[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 103 (Thursday, May 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32075-32082]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11403]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88928; File No. SR-ICEEU-2020-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Partial Amendment No.
1, Relating to the ICE Clear Europe Auction Terms for CDS Default
Auctions and CDS Default Management Policy (formerly the CDS Default
Management Framework).

May 21, 2020.
    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 May 12, 2020, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or the
``Clearing House'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule changes described in Items I, II and
III below, which Items have been prepared by ICE Clear Europe. On May
20, 2020, ICE Clear Europe filed Partial Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.\3\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as modified by Partial
Amendment No. 1 (hereinafter the ``proposed rule change''), from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Partial Amendment Number 1 amended Exhibit 5A of the filing
to correct the paragraph numbering in Part 2 of the CDS Auction
Terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or the ``Clearing
House'') proposes to amend its Auction Terms for CDS Default Auctions
(the ``CDS Auction Terms'') and CDS Default Management Policy (the
``Policy''), formerly the CDS Default Management Framework. The
revisions do not involve any changes to the ICE Clear Europe Clearing
Rules (the ``Rules'') or other Procedures.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe 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. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

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

(a) Purpose
    ICE Clear Europe is proposing to amend its CDS Auction Terms and
the Policy. The proposed amendments to the CDS Auction Terms would (1)
add a new ``all or nothing'' bidding type, (2) clarify certain
procedures regarding determination of minimum bid requirements, (3)
provide for the use of ICEU's default management system, in lieu of
email or other manual forms of communication, for submission of bids

and provision of certain notices to auction participants by the
Clearing House, (4) clarify certain regulatory and compliance
obligations of auction participants, and (5) generally update and
clarify certain terms and provisions and correct certain typographical
errors. The proposed amendments to the Policy would make corresponding
changes to reference the new ``all or nothing'' bidding type and make
general updates and clarifications.
I. CDS Auction Terms
1. All or Nothing Bid Type
    The amendments would allow auction participants to submit a new
type of bid for an Auction Lot, an ``All or Nothing Bid.'' As provided
in the proposed new definition in paragraph 1.2 as well as paragraph
3.8 of Part 1 and paragraph 3.6 of Part 2, an All or Nothing Bid would
constitute a bid for the entire Auction Lot which, if it is the winning
bid, would provide for the bidder to receive 100% of the Auction Lot
without that award being split among more competitively priced bids (as
may occur with bids under the current bidding process (referred to as
``Standard Bids'')). Use of All or Nothing Bids would be optional, and
auction participants could continue to use Standard Bids as under the
current process. An auction participant may also submit both Standard
Bids and an All or Nothing Bid. Revised paragraph 3.8 of Part 1 and
paragraph 3.6 of Part 2 would also address the manner in which an All
or Nothing Bid may satisfy the Minimum Bid Requirement for an Auction
Lot and the requirement to identify an All or Nothing Bid as such.
    The term ``BP'' would be similarly amended to include the price of
any valid All or Nothing Bid made by a Primary CDS Auction Participant
or Secondary CDS Auction Participant in the Primary CDS Auction or
Secondary CDS Auction, in either case proportionately scaled to a
portfolio size representing 100% of the relevant Auction Lot. This
definition would be further amended to provide that where the Standard
Bids submitted by an auction participant do not comply with any
applicable Minimum Bid Requirement, the BP shall be only the price of
any All or Nothing Bid made by such participant, should it have made
one. If a participant does not comply with any applicable Minimum Bid
Requirement based on its Standard Bids, and does not provide a valid
All or Nothing Bid, then the participant would be considered a Non-
Bidding CDS Clearing Member. Where a participant submitted only
Standard Bids, or only an All or Nothing Bid, BP would be the weighted
average bid price of the Standard Bids, or the price of the All or
Nothing Bid, respectively.
    The definitions of Primary CDS Auction Priority AC Sequence and
Primary CDS Auction Priority GF Sequence (previously CDS Auction
Priority AC Sequence and CDS Auction Priority GF Sequence) would be
amended to clarify that each amount in the sequence would be applied
pro rata for the relevant Auction Lot of a Primary CDS Auction by
applying the Auction Lot Guaranty Fund Weighting. As discussed below,
the terms CDS Auction Priority AC Sequence and CDS Auction Priority GF
Sequence, would be renamed to indicate more clearly that these terms
relate to the Primary CDS Auction. A number of other terms relating to
the Primary CDS Auction would be similarly renamed. The clarification
that the amount in the sequence would be applied pro rata would provide
additional detail that is consistent with existing practice. The term
Lot Guaranty Fund Weighting has been renamed Auction Lot Guaranty Fund
Weighting, consistent with the update from the term Lot to Auction Lot.
The definition of this term has been clarified to refer to the
aggregate of the PRIs for all Auction Lots in a Defaulter's portfolio
rather than all Lots in a CDS Auction or Secondary CDS Auction, which
is a more precise definition, but the change is not intended to result
in a substantive change in practice. The definitions of Secondary CDS
Auction Priority AC Sequence, Secondary CDS Auction Priority GF
Sequence would be amended generally to conform to the corresponding
Primary CDS Auction definitions, including to cross-refer, for clarity,
to Rule 908(i) (which is the relevant provision of the Rules relating
to the order of application of Guaranty Fund Contributions) and to
clarify that each amount in the sequence would be applied pro rata for
the relevant Auction Lot of a Secondary CDS Auction by applying the
Auction Lot Guaranty Fund Weighting. The cross-reference would be added
to ensure clarity and consistency between the relevant terms used for
Primary and Secondary Auctions and between the CDS Auction Terms and
the Rules, but is not intended to change the substance of current
practice. The definition of CDS Auction Clearing Price would be
redefined as Primary CDS Auction Clearing Price and a proviso would be
added to this defined term and to the defined term Secondary CDS
Auction Clearing Price stating that in the event that an All or Nothing
Bid is included in such sum of the notional amount of CDS Contracts,
the term would mean the price of the All or Nothing Bid in accordance
with paragraph 5.4 of Part 1 or paragraph 5.4 of Part 2, as applicable,
of the CDS Auction Terms. If an All or Nothing Bid is not submitted to
or accepted by the Clearing House, then consistent with the current CDS
Auction Terms, the Auction Lot will be allocated in full to bids at or
above the Primary CDS Auction Clearing Price or Secondary CDS Auction
Clearing Price, as applicable. If, however, an All or Nothing Bid is
included in the group of bids with equal or higher bid prices, then the
price of such All or Nothing Bid would be the Primary CDS Auction
Clearing Price. The examples in Paragraph 5.4 of Part 1 would be
modified to take into account All or Nothing Bids, including to show
information regarding a ``price rank'', whether it is an All or Nothing
Bid, the bid size (as a percentage of auction lot), bid price (payment
per 100%), size multiplied by price and the allocation percentage of
the auction lot. The examples in Paragraph 5.4 of Part 2 would be
removed, and cross-reference to the examples in Paragraph 5.4 of Part I
would be added instead.
    Paragraph 5.5 of Parts 1 and 2 would clarify that All or Nothing
Bids are given precedence over Standard Bids, in the sense that if an
All or Nothing Bid is accepted, a Standard Bid will not be accepted
even if it had a higher price than the Primary CDS Auction Clearing
Price or Secondary CDS Auction Clearing Price, as applicable. It would
also provide that if multiple All or Nothing Bids are received at the
Primary CDS Auction Clearing Price or Secondary CDS Auction Clearing
Price, as applicable, the Auction Lot will be allocated equally among
those bidders.
    Paragraph 5.6 in Part 1 would be amended to clarify that in the
scenario where the Clearing House elects to determine the CDS Auction
Clearing Price for less than 100% of the contracts in the lot and hold
a further auction (a ``Repeat CDS Auction'') for the remainder, any All
or Nothing Bids would be disregarded. Related examples in paragraph 5.6
have been amended accordingly.
2. Minimum Bid Requirement
    The amendments would revise Paragraph 2.2 of Parts 1 and 2 to
reflect that a Clearing Member could have a zero Minimum Bid
Requirement (in which case it would not be required to bid for the
relevant lot) and to remove a stated exception from the requirement for
each CDS Clearing Member to bid in every Primary CDS Auction or

Secondary CDS Auction (as such terms are defined in the CDS Auction
Terms), as applicable, for those whose membership privileges permit
them not to participate (as there are no such CDS Clearing Members).
    Paragraph 2.4 of Parts 1 and 2 would be amended such that a CDS
Clearing Member's Minimum Bid Requirement would be communicated to it
through the DMS (or via such other means as specified by the Clearing
House), as discussed below, as soon as practicable prior to the
relevant CDS Auction instead of through the template notification set
out in an annex to the CDS Auction Terms (which would accordingly be
removed). The amendments to Paragraph 2.4 of Part 1 and Paragraphs 2.4
and 2.5 of Part 2 would also clarify the procedures for the Clearing
House to determine that a Minimum Bid Requirement would be
inappropriate for a particular CDS Clearing Member in particular
circumstances, which would permit the Clearing House greater
flexibility in appropriate circumstances. A CDS Clearing Member would
be required to notify the Clearing House promptly, but in any event
within one hour of the Clearing House publishing details of the CDS
Contracts comprising the relevant Auction Lot (instead of 12 hours
prior to the opening of the auction), in writing, if it reasonably
considers that the Minimum Bid Requirement would not apply to it. ICE
Clear Europe does not believe the current 12 hour period is necessarily
practicable as an operational matter, as the Clearing House may need to
conduct an auction with less than 12 hours' notice. The current
requirement could thus either create an undesirable delay in conducting
an auction or impose an unnecessary limitation on the CDS Clearing
Member's ability to request an exception to the Minimum Bid
Requirement. The proposed change, to allow notice within one hour after
the Clearing House publishes auction details, will allow the Clearing
House to move more quickly to minimize losses and preserve the CDS
Clearing Member's ability to request an exception where warranted. The
amendments would also clarify that CDS Clearing Members could outsource
the operational processing of any of their auction obligations under
Rule 102(w) (regarding outsourcing). CDS Clearing Members could also
transfer their Minimum Bid Requirements to an Affiliate that is also a
CDS Clearing Member, subject to notification to the Clearing House
prior to an auction and execution of an agreement in an approved
format. The amendments would clarify that a CDS Clearing Member that
outsources any of its obligations would remain liable for any breach by
any Affiliate or outsourcee of the CDS Auction Terms or the Primary CDS
Auction Specifications, including without limitation in respect of CDS
Guaranty Fund juniorization. This amendment broadens the existing
requirement which only refers to transfers or outsources of the Minimum
Bid Requirement rather than any obligation, and makes specific
reference to the CDS Guaranty Fund juniorization, and reflects the
general principle that outsourcing or transfer of an obligation does
not avoid responsibility for complying with the obligation. The
amendments would further add that a CDS Clearing Member that transfers
or outsources its Minimum Bid Requirement to an Affiliate would, for
the purposes of determining its Senior Guaranty Fund Contribution,
Subordinate Guaranty Fund Contribution, Senior Assessment Contribution
and/or Subordinate Assessment Contribution, and for determining whether
it should be designated as a Non-Bidding CDS Clearing Member, assume
the same position as a Senior Bidder, Split Bidder, Subordinate Bidder
or Non-Bidding CDS Clearing Member as the Affiliate, as appropriate.
3. Default Management System
    The amendments would provide for the use of the DMS for a number of
communications between the Clearing House and auction participants, in
lieu of the current manual notice process. Pursuant to amended
paragraph 2.1 of Parts 1 and 2 and the revised definitions of Primary
CDS Auction Announcement and Secondary CDS Auction Announcement, the
Clearing House would notify CDS Clearing Members electronically through
the DMS (or other means specified by the Clearing House) of an auction
taking place instead of by Circular. Conforming changes would be made
throughout the CDS Auction Terms to make reference to communication
through the DMS instead of through existing means. For example, as
noted above, the Clearing House would notify Clearing Members of
Minimum Bid Requirements through the DMS, pursuant to revised paragraph
2.4 in Parts 1 and 2. Paragraph 2.5 of Part 1 and Paragraph 2.7 of Part
2 would be amended to state that Primary CDS Auction Specifications or
Secondary CDS Auction Specifications, as applicable would be provided
through the DMS instead of in the template format currently attached to
the CDS Auction Terms. Further, in Paragraph 2.5 of Part 1 and
Paragraph 2.7 of Part 2, the statement that the Clearing House will
provide each auction participant (other than Defaulters) with
information about CDS Contracts to be auctioned would be amended to
remove the exception for Defaulters because it is clear that Defaulters
would not be auction participants and as such, the exception was
unnecessary. The requirement that any minimum or maximum reserve price
be provided would be deleted because, consistent with Paragraph 5.2,
any reserve price would not necessarily be disclosed to bidders.
    Paragraph 2.9 and 2.10 of Part 1 and Paragraphs 2.10 and 2.11 of
Part 2 would be amended to state that all bids must be submitted via
DMS (or other means specified by the Clearing House) instead of through
the existing bid form. Former Paragraph 2.11 of Part 1 and Paragraph
2.12 of Part 2 has been correspondingly removed as no longer relevant
with electronic submission through DMS. Paragraph 3.12 of Part 1 and
Paragraph 3.10 of Part 2 (each as renumbered) would be amended to
provide that modified or amended bids may be submitted through DMS (or
another format specified by the Clearing House). Pursuant to revised
Paragraph 5.7 of Part 1, further Primary CDS Auction Specifications for
any repeat CDS Auction would be notified by the Clearing House through
the Primary CDS Auction Announcement and through the DMS (or via such
other means and in such format as is specified by the Clearing House).
Pursuant to revised Paragraph 5.8 of Part 1 and Paragraph 5.9 of Part
2, winning bidders could also be notified through the DMS. References
to submission of a bid form would be removed from the definition of
``Bid'' and the term ``Bid Form'' would be amended to ``Bid
Submission'' and would mean submission of a bid via DMS rather than via
the ICE file transfer server.
4. Clarification of Certain Regulatory and Compliance Obligations
    Paragraph 7.7 of Parts 1 and 2 would be amended to clarify and
state explicitly certain obligations for auction participants in
respect of information they may receive in connection with an auction,
including the contents of the portfolio or the outcome or timing of an
auction. Specifically, the auction participant would acknowledge that
such information may constitute inside information for the purposes of
the Market Abuse Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 596/2014) (``MAR'') or
fall within the definition of any similar term

under Applicable Law (``Market Abuse Laws'') in respect of any
Contracts cleared by the Clearing House or in respect of securities of
a Defaulter. Under the revisions, each such participant would be
required to assess whether such information is inside information and,
if so, agree to: (a) Comply with applicable Market Abuse Laws; (b)
generally not disclose such information to persons outside of its
organization; (c) prevent persons engaged in client trading at such
organization from possessing such information; (d) prevent those in
possession of such information from trading on such information until
it ceases to be inside information; and (e) where such information
constitutes inside information under Regulation (EU) No. 596/2014,
maintain an insider list of persons with access to this information.
5. Other Clarifications and Updates
    The amendments would make a number of other clarifications,
drafting improvements and corrections to the CDS Auction Terms. Certain
changes to defined terms would be made throughout the CDS Auction
Terms, including the use of the term ``CDS Default Auction Procedures''
instead of CDS Auction Procedures, the new defined term ``Bidding Close
Time'' instead of ``Closing Time'' (which ICE Clear Europe views as a
more precise term in this context (as the concept of closing time more
generally has other uses), but which would have the same definition),
and the defined term ``Auction Lot'' instead of ``Lot'' to better
distinguish the term from the generic term, ``lot''. The definition of
Auction Lot would also be clarified to refer only to CDS Contracts of
the Defaulter (rather than the generic term ``portfolio'' of a
Defaulter), and to all or any part of such contracts as determined by
the Clearing House for a particular discrete auction. ICE Clear Europe
does not believe such change would result in any change in practice.
Conforming changes would be made to the defined terms for Lot
Assessment Contribution, Lot CDS Direct Auction Participant
Contribution, Lot Guaranty Fund Contribution, Lot Guaranty Fund
Weighting, Lot Resources and Lot Resource Shortfall.
    A series of other changes is intended to more clearly distinguish
between primary auctions under Part 1 and secondary auctions under Part
2. Thus, the term ``CDS Auction'' would be amended to ``Primary CDS
Auction'' with corresponding changes to CDS Auction Announcement, CDS
Auction Clearing Price, CDS Auction Participant, CDS Auction Priority,
CDS Auction Priority AC Sequence, CDS Auction Priority GF Sequence and
CDS Auction Specifications to refer to Primary CDS Auction
Announcement, Primary CDS Auction Clearing Price, Primary CDS Auction
Participant, Primary CDS Auction Priority, Primary CDS Auction Priority
AC Sequence, Primary CDS Auction Priority GF Sequence and Primary CDS
Auction Specifications. Conforming changes would be made throughout the
CDS Auction Terms. The terms ``Non-Bidding CDS Clearing Member'' and
``Non-Bidding Direct Participating Customer'' would be clarified to
explicitly reference such persons that do not submit or make (or would
not be deemed to submit or make) a bid in the relevant Primary CDS
Auction or Secondary CDS Auction in order to clarify that the terms
capture those persons who do not participate or who are deemed not to
participate (such as where their bid has been declared invalid under
the CDS Auction Terms), whether or not they can be said to have
``chosen'' not to participate. The term ``Elective CDS Auction
Participants'' and references to this term would be removed, as there
are no CDS Clearing Members in such category. The term ``Second CDS
Auction'' would be amended to ``Repeat CDS Auction'', which term
currently refers to a further Primary CDS Auction under Part 1 after an
unsuccessful or partially unsuccessful first CDS auction, with the
intention to more clearly distinguish such an auction from a Secondary
CDS Auction under Part 2. The terms ``Split Bidder'' and ``Subordinate
Bidder'' would be amended to explicitly note that this could be either
a Primary CDS Participant or a Secondary CDS Auction Participant, as
applicable for the relevant auction. This does not reflect a change in
substance, but is intended to make the drafting consistent with the
deletion of the term ``CDS Auction Participant'' and addition of the
more specific terms, Primary CDS Auction Participant and Secondary CDS
Auction Participant.
    Proposed amendments to paragraph 1.64 would clarify that references
to CDS Contracts, for purposes of the CDS Auction Terms, include (i)
where automatic early termination has taken place under Part 9 of the
Rules or Contract Terms, a reference to the terminated CDS Contracts or
notional amounts representing such terminated CDS Contracts and (ii)
where contracts have arisen from hedging transactions pursuant to Rule
903(c), a reference to any such hedging contracts executed by the
Clearing House. These amendments thus clarify that such contracts may
be auctioned for purposes of establishing replacement contracts with
non-defaulting Clearing Members to balance the Clearing House's
positions as part of the default management process, and thereby also
establishing an auction price to be used in determining the Clearing
House's loss with respect to the close out of the defaulter's positions
for purposes of the Rules. Amendments to this paragraph would also add
a general introductory note that the CDS Auction Terms govern the
auctioning of lots representing one or more CDS Contracts to which a
Defaulter is or was a party, where such auction is administered by the
Clearing House pursuant to Part 9 of the Rules. In paragraph 1.65, the
amendments would clarify that nothing in the CDS Auction Terms would
prevent the Clearing House from administering a sale or entering into
offsetting transactions without holding an auction to which the CDS
Auction Terms apply. This reflects the Clearing House's existing
authority under the Rules, and is intended to avoid any potential
confusion as to the scope of the CDS Auction Terms.
    Introductory provisions would be added in paragraph 1.67 and
following paragraphs to address matters such as governing law and
dispute resolution (including submission to arbitration and
jurisdiction). These are substantially similar to existing provisions
in the Rules and the other Procedures, and ICE Clear Europe is
proposing to add them here for consistency across its documentation.
    Paragraph 2.11 of Part 1 and Paragraph 2.13 of Part 2 would be
amended to clarify that after the Bidding Close Time, the Clearing
House will notify participants of the fact that the CDS Auction took
place, in addition to the outcome.
    Paragraph 3.3 of Parts 1 and 2 would clarify that the specified
order of application of CDS Guaranty Fund Contributions and Assessment
Contributions in the Primary CDS Auction Priority or Secondary CDS
Auction Priority, as applicable, would only apply to bids indicated or
deemed related to Minimum Bid Requirements (i.e., those Standard Bids,
or if applicable the All or Nothing Bid, that count toward the Minimum
Bid Requirement).
    An additional clarification would be made in Paragraph 3.8 of Part
1 and Paragraph 3.6 of Part 2 that the Minimum Bid Requirement could be
satisfied by submitting multiple bids provided that any individual bid
is equal to (and not merely larger than) any applicable minimum bid
size.

    A clarification would be made in Paragraph 3.11 of Part 1 and
Paragraph 3.9 of Part 2 that a bidder making a referential Bid (e.g. a
Bid which purports to be a Bid which is [euro]1 higher or lower than
the highest or lowest Bidder) would be treated as if it had not made
such bid. This change is consistent with other changes to the CDS
Auction Terms to refer to a person that does not bid in the auction (or
is deemed not to bid) as ``Non-Bidding CDS Clearing Member'' or ``Non-
Bidding Direct Participating Customer'', without regard to whether the
person ``chose'' not to participate. Similarly, under revised Paragraph
3.12 of Part 1 and Paragraph 3.10 of Part 2, following the bidding
close time, upon request of a CDS Auction Participant stating that a
mistake was made in the bid submission, the Clearing House could
invalidate the bid and the participant would be treated as if it had
not made such a bid. The Clearing House would no longer provide for the
submitter to withdraw or correct the bid in this case. This reflects
the operation of DMS, which does not permit submission of a bid
following the bidding close time, and further reflects ICE Clear
Europe's view that given the objective of ensuring a fair and orderly
auction, it is not appropriate for Clearing Members to modify bids
following the bidding close deadline.
    Similar amendments changing ``treated as if it had chosen not to
participate'' to ``as if it had not made such Bid'' would be made to
Paragraphs 3.13, 3.14, 3.15, 4.4 and 5.5 of Part 1 and Paragraphs 3.11,
3.12, 3.13, 4.4, 5.4 and 5.5 of Part 2 for similar reasons. An
additional amendment to Paragraph 5.4 of Parts 1 and 2 would provide
that in the event of invalid or void bid or no CDS Contract being
established, such bid would not be accepted and the CDS Auction
Participant would be treated as if it had not made such bid, instead of
chosen not to participate, for similar reasons.
    The amendments to Paragraph 4.1 of Parts 1 and 2 would remove a
statement that a CDS Clearing Member may make an unlimited number of
separate bids and clarify that the member may make separate bids for
Customers or Sponsored Principals for whom it acts as Sponsor in the
same way as it may make a bid for one of its Proprietary Accounts and
subject to the same provisions of the relevant Part of the CDS Auction
Terms. This amendment reflects that relevant systems do not permit an
infinite number of separate bids, and in practice is intended to give
ICE Clear Europe flexibility to set a maximum number of bids if it
determines that is appropriate. Amendments to Paragraph 4.3 of Parts 1
and 2 would require that each Direct Participating Customer (as defined
in the CDS Auction Terms) enter into a CDS Auction Participation
Agreement with its CDS Clearing Member prior to participation in a
Primary CDS Auction or Secondary CDS Auction, as applicable (rather
than deeming them to be bound by the CDS Auction Terms). ICE Clear
Europe believes it is preferable to have a formal agreement with the
Direct Participating Customer in this situation, as it provides a
clearer and stronger basis for enforcement of the CDS Auction Terms
against the Direct Participating Customer.
    Amendments to Paragraph 5.3 of Parts 1 and 2 would also permit the
Clearing House to at its discretion withdraw an auction lot after (as
well as prior to) the bidding close time.
    In Paragraph 5.5 of Parts 1 and 2, an additional clarification
would add that bids invalidated pursuant to certain Paragraph 3
(Bidding Process) provisions could, at the Clearing House's discretion,
be excluded for purposes of calculating the auction clearing price or
allocating sizes at that price.
    Amendments to Paragraph 5.8 of Part 1 and Paragraph 5.9 of Part 2
would clarify the mechanism under the Rules through which CDS Contracts
are entered into as a result of an auction, by providing that each bid
constitutes an offer by the CDS Clearing Member to the Clearing House
to enter into CDS Contracts pursuant to a Transfer governed by Rule
904(b) (but without regard to any Customer or Customer-CM Transactions
of the Defaulter) and Part 4 of the Rules. The amendment is intended as
a clarification of the existing process for entering into contracts and
is not a substantive change in the CDS Auction Terms. Any unnecessary
reference to acceptance of such offer by the Clearing House would be
removed (as the paragraph provides for the relevant contracts to arise
between the Clearing House and the winning bidder without need for any
further step). Other changes in this paragraph would clarify that
resulting CDS Contracts would arise between the Clearing House and the
winning bidder, in accordance with such a Transfer and Part 4 of the
Rules, but without regard to any Customer or Customer-CM Transactions
of the Defaulter, on economically identical terms to the CDS Contracts
that are the subject of the auction lot in the relevant Primary CDS
Auction or Secondary CDS Auction, as applicable.
    Clarifying amendments as to the treatment of Individually
Segregated Sponsored Accounts as a form of Customer Account, consistent
with other amendments discussed above, would be made in Paragraph 7.1
of Parts 1 and 2.
    Throughout the CDS Auction Terms, various provisions would be
renumbered as a result of the changes described above and related
cross-references would be corrected and updated.
II. CDS Default Management Policy
    ICE Clear Europe is also proposing to make various amendments to
its CDS Default Management Framework, which would be renamed the CDS
Default Management Policy. The amendments would be consistent with the
amendments to the CDS Auction Terms discussed above and make certain
other clarifications and updates. Conforming changes would also be made
throughout the document to reflect the name change.
    In terms of the procedures for declaring a default, the Policy
would be revised to remove a requirement that the default management
process be implemented ``immediately'' after approval by appropriate
management of the declaration of a default. Although ICE Clear Europe
expects that such process would be implemented in a timely manner under
the circumstances, it is not necessary (or necessarily feasible) to
specify that it do so immediately. A similar change would be made to
the requirement that ICE Clear Europe cease clearing trades for the
defaulting Clearing Member when it is declared in default.
    With respect to activation of the clearing risk team, the Policy
would be amended to remove the statement that in the event that the
President/Chief Operating Officer being absent, the Head of Clearing
Risk has the ability to overrule any other head of department
(including Head of Treasury and Head of Operations) where necessary, on
matters relating to default management. The amendment reflects a change
in the Board's delegation of authority to the President (and not to the
Chief Operating Officer or Head of Clearing Risk in the President's
absence).
    With respect to liquidation of a defaulting member's collateral,
the amendments would remove a statement that for all assets the
Clearing House ensures that it can sell the collateral, subject to
settlements terms, within a single working day. This statement is
unnecessary and an oversimplification, and the Clearing House in any
event relies on its existing and detailed

collateral and liquidity policies to ensure it has sufficient access to
liquidity in case of default. A related statement that the Head of
Clearing Risk will have the discretion to postpone the collateral sale
would be removed as unnecessary in light of the general standard that
the Clearing House will take appropriate action to ensure an orderly
close out. Amendments would also clarify that the Clearing House may
(but need not) convert any portion of the defaulting Clearing Member's
non-cash margin or collateral into cash, as the Clearing House
determines appropriate. This is intended as a drafting improvement that
provides greater clarity, but does not affect the Clearing House's
rights with respect to such margin or collateral.
    The provisions of the Policy regarding bidding mechanics would be
amended to address ``All or Nothing'' bids. A paragraph would be added
to this section to provide that auction participants may submit ``All
or Nothing'' bids for each auction. The amendments provide explanation
as to the meaning of such a bid and an example of how such bids work.
The amendments would also provide that further information on the
bidding types utilized in any given auction would be published as part
of the CDS Default Auction Terms Specifications.
    The existing requirement that ICE Clear Europe conduct quarterly
reviews of the Policy would be deleted as the Policy would reviewed as
part of the ICE Clear Europe's separate annual documentation review
process. The Policy would continue to require ICE Clear Europe, in
coordination with its Clearing Members, conduct an annual mock Clearing
Member default test with the Clearing Risk Department, appropriate
Clearing House management and CDS Default Committee Members for each
Clearing Member.
    The amendments to the Policy would also update arrangements for
breach management, ongoing Policy reviews and exception handling. The
amendments are intended to make the Policy consistent in this regard
with other ICE Clear Europe policies and governance processes. Pursuant
to the amendments, the document owner, as specified in ICE Clear Europe
policies, would be responsible for reporting report material breaches
or unapproved deviations from this document to the Head of Department,
the Chief Risk Officer and the Head of Compliance (or their delegates)
who together would determine if further escalation should be made to
relevant senior executives, the Board and/or competent authorities.
Exceptions to the Policy would approved in accordance with ICE Clear
Europe's governance process for the approval of changes to the Policy.
(b) Statutory Basis
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed amendments are
consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \5\ and the
regulations thereunder applicable to it. In particular, Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \6\ requires, among other things, that the
rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to
the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions, the safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody
or control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and
the protection of investors and the public interest. ICE Clear Europe
believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to ICE Clear Europe, in particular, to Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F),\7\ because ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed
changes to the CDS Auction Terms enhance ICE Clear Europe's ability to
manage the risk of defaults. The proposed changes introduce All or
Nothing Bidding to ICE Clear Europe's existing auction methodology.
This new bid type is intended to reward auction participants for
bidding competitively on both size and price, rather than just price
(as with a Standard Bid). If an All or Nothing Bid sets the auction
clearing price, the revised CDS Auction Terms award 100% to that bid,
rather than splitting the award with participants bidding more
competitively on price but with smaller size. Such changes incentivize
competitive bidding by rewarding auction participants for bidding
competitively on both price and size and are designed to promote
effective and efficient auctions to facilitate the close-out of the
defaulter's portfolio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed amendments also implement the use of the automated DMS
to replace certain manual communication tasks in the auction process,
including announcing the auction, communicating Minimum Bid
Requirements and auction specifications, submitting bids and notifying
winning bidders. Such changes allow ICE Clear Europe to more
efficiently and safely manage its auction process and reduce the risk
of miscommunication or error. The added compliance requirements around
treatment of information concerning the auction will help prevent
market abuse, enhance compliance with applicable law and thus generally
promote the public interest. Finally, the clarification and clean-up
changes provide greater specificity with respect to the CDS Auction
Terms such that auction participants have greater certainty and clarity
regarding the auction process and the requirements for their
participation. ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed amendments
augment ICE Clear Europe's procedures relating to default management
and enhance ICE Clear Europe's ability to withstand defaults and
continue providing clearing services, thereby promoting the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions,
derivatives agreements, contracts, and transactions, the safeguarding
of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of ICE
Clear Europe or for which it is responsible; and the protection of
investors and the public interest, within the meaning of Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed rule change is consistent with the
relevant requirements of Rule 17Ad-22.\9\ Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) \10\
requires ICE Clear Europe to 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, including by maintaining additional financial
resources at the minimum to enable it to cover a wide range of
foreseeable stress scenarios that include, but are not limited to, the
default of the two participant families that would potentially cause
the largest aggregate credit exposure for the covered clearing agency
in extreme but plausible market conditions. ICE Clear Europe believes
that the proposed revisions enhance its CDS Auction Terms. As described
above, the optional All or Nothing Bid incentivizes competitive
bidding, promoting the goal of reaching an efficient auction clearing
price that permits ICE Clear Europe to close out the defaulter's
portfolio and return ICE Clear Europe to a matched book. Such new bid
type rewards auction participants for bidding competitively on both
size and price and may increase the willingness and ability of
participants and their

customers to participate in an auction and absorb the defaulter's
positions through the default management process. In ICE Clear Europe's
view, these enhancements represent tools that strengthen ICE Clear
Europe's ability to maintain its financial resources and withstand the
pressures of defaults, consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(4)(ii).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, ICE Clear Europe believes the amendments satisfy Rule
17Ad-22(e)(13),\12\ which requires a clearing agency to ensure that it
``has the authority and operational capacity to take timely action to
contain losses and liquidity demands'' in the case of default. As
discussed above, the proposed amendments would enhance ICE Clear
Europe's default management capabilities in CDS default auctions.
Specifically, ICE Clear Europe believes the proposed addition of All or
Nothing Bidding and the automated DMS enhance ICE Clear Europe's
ability to withstand defaults and continue providing clearing services,
including by incentivizing competitive bidding to promote effective and
efficient auctions that facilitate the close-out of the defaulter's
portfolio and maximizing ICE Clear Europe's ability to efficiently and
safely manage its auction process in default events, to ensure that ICE
Clear Europe can take timely action to contain losses and liquidity
pressures and to continue meeting its obligations in the event of a
participant default consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(13).\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(13).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) \14\ requires that clearing agencies establish
policies and procedures that provide for a well-founded, clear,
transparent, and enforceable legal basis for each aspect of its
activities in all relevant jurisdictions. The amendment to Paragraph
7.7 of Parts 1 and 2 are designed to enhance compliance by CDS auction
participants with Market Abuse Laws to the extent that they receive any
inside information relating to any Contracts cleared by the Clearing
House or in respect of securities of a Defaulter. In ICE Clear Europe's
view, the amendments are therefore consistent with the requirements of
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1). \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(i) \16\ requires clearing agencies to maintain a
sound risk management framework that identifies, measures, monitors and
manages the range of risks that it faces. The amendments to the Policy
are intended to ensure that the Policy is consistent with the CDS
Auction Terms and to ensure risks relating to defaults continue to be
well managed. In ICE Clear Europe's view, the amendments are therefore
consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(i).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(3)(i).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(3)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2) \18\ requires clearing agencies to establish
reasonably designed policies and procedures to provide for governance
arrangements that are clear and transparent and specify clear and
direct lines of responsibility. The proposed amendments to the Policy
more clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the document
owner, the Head of Department, the senior members of the Risk Oversight
Department and the senior members of the Compliance Department, and are
therefore consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2).\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(2).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed amendments would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The amendments
are being adopted further clarify and update the CDS Auction Terms,
with the goal of enhancing default management. The addition of All or
Nothing Bids would provide an additional bidding option for Clearing
Members if they choose to use it. The amendments will otherwise apply
to all CDS Clearing Members. ICE Clear Europe does not expect that the
proposed changes will adversely affect access to clearing or the
ability of Clearing Members, their customers or other market
participants to continue to clear contracts. ICE Clear Europe also does
not believe the amendments would materially affect the cost of clearing
or otherwise impact competition among Clearing Members or other market
participants or limit market participants' choices for selecting
clearing services. Accordingly, ICE Clear Europe does not believe the
amendments would impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act.

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

    Written comments relating to the proposed amendments have not been
solicited or received by ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe will notify
the Commission of any written comments received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change

    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.
    The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions
required with respect to the proposal are completed.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2020-007 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-ICEEU-2020-007. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule

change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
such filings will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE Clear Europe's website
at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/regulation. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2020-007 and should be submitted
on or before June 18, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-11403 Filed 5-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 21, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20680-20681]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08221]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC21-56-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Indiana, LLC, GIC Infra Holdings Pte. Ltd.
    Description: Joint Motion for Leave to Answer and Answer to Protest
of Duke Energy Indiana, LLC and GIC Infra Holdings Pte. Ltd.
    Filed Date: 3/26/21.
    Accession Number: 20210326-5177.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/21.

    Docket Numbers: EC21-79-000.
    Applicants: Crystal Lake Wind III, LLC, Crystal Lake Wind Energy
III, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Crystal Lake Wind III, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:.
    Docket Numbers: ER21-255-003.
    Applicants: Taylor Creek Solar, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Taylor Creek Solar, LLC Compliance
Filing to be effective 12/29/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5250.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-454-002.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2nd Refiling TOT Revisions to
Incorporate Letter Agreements to be effective 6/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5125.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-455-002.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2nd Refiling WDAT Revisions to
Incorporate Curtailment and Qualifying Facilities to be effective 6/15/
2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5160.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-456-002.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2nd Refiling WDAT Revisions to
Incorporate Letter Agreements to be effective 6/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1181-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 3127R3 Montana-Dakota Utilities Co.
NITSA NOA to be effective 2/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5097.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1209-001.
    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: MAIT submits amendment to ECSA No.
5921 to be effective 4/27/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5288.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1270-001.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Rabun Gap Enhanced Reliability
Upgrade Construction Agreement Errata Filing to be effective 2/23/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5272.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1683-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 6011; Queue No. AD1-125 to be effective 3/18/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5038.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1685-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Order No. 864 Compliance Filing to
be effective 2/25/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5141.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1686-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Letter Agreement--Sky River,
LLC and SCE SA No. 263 to be effective 4/16/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5171.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1687-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Niagara
Mohawk Power Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Joint TPIA among NYISO, NMPC
and LS Power SA No. 2612 CEII to be effective 4/2/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5188.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1688-000.
    Applicants: Harmony Florida Solar, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Harmony Florida Solar, LLC
Compliance Filing to be effective 12/29/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5235.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1689-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: DEF-FL Solar 10--Termination of
E&P Agmt RS 329 to be effective 6/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5263.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1690-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Tri-State Generation and
Transmission Association, Inc. Normalization Filing to be effective 6/
15/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/15/21.
    Accession Number: 20210415-5317.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/21.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:
    Docket Numbers: QF21-689-000.
    Applicants: Caleco Solar Farm LLC.
    Description: Form 556 of Caleco Solar Farm LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/14/21.
    Accession Number: 20210414-5048.
    Comments Due: Non-Applicable.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 14, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-08221 Filed 4-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 36917]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16122]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-2442-000]

Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization: Tri-State
Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced Tri-State
Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.'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 August 13, 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: July 24, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-16122 Filed 7-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 117 (Friday, June 17, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36415-36418]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13050]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0599; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00456-A]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A.
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. (Piaggio) Model P-180
airplanes. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe condition as corrosion
in the bottom fuselage area of the cabin compartment due to inner and
outer sides of fuselage skin panels of certain airplanes treated with
the less effective primer. This proposed AD would require repetitively
inspecting the fuselage skin panels, visually inspecting the entire
fuselage inner side skin if necessary, and taking any necessary
corrective actions. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 1,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Mail: 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 to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Piaggio
Aero Industries S.p.A, P180 Customer Support, via Pionieri e Aviatori
d'Italia, snc--16154 Genoa, Italy; phone: +39 331 679 74 93; email:
[email protected]. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0599; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the MCAI,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Kiesov, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, International Validation
Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106; phone: (816) 329-
4144; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0599;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00456-A'' at the beginning of your
comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the
proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include
supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this NPRM because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Mike
Kiesov, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, MO 64106. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued
EASA AD 2021-0104, dated April 15, 2021 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to address the unsafe condition on certain serial-
numbered Piaggio Model P.180 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences were reported where, during routine inspections,
diffused corrosion was detected on the fuselage inner side skin in
the area of the passenger cabin. Evidence indicates that the
presence of undetected (infiltrated or condensed) water, trapped in
between the inner surface of fuselage skin panels and the thermo-
acoustic insulation panels, could have started a galvanic corrosion
phenomenon, mainly in the bottom fuselage area of the cabin
compartment. Fuselage skin panels of certain aeroplanes, delivered
from 2009 to 2013, were treated with the first type of ``chromate-
free'' primer, chemically not as effective against corrosion when
compared to those containing chrome. The phenomenon has been
observed on aeroplanes subjected to prolonged inactivity and not
stored in a hangar, or those operating in an environment with high
humidity and/or frequent heavy precipitation, combined with a
possible deterioration of window sealing due to normal aging, wear
and tear.
    This condition, if not corrected, could affect the structural
integrity of the fuselage.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Piaggio published
the [Piaggio Service Bulletin (SB) 80-0405, Revision 0, dated March
15, 2021] SB to provide inspection instructions.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive inspections of each affected area and, if necessary, an
additional visual inspection of the entire fuselage inner side skin
and, depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable repair.
This [EASA] AD also requires reporting the inspection results to
Piaggio.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-
0599.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Piaggio SB No. 80-0405, Revision 0, dated March
15, 2021. This service information specifies procedures for inspecting
the fuselage skin panels and inspecting the full inner fuselage skin.
It also specifies repairing or replacing any parts where corrosion is
found.
    The FAA also reviewed Piaggio SB No. 80-0405, Revision 0, Errata
Corrige No. 1, dated March 24, 2021, which addresses discrepancies
identified in Piaggio SB No. 80-0405, Revision 0, dated March 15, 2021.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM
after determining the unsafe condition described previously is likely
to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information already described.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

    The MCAI allows credit for the fuselage inner skin inspection if
previously done using Piaggio Aerospace Temporary Revision No. 332 to
Chapter 53-00-00 of Piaggio P.180

Avanti II Maintenance Manual, and this proposed AD would not. The FAA
will consider requests for an alternative method of compliance for this
under paragraph (h) of this AD.
    The MCAI specifies compliance times of 8 months and 12 months
depending on when the P-180 airplane maintenance manual 3,600 flight
hour or 5-year inspection was accomplished. This proposed AD has a 12-
month compliance time for all airplanes because the 3,600 flight hour
and 5-year maintenance manual inspections are not required for U.S.
operators by FAA regulation.
    The service information specifies contacting Piaggio for certain
repair instructions, while this proposed AD would require repair using
a method approved by the FAA or EASA.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 14 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Action                Labor cost       Parts cost       Cost per airplane     Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections..................  Up to 150 work-           $2,360  Up to $15,110..........  Up to $211,540.
                                hours x $85 per
                                hour = $12,750.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary actions
that may be required based on the results of the proposed inspections.
The FAA has no way of estimating the number of airplanes that might
need these actions:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Action                    Labor cost               Parts cost                Cost per airplane
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair...........................  Up to 80 work-hours  $1,220......................  Up to $8,020.
                                    x $85 per hour =
                                    $6,800.
Replace skin panel...............  Up to 250 work-      Up to $12,200...............  Up to $33,450.
                                    hours x $85 per
                                    hour = $21,250.
Reporting Results................  1 work-hour x $85    Not Applicable..............  $1,190.
                                    per hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB
Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public
reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be
approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, completing and reviewing the collection of
information. All responses to this collection of information are
mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other
aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for
reducing this burden, to: Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX
76177-1524.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A.: Docket No. FAA-2022-0599; Project
Identifier MCAI-2021-00456-A.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by August 1, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. (Piaggio)
Model P-180 airplanes, serial numbers (S/N) 1174 through 1214
inclusive and S/N 1218 through 1230 inclusive, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 5330, Fuselage Main,
Plate/Skin.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe condition as corrosion in
the bottom fuselage area of the cabin compartment due to inner and
outer sides of fuselage skin panels treated with less effective
primer. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent degradation of the
structural integrity of the fuselage. This condition, if not
addressed, could lead to loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
applicable inspections and corrective actions on each fuselage wing
skin panel in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions, Part
A, paragraphs (1) through (15) and (17) through (20), or Part A
(Alternate Procedure), paragraphs (31) through (37), (41) through
(43), (50) through (55), and (57) through (60), in Piaggio Service
Bulletin 80-0405, Revision 0, dated March 15, 2021, as corrected by
Piaggio Service Bulletin 80-0405, Revision 0, Errata Corrige No. 1,
dated March 24, 2021 (Piaggio SB 80-0405), except for the following:
    (i) You are not required to contact the manufacturer. Instead,
for any repairs, use a method approved by the FAA or the European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
    (ii) Where the steps in Part A or Part A (Alternate Procedure)
reference Part B, you must follow the Accomplishment Instructions,
Part B, paragraphs (82) through (86), (88), and (104) of Piaggio SB
80-0405.
    (2) If, as part of the corrective actions required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD, you repaired areas of the fuselage skin but did
not replace the panels, do the following:
    (i) Within 60 days after completing the actions required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, report the inspection results,
including the information specified in the Confirmation Slip
attached to Piaggio SB 80-0405, to Piaggio at
[email protected]; and
    (ii) Repeat the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of this AD at
intervals not to exceed 660 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 26
months, whichever occurs first.
    (3) If, as part of the corrective actions required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD, you replaced the panels, within 60 days after
completing the actions required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD,
report the inspection results, including the information specified
in the Confirmation Slip attached to Piaggio SB 80-0405, to Piaggio
at [email protected].
    (4) If, during all of the inspections required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD, there is no corrosion and no primer
inconsistencies, no further action is required by this AD.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD
and email to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Mike Kiesov,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301,
Kansas City, MO 64106; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (2) Refer to EASA AD 2021-0104, dated April 15, 2021, for more
information. You may view the EASA AD at https://www.regulations.gov
in Docket No. FAA-2022-0599.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A, P180 Customer Support, via Pionieri e
Aviatori d'Italia, snc--16154 Genoa, Italy; phone: +39 331 679 74
93; email: [email protected]. You may view this
service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(817) 222-5110.

    Issued on June 13, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-13050 Filed 6-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 155)]
[Notices]
[Page 46610]
[DOCID:fr11au08-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

P-13174-000]

Davis Hydro, LLC.; Notice of Application for Preliminary Permit
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Protests

August 4, 2008.
    On April 16, 2008, Davis Hydro LLC. filed an application, pursuant
to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), to study the
feasibility of Boca Power Project. The proposed project would be
located on the Little Truckee River in Nevada County, California. The
existing facilities are owned and operated by the Bureau of
Reclamation.
    The proposed project using the existing Bureau of Reclamation Boca
Power Project would consist of: (1) A proposed approximately eight-
foot-long 50-inch diameter penstock, (2) a proposed powerhouse,
containing one generating unit with an installed capacity of 1.125
megawatts, (3) a proposed 2,000-foot-long, 12 kilovolt transmission
line, and (4) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project would have
an average annual generation of 5 gigawatt-hours and be sold to a local
utility.
    Applicant Contact: Richard D. Ely, Principal, Davis Hydro LLC.,
27264 Meadowbrook Drive, Davis, California 95618,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FERC Contact: Jake Tung,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-
comments.asp. More information about this project can be viewed or
printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the Commission's Web site at http:/
/www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-
13177) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-18376 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 247 (Tuesday, December 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77785-77786]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30535]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2013-0125]

Notice of Application for Approval of Discontinuance or
Modification of a Railroad Signal System

    In accordance with Part 235 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
and 49 U.S.C. 20502(a), this document provides the public notice that
by a document dated September 3, 2013, Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and
BNSF Railway (BNSF) jointly petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) seeking approval for the discontinuance or
modification of a signal system. FRA assigned the petition Docket
Number FRA-2013-0125.
    Applicants:

Union Pacific Railroad, Mr. Phillip A. Danner, AVP Engineering-Signal,
1400 Douglas Street, MS 0910, Omaha, NE 68179
BNSF Railway, Mr. James G. Levere, AVP Signal, 2600 Lou Menk Drive,
OOB-3, Fort Worth, TX 76131

    UP and BNSF jointly seek approval of the proposed temporary
discontinuance of the signal system at Tower 55 in Fort Worth, TX. The
limits of the temporary discontinuance are as follows:

 Fort Worth Subdivision from Milepost (MP) 249.5 to MP 251.0
 Fort Worth Subdivision Ney Bypass from MP 248.84 to MP 250.50
 Dallas Subdivision from MP 247.8 to MP 244.20
 Choctaw Subdivision 1 Track and Gauntlet Track from
MP 754.20 to MP 755.50
 Choctaw Subdivision 2 Track and North Yard Siding
from MP 752.20 to MP 754.40

 Duncan Subdivision from MP 611.90 to MP 612.90

    The purpose of the temporary discontinuance is to support the
installation of new track and a revised signal system. UP and BNSF
estimate the discontinuance to be no more than 120 consecutive days,
within a time period starting after July 1, 2014, and ending before
April 1, 2015. During the discontinuance, trains will operate through
the area via Form ``C'' rules, under the direction of the Employee-In-
Charge.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received by February 7, 2014 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
See http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy notice
of regulations.gov or interested parties may review DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477).

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-30535 Filed 12-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: January 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2288-2289]
[DOCID:fr14ja08-106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

    Extension: Regulations 14D and 14E; OMB Control No. 3235-0102;
SEC File No. 270-114 Schedule 14D-9.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Regulation 14D (17 CFR 240.14d-1-240.14d-11) and Regulation 14E (17

CFR 240.14e-1-240.14e-8) and related Schedule 14D-9 (17 CFR 240.14d-
101) require information important to security holders in deciding how
to respond to tender offers. Schedule 14D-9 takes approximately 258
hours per response to prepare and is filed by 600 companies annually.
We estimate that 25% of the 258 hours per response (64.5 hours) is
prepared by the company for an annual reporting burden of 38,700 hours
(64.5 hours per response x 600 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether these collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden
imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O
Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312;
or send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    January 3, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-353 Filed 1-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 186 (Thursday, September 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57584-57585]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22778]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0057]

Telecommunications; Extension of the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork)
Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in its Telecommunications
Standard (29 CFR 1910.268). The purpose of the requirements is to
ensure that workers have been trained as required by the Standard to
prevent risk of death or serious injury.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
November 24, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit your comments and attachments
to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2010-0057, U.S. Department
of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N-2625,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand,
express mail, messenger, and courier service) are accepted during the
Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15
a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2010-0057) for the Information Collection
Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal information you
provide, are placed in the public docket without change and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information
on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the
section of this notice titled'' SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, Directorate
of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accord with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information

regarding the causes and prevention of occupational injuries,
illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires
that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon employers,
especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce to the
maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining
information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    Under the paperwork requirements specified by paragraph (c) of the
Standard, an employer must certify that his or her workers have been
trained as specified by the training provision of the Standard.
Specifically, employers must prepare a certification record which
includes the identity of the person trained, the signature of the
employer or the person who conducted the training, and the date the
training was completed. The certification record shall be prepared at
the completion of training and shall be maintained on file for the
duration of the employee's employment. The information collected will
be used by employers as well as by compliance officers to determine
whether employees have been trained according to the requirements set
forth in 29 CFR 1910.268(c).

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the Standard on Telecommunications
(29 CFR 1910.268). The burden hours have decreased based on the reduced
number of telecommunication workers installing and repairing lines and
equipment. Therefore, OSHA is proposing to decrease the existing burden
hour estimate for the collection of information requirements specified
by the Standard from 1,077 hours to 664 hours, a total decrease of 413
hours. The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to
this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Telecommunications (29 CFR 1910.268).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0225.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 558.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Two minutes (.03 hour) for an
establishment to disclose training records and two minutes (.03 hour)
for the training record to be generated.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 664.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other materials must identify the Agency
name and the OSHA docket number (Docket No. OSHA-2010-0057) for the
ICR. You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document
files electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in
reference to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit
them to the OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled
ADDRESSES). The additional materials must clearly identify your
electronic comments by your name, date, and the docket number, so the
Agency can attach them to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information, such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this Web
site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not
available from the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet
to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on September 19, 2014.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2014-22778 Filed 9-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P