearing-only report. The Exchange will also obtain and keep a record
identifying transactions which are handled as ``riskless principal.''
The Exchange believes that the provisions of Section (c) of proposed
Rule 6 would govern the activity of Institutional Brokers when they buy
or sell securities on another national securities exchange, or in the
over-the-counter marketplace, on behalf of another client and when the
addition of new Clearing Participants via the step-in process as
described above is not required. Nothing in the provisions of Section
(c) of proposed Rule 6 relieves any Participant or other party from its
obligation to fully and properly report transactions as required by the
applicable rules of other self regulatory organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Article 9, Rule 14 (Reporting Riskless Principal
Transactions) describes the manner in which Exchange Participants
are required to report riskless principal transactions for trade
reporting purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Section (d) of Rule 6 provides that the Exchange shall not
be responsible or liable in any way whatsoever to any member, member
organization, clearing member organization, Qualified Clearing Agency
or securities depository for compared trades, the failure to compare
trades or for any delays, errors or omissions in the comparison process
or for the production and delivery of or for the failure to produce and
deliver lists and reports.
    Each Clearing Participant which is a party to a non-tape, clearing-
only submission under this rule will pay a Trade Processing Fee in the
amount

specified in the Exchange's Fee Schedule.\13\ As part of this filing,
we propose to retain the Trade Processing Fee charged to Participants
for the clearing submission service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Proposed Article 21, Rule 6(e). The Trade Processing Fees
are specified in Section E.7. of the CHX Schedule of Fees and
Assessments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act in general,\14\ and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) in particular,\15\ in that it is designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transaction in securities, to remove impediments and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest by setting forth the rules and
principles governing the submission of clearing information to a
Qualified Clearing Agency. By facilitating the submission for both CHX
and non-CHX executed trades, the Exchange is providing a safe, reliable
means of submitting such information to a Qualified Clearing Agency,
responding to the preferences of certain Participants to have CHX make
such clearing-related submissions, and introducing competition with
other exchanges, such as Nasdaq, which provide similar services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) As the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) by order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, 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-CHX-2011-17 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2011-17. 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 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of CHX. 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 publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2011-17 and should be
submitted on or before August 16, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-18816 Filed 7-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 62 (Monday, April 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19568-19570]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07460]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0087]

Limited Service Exclusion for Household Goods Motor Carriers and
Related Registration Requirements for Brokers

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA provides notice and requests comments on the Agency's
process for determining the appropriate use of the Limited Service
Exclusion (LSE), a statutory exception to the definition of Household
Goods (HHG) motor carrier provided at 49 U.S.C. 13102(12)(C). In
addition, this notice explains the registration requirements of brokers
that arrange for the transportation of shipments that are eligible for
the LSE.

DATES: You must submit comments on or before May 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA-2013-0087 by any one of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, (M-30), U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room 12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
All submissions must include the Agency name and docket number for this
notice. See the ``Public Participation'' heading below for instructions
on submitting comments and additional information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kenneth Rodgers, Commercial
Enforcement and Investigations Division, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>
or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials. All comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal and/or
copyrighted information you provide.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2013-0087), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of
these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing
address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of your
document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
insert ``FMCSA-2013-0087'' in the ``Search'' box, and then click the
``Search'' button to the right of the white box. Click on the top
``Comment Now'' box which appears next to the notice. Fill in your
contact information, as desired and your comment, uploading documents
if appropriate. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8[frac12] by 11
inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this enforcement policy based on your
comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this notice as
being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
insert ``FMCSA-2013-0087'' in the ``Search'' box and and then click on
``Search.'' Click on the ``Open Docket Folder'' link and all the
information for the notice, and the list of comments will appear with a
link to each one. Click on the comment you would like to read. If you
do not have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by
visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of

the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    All comments received will be posted with personal information you
have provided to http://www.regulations.gov. Anyone may search the
electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or of the person signing
the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the
Federal Docket Management System published in the Federal Register on
December 29, 2010 (75 FR 82132), or you may visit http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12-29/pdf/2010-32876.pdf.

Background

    The Limited Service Exclusion (LSE) is a statutory provision that
pertains to the definition of ``household goods motor carrier'' at 49
U.S.C. 13102(12)(C). Congress defined a HHG motor carrier in 49 U.S.C.
13102(12)(A) as a ``motor carrier that, in the ordinary course of its
business of providing transportation of household goods, offers some or
all of the following additional services: (i) Binding and nonbinding
estimates; (ii) Inventorying; (iii) Protective packing and unpacking of
individual items at personal residences; and (iv) Loading and unloading
at personal residences.''
    Through the LSE, Congress specifically excluded certain motor
carriers from the definition of HHG motor carrier: ``[W]hen the motor
carrier provides transportation of household goods in containers or
trailers that are entirely loaded and unloaded by an individual (other
than an employee or agent of the motor carrier) . . .'' the carrier is
not considered a HHG motor carrier. 49 U.S.C. 13102(12)(C).
Transportation falling under the LSE is not subject to the consumer
protection regulations applicable to HHG shipments at 49 CFR Part 375,
HHG motor carrier registration requirements at 49 CFR Part 365, or the
cargo insurance requirements at 49 CFR Part 387.
    The FMCSA is issuing this notice to provide clarity on those
transportation services which fall within the scope of the LSE. The
Agency has examined the legislative history relating to this provision,
which makes clear that Congress intended to distinguish traditional,
full service moving companies that offer some or all of the
``additional services'' noted above from ``a motor carrier solely
providing transportation of household goods entirely packed in, or
unpacked from, one or more containers[hellip].'' Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users,
Sec.  4202(b), Public Law 109-59, Conf. Rep. No. 109-203.
    The FMCSA understands that Congress thereby intended to create an
economic opportunity for companies providing a lower cost, ``no
frills'' moving option for shippers willing to pack their own
belongings or to hire separate labor. Congress directed, however, that
the loading and unloading may not be provided by an agent or employee
of the company transporting the packed container.

Enforcement Policy and Process

    Regarding the applicability of the LSE to specific entities, given
the varied nature of the moving industry, FMCSA has concluded that
whether an individual motor carrier is or is not eligible for the LSE
must be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the
entirety of the relationship between a motor carrier and the individual
that loads and unloads the HHG.
    For enforcement purposes, the factors relevant to the determination
of whether or not the LSE should apply are:
    (1) Web site statements and other advertising, including claims or
statements implying that the container company will provide HHG packing
or other specialized services, or, by contrast, disclaiming HHG motor
carrier status and clarifying that the company does not provide such
services;
    (2) The level of control by the motor carrier over the individual
providing packing and loading services;
    (3) The organizational structure of the motor carrier and the
relationship of that entity to the individual providing loading and
unloading services;
    (4) Commonality of employees between the motor carrier and any
entity providing loading and unloading services, including, but not
limited to corporate officers;
    (5) The nature of referrals for loading and packing services;
    (6) The nature and extent of business income derived from the
referral for packing and loading services;
    (7) Other factors that may be relevant to defining the relationship
between the motor carrier and individual providing packing and loading
services; or
    (8) Other factors relevant to a determination that a motor carrier
holds itself out as providing ``full service'' HHG services.
    FMCSA believes that Congress did not intend the LSE as a mechanism
for companies engaged in traditional household goods moving to evade
regulatory oversight. Thus, the Agency will examine very closely any
company statements on the Internet or in other advertising claiming to
offer ``full service moving'' or similar comprehensive moving service
packages. The Agency will generally deem companies holding themselves
out as HHG movers through such statements to be, in fact, HHG movers
and ineligible for the LSE.
    By statute, the LSE also does not apply where the relationship
between a motor carrier and the individual that loads or unloads the
HHG is determined to be that of an employer/employee or principal/
agent. Under these circumstances, FMCSA will consider the container
company a HHG motor carrier if it meets the definition of HHG motor
carrier under 49 U.S.C. 13102(12)(A).
    While no single factor is paramount in assessing the business
relationships between a container company and loading/packing labor,
the extent of a motor carrier's control over the individual performing
the loading/packing service is highly significant. Generally, the
closer the relationship between the motor carrier and the individual
loading/unloading the HHG, the less likely the motor carrier will be to
qualify for the LSE. FMCSA will take into account the totality of the
circumstances in defining the relationship between the motor carrier
and the individual loading and unloading. As noted, FMCSA determines
eligibility for the LSE on a case by case basis, utilizing factors
including those above.
    We are seeking comments on the Agency's factors for determining if
the operation is eligible for the LSE.
    The following examples illustrate how FMCSA would determine if the
LSE applies.

Example A

    Bach's Movers, a container company, advertises itself as ``The
Lowest Cost Moving Option'' on its company Web site. The Web site has a
link to ``XYZ Moving Helpers'' and recommends that Bach's customers
contact XYZ directly for assistance with packing and unpacking. FMCSA
investigation reveals that XYZ pays Bach's a 3 percent referral fee for
every customer that contracts with XYZ after visiting Bach's Web site.
Two of Bach's employees work part time for XYZ on weekends. The two
companies have separate management, however, and FMCSA has

no information suggesting that Bach's owns or controls the operations
of XYZ. Bach's is eligible for the LSE and is not a HHG mover.

Example B

    Q-Bic Crates Movers, Inc. claims on its Web site to be a ``Top
Notch Moving Company'' and to provide ``the lowest cost, high quality
moving services.'' Q-Bic Crates provides binding and nonbinding
estimates and inventorying services. The company's Web site refers
customers to Q-Bic Muscles, Inc. for assistance with packing and
unpacking. FMCSA has received complaints that when Q-Bic Crates
employees deliver containers to shippers' homes, they attempt to
pressure shippers into signing agreements for labor from Q-Bic Muscles.
Investigation reveals that Q-Bic Crates Movers and Q-Bic Muscles have
owners and officers in common, are run out of the same location and
pool their revenue to pay salaries to several of the same individuals.
Approximately 95 percent of Q-Bic Muscles' revenue is from Q-Bic Crates
customers. Q-Bic Crates is not eligible for the LSE and must comply
with the consumer protection and other regulations applicable to HHG
motor carriers.

Definition of the Term ``Agent''

    One determinant of whether or not a carrier is providing
transportation that qualifies for the LSE is whether an ``agent'' of
the carrier is performing loading and unloading services. The FMCSA
defines the term ``agent'' by applying its commonly accepted meaning:
``one who is authorized to act for or in place of another; a
representative.'' Black's Law Dictionary, (8th ed. 2004). ``Agency is
the fiduciary relationship that arises when one person (a `principal')
manifests assent to another person (an `agent') that the agent shall
act on the principal's behalf and subject to the principal's control
and the agent manifests assent or otherwise so consents to act.''
Restatement (Third) of Agency Sec.  1.01. What does or does not
constitute authorization to act for or in place of another will depend
upon the details and circumstances of the parties' relationship.

Whether an Entity Is Operating as a HHG Broker

    The FMCSA defines a ``household goods broker,'' in part, as a
person that arranges ``for transportation of household goods by motor
carrier for compensation.'' 49 CFR 371.103. Therefore, whether or not a
broker is a ``household goods broker'' is based upon whether
``transportation of household goods'' is taking place. The FMCSA and
its predecessor, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), have long
focused on the nature of the service, as opposed to the physical goods
being transported, to determine whether HHG transportation is taking
place. See e.g., American Intermodal Services, Inc., Extension--
Nationwide Contract Carrier Service, 1987 WL 100149, at *2 (ICC decided
Dec. 22, 1987) (``[T]he mere transportation of containerized household
goods without the provision of the specialized service or equipment
normally required for such commodities is not within the definition of
household goods transportation and may be performed under `general
commodities (except household goods)' authority.''). In June 2001,
FMCSA issued an opinion that was in agreement with the underlying
rationale of the ICC decisions--that the HHG regulatory requirements
are directed at a discrete segment of the transportation industry that
provides specialized services in specialized equipment. Therefore,
arranging for shipments that are transported subject to the LSE will
not convert a property broker into a ``household goods broker,'' as
FMCSA does not consider the underlying transportation to be the
``transportation of household goods.''
    Moreover, 49 CFR 371.105 states that ``[y]ou may only act as a
household goods broker for a motor carrier that has a valid, active
U.S. DOT number and valid operating authority issued by FMCSA to
transport household goods in interstate or foreign commerce.'' In other
words, HHG brokers may not act as property brokers (``You may only act
as a household goods broker * * *''). Unless HHG brokers have separate
property broker authority, they are not permitted to perform brokerage
of regular freight loads or for carriers that do not have valid HHG
operating authority. Thus, a HHG broker is an entity that brokers
transportation for a HHG motor carrier. However, as defined in 49
U.S.C. 13102(12)(C), a motor carrier operating subject to the LSE is
not considered a HHG motor carrier. Accordingly, the entity that
brokers such transportation is not a HHG broker.
    However, as with a container company that engages in activities
associated with HHG movements, if a broker makes claims on its Web site
or elsewhere about ``full service moving'' or other specialized
services, FMCSA may investigate whether the broker meets the definition
of HHG broker, i.e., ``holds itself out by solicitation, advertisement,
or otherwise as selling, providing, or arranging for, transportation of
household goods by motor carrier for compensation.'' 49 CFR 371.103. If
FMCSA makes such a finding, the broker would be subject to the consumer
protection regulations at 49 CFR part 371, subpart B ``Special Rules
for Household Goods Brokers.'' In analyzing a broker's regulatory
status, FMCSA will look at whether the broker is making claims that it
arranges services for HHG motor carriers as defined at 49 U.S.C. Sec.
13102(12)(A). Those carriers offer some or all of the following
services: Binding and nonbinding estimates, inventorying, protective
packing and unpacking of individual items at personal residences and
loading and unloading at personal residences.
    In sum, only property broker authority is required when arranging
for the transportation of shipments eligible for the LSE. However, if a
broker also performs activities constituting the arrangement of
``transportation of household goods by motor carrier for compensation''
(49 CFR 371.103), it needs HHG brokerage authority as well.

    Issued on: March 25, 2013.
Anne S. Ferro,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-07460 Filed 3-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 79 (Thursday, April 24, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22770-22771]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09145]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1086; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-40]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Geneva, AL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E Airspace at Geneva, AL, to
accommodate a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System
(GPS) Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) serving Geneva
Municipal Airport. This action enhances the safety and management of
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, July 24, 2014. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On February 12, 2014, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Class E airspace at Geneva,
AL (79 FR 8364) Docket No. FAA-2012-1086. Interested parties were
invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written
comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Class E
airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9X dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15, 2013, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes the Class E airspace extending upward from the
surface within a 7.3-mile radius at Geneva Municipal Airport, providing
the controlled airspace required to accommodate the new RNAV (GPS)
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures developed at the airport. This
action provides for the safety and management of IFR operations at the
airport.
    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, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
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. 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 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 establishes
controlled airspace at Geneva Municipal Airport, Geneva, AL.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist

that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of 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(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 Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 7, 2013, effective September 15, 2013, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO AL E5 Geneva, AL [New]

Geneva Municipal Airport, AL
    (Lat. 31[deg]03'09'' N., long. 85[deg]52'08'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.3-mile radius of Geneva Municipal Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 14, 2014.
Myron A. Jenkins,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2014-09145 Filed 4-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 27624]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12639]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4339-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001]

Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 8 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4339-DR), dated September 20, 2017,
and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued May 23, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated May 23, 2018, the President amended the cost-sharing arrangements
regarding Federal funds provided under the authority of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''), in a letter to Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of
Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico resulting from Hurricane Maria during the period of September
17 to November 15, 2017, is of sufficient severity and magnitude
that special cost-sharing arrangements are warranted regarding
Federal funds provided under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act'').
    Therefore, I amend my declarations of September 20, 2017,
September 26, 2017, November 2, 2017, and February 23, 2018, to
authorize a 90-day extension of the period of 100 percent Federal
funding for emergency power restoration and a 120-day extension of
the period of 100 percent Federal funding for emergency temporary
power support and Sheltering and Temporary Essential Power (STEP).

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-12639 Filed 6-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6126-6128]
[FR Doc No: 2011-2349]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

January 26, 2011.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG11-49-000.
    Applicants: Gratiot County Wind LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Gratiot County Wind LLC.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5366.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1674-002.
    Applicants: Deseret Generation & Transmission Co-operative, Inc.
    Description: Deseret Generation & Transmission Co-operative, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35: Triennial Market Power Update to be
effective 7/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5168.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3043-003.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35: In-city buyer side mitigation compliance to be
effective 11/27/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110125-5270.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2299-001.
    Applicants: Green Mountain Energy Company.
    Description: Green Mountain Energy Company submits tariff filing
per 35: Green Mountain--Amendment to MBR Tariff 01262011 to be
effective 12/6/2010.

    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5369.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2370-001.
    Applicants: Cambria CoGen Company.
    Description: Cambria CoGen Company submits tariff filing per 35:
Cambria MBR Compliance Filing to be effective 2/14/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/24/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110124-5183.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 08, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2370-002.
    Applicants: Cambria CoGen Company.
    Description: Cambria CoGen Company submits tariff filing per 35:
Cambria MBR ETariff to be effective 2/14/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110125-5331.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 8, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2748-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Queue No. V4-005, First Revised Service Agreement No.
2553 to be effective 11/8/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110125-5358.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2749-000.
    Applicants: Elm Road Services LLC.
    Description: Elm Road Services, LLC submits Termination of Power
Purchase Agreement.
    Filed Date: 01/24/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110125-0201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2750-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: WMPA No. 2716, Queue W2-020 & W2-021, Bellmawr and
PSE&G to be effective 12/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110125-5379.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2751-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits tariff filing per 35.15:
RMS Agreement Cancellation to be effective 1/31/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5023.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2752-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Intra-Hour Scheduling, Network Operating Agreement and
Various Misc Updates to be effective 3/31/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5037.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2753-000.
    Applicants: Cedar Point Wind, LLC.
    Description: Cedar Point Wind, LLC submits tariff filing per 35.1:
Application for MBR and MBR Tariffs to be effective 4/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5135.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2754-000.
    Applicants: AP Gas & Electric (TX), LLC.
    Description: AP Gas & Electric (TX), LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Petition for Approval of Initial Market-Based Rate Tariff to be
effective 2/25/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5166.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2755-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool
Participants Committee.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: FRM Cost Allocation Changes to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5266.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2756-000.
    Applicants: Edison Sault Electric Company.
    Description: Edison Sault Electric Company, Cancellation of
Electric Tariff.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5273.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2757-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: WMPA No. 2717, Queue No. W2-060, Renovalia Energy,
L.L.C. and PSE&G to be effective 12/28/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5286.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2758-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2058 Southwestern Power Administration Loss
Compensation to be effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5287.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2759-000.
    Applicants: The Dayton Power and Light Company.
    Description: The Dayton Power and Light Company submits tariff
filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: FERC Rate Schedule No. 42, Village of
Arcanum to be effective 1/25/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5304.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES11-15-000.
    Applicants: Michigan Electric Transmission Co., LLC.
    Description: Application of Michigan Electric Transmission Company,
LLC under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5295.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ES11-16-000.
    Applicants: International Transmission Company.
    Description: Application of International Transmission Company
under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 01/26/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110126-5300.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA11-5-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company's Annual Compliance Report on
Operational Penalty Assessments and Distributions.
    Filed Date: 01/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110125-5422.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RR10-13-002.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
    Description: Petition of North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of Amendment to the 2011 Business Plan and
Budget of Texas Reliability Entity, Inc. and Amendment to Exhibit E to
Delegation Agreement with Texas Reliability Entity, Inc.
    Filed Date: 01/24/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110124-5244.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 14, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-2349 Filed 2-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62615-62616]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24561]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER14-96-000]

Healthy Planet Partners Energy Company, 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
Healthy Planet Partners Energy Company, 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 November 5, 2013.
    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 review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site 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: October 16, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-24561 Filed 10-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:	Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Rules
FROM:	Measurement Policy Group
TO:	SPPD Rule Writers
DATE:	August 8, 2018
Electronic Reporting Overview
      Owners and operators of affected sources are required to submit specified reports electronically to the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI), located on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Central Data Exchange (CDX). This section describes the electronic reporting process. Figure 1 below provides a graphical overview of the electronic reporting system.
              Figure 1  -  Electronic Reporting Process Overview

The Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT)
EPA's ERT creates electronic versions of stationary source sampling test plans and reports of test results for performance tests and performance evaluations. Once an ERT package is created, it must be uploaded to CDX for submittal. Currently, the ERT is a Microsoft Access(R) application. EPA has posted an extensible markup language (XML) schema of data elements contained in the ERT on the ERT website to allow the development of alternative software options. Third-party software must contain all of the same data elements required by the ERT. EPA will not preapprove third-party software or maintain a list of available third-party software. Third-party software will be validated through CEDRI submittal; only software that meets the requirements of the XML schema located on the ERT website will be accepted by CEDRI. If an owner or operator chooses to use third-party software, it is his responsibility to ensure that the third-party software is acceptable. Use of a third-party software that does not meet the requirements of the posted XML schema does not relieve owners and operators of the responsibility to electronically submit the report by the submittal deadline.
Performance test reports and performance evaluation reports involving test methods and performance specifications that are supported by EPA's ERT, as listed on the ERT website at the time of the test, must be submitted in the format generated through the use of the ERT. All other performance test and performance evaluation reports must be submitted as an attachment in the ERT. EPA expects the list of supported test methods and performance specifications to change and expand over time. As such, EPA encourages owners, operators, and performance testing contractors to check the website regularly for up-to-date information on methods and performance specifications supported by the ERT.
CDX/CEDRI
In order to electronically submit reports, users need to first visit the CDX homepage and register in CDX, the point of entry for submission of electronic data to EPA. Once in CDX, CEDRI, the interface on the CDX that allows users to submit required NSPS and NESHAP reports electronically, can be selected from the Active Program Service List. Detailed instructions for registering and accessing CDX and CEDRI are outlined in the user's guide available on the CEDRI website.
Once CEDRI is selected from the Active Program Service List, users must then select a CEDRI role. The available roles are "Preparer" and "Certifier." Additionally, certifiers can use the CDX role sponosorship function to designate another user as a "Delegated Certifier." The preparer compiles the data and assembles the submission packages. The preparer can upload files and complete electronic forms. However, the preparer may not submit or sign packages unless the preparer is also a registered certifier for the facility. As part of the registration process, a preparer is required to identify the certifier(s) for whom he is preparing reports. A certifier can also assemble submission packages and can modify submission packages that a preparer has assembled. The certifier is responsible for submitting and signing packages using an electronic signature. The certifier is generally referred to as the "owner or operator" or "responsible official" of the facility. A delegated certifier is a person granted signatory authority by a registered certifier. A delegated certifier can perform all of the same tasks that a certifier performs but cannot delegate their role to another representative.
EPA designed this process to be compliant with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR). The CROMERR (under 40 CFR part 3) provides the legal framework for electronic reporting under all of EPA's environmental regulations and includes criteria for assuring that the electronic signature is legally associated with an electronic document for the purpose of expressing the same meaning and intention as would a handwritten signature if affixed to an equivalent paper document. In other words, documents submitted using an electronic signature are equally enforceable as documents submitted using a handwritten (or "wet") signature. For more information on CROMERR, see the CROMERR website. Users should be aware that certifiers and delegated certifiers must go through a one-time identity-proofing process when registering. This process (by which registrants prove their true identity) can be done in real time or can take up to two weeks, depending on the method of identity proofing used. Additionally, certifiers who are not principals at the company will need proof of signing authority. As with identity-proofing, CDX provides a fast, online process and a slower, paper-based option to demonstrate signing authority. Affected facilities may want to consider registering alternate certifiers or delegated certifiers to reduce the chance that unavailability of the primary certifier prevents submission of an electronic report.
Once in CEDRI, users can upload an ERT file, upload a portable document format (PDF) file, upload a zip file containing a spreadsheet template or create a report submission using a CEDRI webform, depending on the type of report that is being submitted. When the certifier determines that the report is ready for submission, the certifier will certify the submission with a CROMERR electronic signature and submit the report through CEDRI. Facilities can submit reports for multiple subparts or multiple reports for the same subpart at the same time. Additionally, for most reports, CEDRI templates provide the opportunity for a bulk upload. Bulk uploads allow the same report type to be submitted for multiple facilities in one batch report. Following submission, the certified signature file will be stored with each report contained in the submission package as the CROMERR Copy of Record in CDX.

Accessibility by Air Agencies and the Public
Air agency staff will have access to data immediately upon submittal if they are registered in CEDRI. Following a processing period in CEDRI, each report will be sent to EPA's Web Factor and Information Retrieval (WebFIRE) database, where it is publicly accessible. The processing period is  60 days for performance test reports and performance evaluation reports and 30 days for all other submissions. During this processing period, corrected reports may be submitted to CEDRI. If changes are made to the submission package prior to the end of the processing period, the processing period will start over to allow air agency reviewers time to review the new submission package. While only the corrected package will be available in WebFIRE, all versions of submitted reports will remain as part of the official record and be available to EPA and air agency reviewers through CEDRI. Corrections to reports may still be submitted after the processing period is over. However, the original report will be available in WebFIRE until the end of the processing period for the corrected report, at which time the corrected report will replace the original report in WebFIRE.
Extensions for Electronic Reporting
EPA has identified two broad circumstances in which electronic reporting extensions may be provided. In both circumstances, the decision to accept a claim of needing additional time to report is within the discretion of the Administrator, and reporting should occur as soon as possible.
If either the CDX or CEDRI is unavailable at any time beginning five business days prior to the date that the submission is due, and the unavailability prevents submission of a report by the required date, an owner or operator may assert a claim of EPA system outage. EPA considers five business days prior to the reporting deadline to be an appropriate timeframe because if the system is down prior to this time, owners and operators still have one week to complete reporting once the system is back online. However, if the CDX or CEDRI is down during the week a report is due, EPA realizes that this could greatly impact the ability to submit a required report on time. EPA will notify owners or operators about known outages as far in advance as possible by Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emissions Factors Listserv notice, posting on the CEDRI website, and posting on the CDX website so that an owner or operator can plan accordingly and still meet the reporting deadline. However, if a planned or unplanned outage occurs and an owner or operator believes that it will affect or it has affected the ability to comply with an electronic reporting requirement, EPA has provided a process to assert such a claim.
If a force majeure event occurs or is still occurring or if there are still lingering effects of the event in the five business days prior to a submission deadline, EPA has provided a process to assert a claim of force majeure. A force majeure event is defined as an event that will be or has been caused by circumstances beyond the control of the affected facility, its contractors, or any entity controlled by the affected facility that prevents an owner or operator from complying with the requirement to submit a report electronically as required by this rule. Examples of such events are acts of nature, acts of war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazards beyond the control of the facility.
      EPA is providing these potential extensions to protect owners or operators from noncompliance in cases where a report cannot be submitted successfully by the reporting deadline for reasons outside the control of the owner or operator as described above. EPA is not providing an extension for other instances. Owners or operators should register for CEDRI far in advance of the initial compliance date, to ensure that the identity proofing process can be completed prior to the initial compliance date. Additionally, EPA recommends owners or operators to start developing reports early, in case any questions arise during the reporting process.
Rationale for Electronic Reporting
The electronic submittal of reports increases the usefulness of the data contained in those reports, is in keeping with current trends in data availability, further assists in the protection of public health and the environment, and ultimately results in less burden on regulated facilities. It also will improve compliance by facilitating the ability of regulated facilities to demonstrate compliance and the ability of air agencies and EPA to assess and determine compliance. Electronic storage of reports make data more accessible for review, analysis and sharing. Electronic reporting also eliminates paper-based, manual processes; thereby saving time and resources, simplifying data entry, eliminating redundancies, minimizing data reporting errors and providing data quickly and accurately to affected facilities, air agencies, EPA, and the public.
In 2011, in response to Executive Order 13563, EPA developed a plan to periodically review its regulations to determine if they should be modified, streamlined, expanded or repealed in an effort to make regulations more effective and less burdensome. The plan includes replacing outdated paper reporting with electronic reporting. In keeping with this plan and the Digital Government Strategy, in 2013, EPA established an agency-wide policy on electronic reporting.  By requiring electronic submission of specified reports in NSPS and NESHAP rules, EPA is taking steps to implement this policy.
Benefits of Electronic Reporting
By making records, data and reports readily available, EPA, the regulated community and the public will benefit when EPA conducts its Clean Air Act (CAA)-required technology and risk-based reviews. As a result of having performance test reports and air emission data readily accessible, EPA's ability to carry out comprehensive reviews will be increased and achieved within a shorter period of time. These data will provide useful information on control efficiencies being achieved and maintained in practice within a source category and across source categories for regulated sources and pollutants. These reports can also be used to inform the technology-review process by providing information on improvements to add-on control technology and new control technology.
Additionally, under an electronic reporting system, EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) would have air emissions and performance test data in hand; OAQPS would not have to collect these data from EPA Regional Offices or from delegated air agencies or industry sources in cases where these reports are not submitted to EPA Regional Offices. Thus, EPA anticipates fewer or less substantial information collection requests (ICRs) in conjunction with prospective CAA-required technology and risk-based reviews may be needed, which results in a decrease in time spent by industry to respond to data collection requests as well as reduced testing costs.
Electronic reporting minimizes submission of unnecessary or duplicative reports in cases where facilities report to multiple government agencies and the agencies opt to rely on EPA's electronic reporting system to view report submissions. Where air agencies continue to require a paper copy of these reports and will accept a hard copy of the electronic report, facilities will have the option to print paper copies of the electronic reports to submit to the air agencies, and, thus, minimize the time spent reporting to multiple agencies. Moreover, maintenance and storage costs associated with retaining paper records could likewise be minimized by replacing those records with electronic records of electronically submitted data and reports.
Air agencies, as well as EPA, can benefit from more streamlined and automated review of electronically submitted data. Standardizing report formats allows air agencies and EPA to review reports and data more quickly. Electronic reports and associated data facilitate downloading and analyzing data in spreadsheet format. Additionally, air agencies and EPA can access reports wherever and whenever they want or need, as long as they have access to the Internet. The ability to access and review reports electronically will also assist air agencies and EPA to more quickly and accurately determine compliance with the applicable regulations, potentially allowing a faster response to violations, which could minimize harmful air emissions. This benefits both air agencies and the general public.
By making data readily available, electronic reporting increases the amount of data that can be used for many purposes. One example is the development of emissions factors. An emissions factor is a representative value that attempts to relate the quantity of a pollutant released to the atmosphere with an activity associated with the release of that pollutant (e.g., pounds of particulate emitted per million British thermal unit of heat input). Such factors facilitate the estimation of emissions from various sources of air pollution and are an important tool in developing emissions inventories, which in turn are the basis for numerous efforts, including trends analysis, regional and local scale air quality modeling, regulatory impact assessments, and human exposure modeling. Emissions factors are also widely used in regulatory applicability determinations and in permitting decisions.
EPA has received feedback from stakeholders asserting that many of EPA's emissions factors are outdated or not representative of a particular industry emission source. While EPA believes that the emissions factors are suitable for their intended purpose, EPA recognizes that the quality of emissions factors varies based on the extent and quality of underlying data. EPA also recognizes that emissions profiles on different pieces of equipment can change over time due to a number of factors (fuel changes, equipment improvements, industry work practices), and it is important for emissions factors to be updated to keep up with these changes. EPA is currently pursuing emissions factor development improvements that include procedures to incorporate the source test data that is submitted electronically. By requiring the electronic submission of test reports, EPA is able to access and use the submitted data to update emissions factors more quickly and efficiently, creating factors that are characteristic of what is currently representative of the relevant industry sector. Likewise, an increase in the number of test reports used to develop the emissions factors will provide more confidence that the factor is of higher quality and representative of the whole industry sector.
      Electronic reporting of environmental data is already common practice in many media offices at EPA. Changes to incorporate electronic reporting into the NSPS and NESHAP rules are needed to continue EPA's transition to electronic reporting.