[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 145 (Monday, July 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35563-35566]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15993]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81203; File No. SR-NSCC-2017-010]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Expand the
Application of the Family-Issued Securities Charge

July 25, 2017.
    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 July 10, 2017, National Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the clearing agency.\3\ The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ On July 10, 2017, NSCC filed this proposed rule change as an
advance notice (SR-NSCC-2017-804) with the Commission pursuant to
Section 806(e)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act entitled the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement
Supervision Act of 2010, 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1), and Rule 19b-
4(n)(1)(i) of the Act, 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i). A copy of the
advance notice is available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed change consists of amendments to the NSCC Rules and
Procedures (``Rules'') \4\ in order to (i) expand the application of
NSCC's existing family-issued securities charge \5\ to apply to all
Members, as described below, and (ii) include a definition of ``Family-
Issued Security'' as a security that was issued by a Member or by an
affiliate of that Member, as described in greater detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Terms not defined herein are defined in the Rules, available
at www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/nscc_rules.pdf.
    \5\ The family-issued securities charge is currently described
in Procedure XV, Section I.(B)(1) of the Rules, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. The clearing agency 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

1. Purpose
    Currently, in calculating its Members' required deposits to the
Clearing Fund, NSCC excludes positions in Family-Issued Securities of
certain Members from its parametric volatility Clearing Fund component
(``VaR Charge''), and instead charges an amount calculated by
multiplying the absolute value of the long, net unsettled positions in
that Member's Family-Issued Securities by a percentage that is no less
than 40 percent (``FIS Charge''). The FIS Charge is currently only
applied to Members that are rated 5, 6, or 7 on the Credit Risk Rating
Matrix (``CRRM''). The proposed change would expand the application of
the FIS Charge to the positions in Family-Issued Securities of all
Members to help NSCC cover the specific wrong-way risk posed by Family-
Issued Securities, as described further below.\6\ Therefore, NSCC is
proposing to amend (i) Rule 1 (Definitions and Descriptions) to add a
definition of ``Family-Issued Security,'' and (ii) Procedure XV
(Clearing Fund Formula and Other Matters) to expand the application of
the FIS Charge to all Members by moving the description of FIS Charge
from Section I.(B)(1) to Sections I.(A)(1) and I.(A)(2) in order to
make clear that the FIS Charge would be included as a component of the
Clearing Fund formula calculated for all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Members that do not trade in Family-Issued Securities would
not be subject to the FIS Charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a central counterparty, NSCC occupies an important role in the
securities settlement system by interposing itself between
counterparties to financial transactions and thereby reducing the risk
faced by participants and contributing to global financial stability.
The effectiveness of a central counterparty's risk controls and the
adequacy of its financial resources

are critical to achieving these risk-reducing goals. In that context,
NSCC continuously reviews its margining methodology in order to ensure
the reliability of its margining in achieving the desired coverage. In
order to be most effective, NSCC must take into consideration the risk
characteristics specific to certain securities when margining those
securities.
    Among the various risks that NSCC considers when evaluating the
effectiveness of its margining methodology are its counterparty risks
and identification and mitigation of ``wrong-way'' risk, particularly
specific wrong-way risk, defined as the risk that an exposure to a
counterparty is highly likely to increase when the creditworthiness of
that counterparty deteriorates.\7\ NSCC has identified an exposure to
specific wrong-way risk when it acts as central counterparty to a
Member with respect to positions in Family-Issued Securities. In the
event that a Member with unsettled long positions in Family-Issued
Securities defaults, NSCC would close out those positions following a
likely drop in the credit-worthiness of the issuer, possibly resulting
in a loss to NSCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Principles for financial market infrastructures, issued
by the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems and the Technical
Committee of the International Organization of Securities
Commissions 47 n.65 (April 2012), available at http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss101a.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2015, NSCC proposed to address its exposure to specific wrong-
way risk in two ways.\8\ First, NSCC proposed to apply the FIS Charge
to its Members that are rated a 5, 6, or 7 on the CRRM (i.e., Members
on the Watch List).\9\ Today, following implementation of the FIS Phase
1 Rule Change, the FIS Charge is applied by excluding positions in
Family-Issued Securities of those Members from NSCC's VaR Charge, and
instead charging an amount calculated by multiplying the absolute value
of the long net unsettled positions in that Member's Family-Issued
Securities by a percentage.\10\ That percentage is no less than 40
percent and up to 100 percent, and is determined by NSCC based on the
Member's rating on the CRRM and on the type of Family-Issued Securities
submitted to NSCC. As such, under Procedure XV (1) fixed income
securities that are Family-Issued Securities are charged a haircut rate
of no less than 80 percent for Members that are rated 6 or 7 on the
CRRM, and no less than 40 percent for Members rated 5 on the CRRM; and
(2) equity securities that are Family-Issued Securities are charged a
haircut rate of 100 percent for Members that are rated 6 or 7 on the
CRRM, and no less than 50 percent for Members that are rated 5 on the
CRRM. Members that have a rating on the CRRM of 1 through 4 are not
currently subject to the FIS Charge. As stated above, Family-Issued
Securities present NSCC with specific wrong-way risk such that, in the
event that a Member with unsettled long positions in Family-Issued
Securities defaults, NSCC would close out those positions following a
likely drop in the credit-worthiness of the issuer, possibly resulting
in a loss to NSCC. Therefore, the FIS Charge is applied to the
unsettled long positions in Family-Issued Securities, which are the
positions that NSCC would close out following a Member default, as
opposed to the short positions in net unsettled securities. The haircut
rates were calibrated based on historical corporate issue recovery rate
data, and address the risk that the Family-Issued Securities of a
Member would be devalued in the event of that Member's default.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76077 (October 5,
2015), 80 FR 61256 (October 9, 2015), (SR-NSCC-2015-003) (``FIS
Phase 1 Rule Change'').
    \9\ As part of its ongoing monitoring of its membership, NSCC
utilizes the CRRM to rate its risk exposures to its Members based on
a scale from 1 (the strongest) to 7 (the weakest). Members that fall
within the higher risk rating categories (i.e., 5, 6, and 7) are
placed on NSCC's ``Watch List,'' and may be subject to enhanced
surveillance or additional margin charges, as permitted under the
Rules. See Rule 2B, Section 4 and Procedure XV, Section I.(B)(1) of
the Rules, supra note 4. See also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 80734 (May 19, 2017), 82 FR 24174 (May 25, 2017), (SR-DTC-2017-
002, SR-FICC-2017-006, SR-NSCC-2017-002) (approving proposed changes
to the CRRM methodology).
    \10\ Procedure XV (Clearing Fund Formula and Other Matters),
Section I.(B)(1), supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FIS Charge is currently applied only to Members on the Watch
List because these Members present a heightened credit risk to NSCC or
have demonstrated higher risk related to their ability to meet
settlement, and, as such, at the time the FIS Phase 1 Rule Change was
proposed, NSCC believed there was a clear and more urgent need to
address NSCC's exposure to specific wrong-way risk presented by these
Members' positions in Family-Issued Securities.
    Second, NSCC proposed to further evaluate its exposure to wrong-way
risk presented by positions in Family-Issued Securities by reviewing
the impact of expanding the application of the FIS Charge to positions
in Family-Issued Securities of all Members.\11\ Following its
evaluation, NSCC has determined that the risk characteristics to be
considered when margining Family-Issued Securities extend beyond
Members' creditworthiness. More specifically, exposure to specific
wrong-way risk is based on the correlation to the default of the issuer
Member, and NSCC may face this risk with respect to positions in
Family-Issued Securities of all of its Members, not only those Members
on the Watch List. As such, in order to more effectively mitigate its
exposure to specific wrong-way risk, NSCC is proposing to apply the FIS
Charge to positions in Family-Issued Securities of all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ FIS Phase 1 Rule Change, supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to implement this proposal, NSCC would amend Procedure XV
to move the FIS Charge from Section I.(B)(1), where it is currently
described as an additional deposit for Members on surveillance, to
Sections I.(A)(1) and (2), to include the FIS Charge as a component of
the Clearing Fund formula that is calculated for each Member.\12\ Under
the proposed change, the calculation of the FIS Charge would not change
as applied to Members that are rated 5, 6, or 7 on the CRRM. NSCC is
proposing to revise the description of the FIS Charge to include
Members that are rated 1 through 4 on the CRRM.\13\ Specifically, NSCC
is proposing to amend the description of the FIS Charge in Procedure XV
such that (1) fixed-income securities that are Family-Issued Securities
would be charged a haircut rate of no less than 80 percent for Members
that are rated 6 or 7 on the CRRM, and no less than 40 percent for
Members that are rated 1 through 5 on the CRRM; and (2) equities that
are Family-Issued Securities would be charged a haircut rate of 100
percent for Members rated 6 or 7 on the CRRM, and no less than 50
percent for Members that are rated 1 through 5 on the CRRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Procedure XV, Sections I.(A)(1) and (2) and I.(B), supra
note 4.
    \13\ Members that are not rated on the CRRM are not subject to
the FIS Charge and would not be subject to the FIS Charge under the
proposed change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change would also amend NSCC Rule 1 (Definitions and
Descriptions) to include a definition of Family-Issued Securities in
order to provide more clarity to the Rules. Under the proposed change,
``Family-Issued Security'' would be defined as a security that was
issued by a Member or an affiliate of that Member.
2. Statutory Basis
    NSCC believes that the proposed change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a registered clearing agency. In particular, NSCC
believes that the proposed change is consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act,\14\ and Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i), and (6)(i) and

(v),\15\ each promulgated under the Act, for the reasons described
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4) and (e)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the Rules
be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement
of securities transactions and to protect investors and the public
interest.\16\ By enhancing the margin methodology applied to Family-
Issued Securities of all Members, the proposal will assist NSCC in
collecting margin that more accurately reflects NSCC's exposure to a
Member that clears Family-Issued Securities and will assist NSCC in its
continuous efforts to improve the reliability and effectiveness of its
risk-based margining methodology by taking into account specific wrong-
way risk. As such, the proposal will help NSCC, as a central
counterparty, promote robust risk management, and thus promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, as well as, in general, protect investors and the public
interest, consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) under the Act requires, in part, that each
covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively
identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures to
participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and
settlement processes, including by maintaining sufficient financial
resources to cover its credit exposure to each participant fully with a
high degree of confidence.\17\ The specific wrong-way risk presented by
Family-Issued Securities is the risk that, in the event that a Member
with unsettled long positions in Family-Issued Securities defaults,
NSCC would close out those positions following a likely drop in the
credit-worthiness of the issuer, possibly resulting in a loss to NSCC.
The haircut rates of the FIS Charge more accurately reflect this risk
because they were calibrated based on historical corporate issue
recovery rate data, and, therefore, address the risk that the Family-
Issued Securities of a Member would be devalued in the event of that
Member's default. In this way, NSCC has determined that the margining
methodology used in calculating the FIS Charge more accurately reflects
the risk characteristics of Family-Issued Securities than applying its
VaR Charge, and would permit NSCC to more accurately identify, measure,
monitor and manage its credit exposures to those Members with positions
in Family-Issued Securities. Further, by expanding the application of
the FIS Charge to all Members, the proposed change would assist NSCC in
collecting and maintaining financial resources that reflect its credit
exposures to those Members. Therefore, NSCC believes the proposed
change is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) under the Act requires, in part, that each
covered clearing agency that provides central counterparty services
establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to cover its credit exposures to its
participants by establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a
minimum, considers, and produces margin levels commensurate with, the
risks and particular attributes of each relevant product, portfolio,
and market.\18\ Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(v) under the Act requires, in part,
that each covered clearing agency that provides central counterparty
services establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies
and procedures reasonably designed to cover its credit exposures to its
participants by establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a
minimum, uses an appropriate method for measuring credit exposure that
accounts for relevant product risk factors and portfolio effects across
products.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, Family-Issued Securities present NSCC with
specific wrong-way risk that, in the event that a Member with unsettled
long positions in Family-Issued Securities defaults, NSCC would close
out those positions following a likely drop in the credit-worthiness of
the issuer, possibly resulting in a loss to NSCC. Therefore, the
haircut rates were calibrated based on historical corporate issue
recovery rate data, and address the risk that the Family-Issued
Securities of a Member would be devalued in the event of that Member's
default, and would more accurately reflect the risk characteristics of
Family-Issued Securities than applying its VaR Charge. In this way, the
proposal would assist NSCC in maintaining a risk-based margin system
that considers, and produces margin levels commensurate with, the risks
and particular attributes of Family-Issued Securities. Additionally,
NSCC believes application of the FIS Charge to positions in Family-
Issued Securities of all Members is an appropriate method for measuring
its credit exposures, because the FIS Charge accounts for the risk
factors presented by these securities, i.e. the risk that these
securities would be devalued in the event of a Member default.
Therefore, NSCC believes the proposed change is consistent with Rule
17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v).

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

    By expanding the application of the FIS Charge to all Members, and,
therefore, increasing the amount of margin that Members may be charged
under the Rules, the proposed change may impose a burden on
competition. However, because the FIS Charge would be imposed on all
Members on an individualized basis in an amount reasonably calculated
to mitigate the risks posed to NSCC by those Members' positions in
Family-Issued Securities, NSCC does not believe any burden on
competition imposed by the proposed change would be significant.
    Further, NSCC believes that any burden on competition imposed by
the proposed change would be both necessary and appropriate in
furtherance of the Act.\20\ The proposal to expand the application of
the FIS Charge to positions in Family-Issued Securities of all Members
is necessary for NSCC to limit its credit exposures posed by these
securities. Additionally, by permitting NSCC to calculate and collect
margin that more accurately reflects the risk characteristics of these
securities, the proposed change would assist NSCC in limiting its
potential losses from defaults by Members. As stated, the FIS Charge
would be imposed on Members on an individualized basis in an amount
reasonably calculated to mitigate the risks posed to NSCC by those
Members' positions in Family-Issued Securities. In this way, NSCC
believes the proposed change would promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and protect
investors and the public interest. As such, NSCC believes any burden on
competition imposed by the expansion of the application of the FIS
Charge to all Members would be necessary and appropriate in furtherance
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NSCC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to
this proposal. NSCC will notify the

Commission of any written comments received by NSCC.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self- regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2017-010 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2017-010. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on
DTCC's Web site (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2017-010 and should be
submitted on or before August 21, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-15993 Filed 7-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28864-28865]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10987]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0272; FRL-9946-23-OAR]

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Notice of Revocation and
Voluntary Withdrawals of Programs From EPA's Section 608 Technician
Certifying Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of revocations and voluntary withdrawals.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is removing programs that were revoked and those that
submitted voluntary withdrawals from its list of Section 608 Technician
Certification Programs approved to provide the technician certification
exam. EPA's list is available at: http://www.epa.gov/section608/section-608-technician-certification-programs.

DATES: On February 1, 2016, authorization to provide the technician
certification exam and to issue certification cards was revoked for
each program in the Table below: Revoked Technician Certification
Programs. Technicians that were already certified by these programs
will remain certified, in accordance with 40 CFR 82.161(a).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Burchard, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (6205T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 343-2338; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

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

    Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0272. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC. This Docket Facility is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically from the Government Printing Office under the ``Federal
Register'' listings at the FDSys Web site (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR).

II. Revocations and Voluntary Withdrawals

    In accordance with the standards for certifying programs
established in appendix D of 40 CFR part 82, subpart F, technician
certifying programs must submit an activity report to EPA on a biannual
basis (such that EPA receives the report by every January 30 and June
30) that provides certain information about the certification tests
administered. The programs in the Table below have repeatedly failed to
submit activity reports.
    The regulations at 40 CFR 82.161 establish criteria and procedures
for such programs to become approved technician certification programs
that can provide the certifications that are required for technicians
under Section 608. As provided in 40 CFR 82.161(e), ``[i]f at any time
an approved program violates any of the above requirements,'' which
reference the standards in appendix D that are cited in 82.161(c),
``the Administrator reserves the right to revoke approval in accordance
with Section 82.169.'' Today's notice announces the final revocation of
the approval of the programs in the Table below.
    These programs were sent certified letters explaining that EPA had
not received required activity reports and listing which reports were
missing. In the letters, the programs were offered the opportunity to
come into compliance by submitting missing reports.\1\ The Agency
received no replies. In a Federal Register notice published December 2,
2015 (80 FR 75456), the programs in the table below were given thirty
days from the date of publication of that notice to submit their
missing reports. The notice announced that failure to submit these
reports so that they were received by January 4, 2016 would result in
an automatic suspension of the program's approval to offer the
technician certification exam and of its approval to issue Section 608
technician certification cards. The notice also announced that
automatic program revocation would occur on February 1, 2016 for each
of those certifying organizations that were so notified of impending
suspension and revocation and that failed to provide missing reports,
unless the organization requested a hearing in accordance with the
regulations published at 40 CFR 82.169 before that date. Since the
Agency did not receive any reports from those certifying organizations
by January 4, 2016, or requests for a hearing by February 1, 2016, the
approval to certify technicians is revoked for all the programs listed
in the following table:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Some of these programs also received notice in these letters
of impending suspensions and revocations, but as some of these
letters were returned to us unopened, we chose to provide a second
notice in the Federal Register. 80 FR 75456.

                                Table--Revoked Technician Certification Programs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   No.                    Technician certification program   Year of most recent activity report
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.......................................  ACI Environmental Safety          2009.
                                           Training Institute.
2.......................................  California Career Center........  No record of a submitted report.
3.......................................  Delaware County Community         2011.
                                           College.
4.......................................  Delaware Skills Center Building   2013.
                                           Maintenance.
5.......................................  Delaware Technical & Community    2009.
                                           College.
6.......................................  Educational Services............  2012.
7.......................................  HVAC/R Training, Inc............  2010.
8.......................................  InSolution......................  No record of a submitted report.
9.......................................  Niagara County Community College  2010.
10......................................  Nugent Associates...............  2011.
11......................................  San Diego City College..........  2010.
12......................................  Southern Technical College......  2012.
13......................................  Unified Industries, Inc.........  No record of a submitted report.
14......................................  Vatterott College...............  2011.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, we have updated the list of approved Section 608
Technician Certification Programs mentioned above by removing these
programs from the list.
    Additionally, as discussed in the December 2, 2015 Notice, the
following 608 Technician Certification Programs voluntarily withdrew
their certification and have been removed from the Agency's list of
approved Section 608 Technician Certification Programs: Air-
Conditioning & Refrigeration Institute (ARI); CDTA, Inc; and Motorcoach
Training Specialist. Three programs--NASA; Kellogg Community College;
and WyoTech--had prior to the December 2, 2015 Notice also submitted
requests for voluntary withdrawal but were inadvertently omitted from
that Notice. Consistent with those requests, these programs have also
been removed from the Agency's list of approved Section 608 Technician
Certification Programs.
    Technicians that were already certified by all of these programs
remain certified, in accordance with 40 CFR 82.161(a). Requests for
replacement cards should be sent to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Drusilla Hufford, Director,
Stratospheric Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-10987 Filed 5-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


P-18-0336 Sanitized Support Documents Index:
 P-18-0336 Sanitized Determination Document (linked)
 P-18-0336 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-18-0336 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-18-0336-0337 Sanitized ENG Report (attached)
 P-18-0336 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-18-0336 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-18-0336 Sanitized HLTH Report_POST-FOCUS FINAL (attached)


[Federal Register: February 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 9534-9535]
[DOCID:fr24fe06-66]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-33-001]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

February 14, 2006.
    Take notice that on February 9, 2006, Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company

(Tennessee) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Original Volume No. 2, First Revised Sheet No.1650, to become effective
February 1, 2006.
    Tennessee states that the attached tariff sheet is submitted in
compliance with the Commission's Order Approving Abandonment issued
February 1, 2006 in Docket No. CP06-33-000.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 7, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-2627 Filed 2-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 4)]
[Notices]
[Page 1238]
[DOCID:fr07ja08-58]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and
Exchange Commission will hold the following meeting during the week of
January 7, 2008:

A Closed Meeting will be held on Thursday, January 10, 2008 at 2 p.m.

    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (9)(B), and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Casey, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the closed meeting in closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
January 10, 2008 will be:

Formal orders of investigation;
Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an
enforcement nature; and
Matters related to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    January 3, 2008.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-43 Filed 1-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 213)]
[Notices]
[Page 64690-64691]
[DOCID:fr03no06-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-31-000]

Destin Pipeline Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Request for Limited
Tariff Waiver

October 26, 2006.
    Take notice that on October 23, 2006, Destin Pipeline Company,
L.L.C. (Destin) filed with the Commission a

request for a one-time, limited waiver of a tariff provision.
    Destin states that the purpose of its filing is to seek a one-time,
limited waiver of Section 5(e) of Rate Schedule FT-2 of Destin's FERC
Gas Tariff in order to allow for less than thirty (30) days written
notice by Shippers in order to reduce their Transportation Demand as a
result of a recent action by the Minerals Management Service. Destin
requests an effective date of November 1, 2006, for this request for
limited tariff waiver.
    Destins states that copies of this filing are being served on all
affected shippers, and applicable state regulatory agencies.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated
below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time October 30, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-18524 Filed 11-2-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P