[Federal Register: September 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 186)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 49356]
[DOCID:fr28se09-22]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 49

[EPA-R01-OAR-2009-0305; A-1-FRL-8949-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a Tribal Implementation Plan
(``TIP'') submitted by the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut
(``the Tribe''). This revision adds new emission units to the Tribe's
TIP, while maintaining an enforceable cap on nitrogen oxide emissions
from stationary sources owned by the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority
and located within the external boundaries of the Mohegan Reservation.
The revision also provides the Administrator of The Mohegan
Environmental Protection Department with enforcement authority for
violations of the Mohegan TIP and establishes a right of appeal to the
Director of Regulation and Compliance and the Mohegan courts. This
action is intended to help attain the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. This action is being taken in
accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 28, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2009-0305 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R01-OAR-2009-0305'', Ida McDonnell, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAP), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Ida
McDonnell, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Air Unit, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAP), Boston, MA
02114-2023. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
legal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
Section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ida E. McDonnell, Air Permits, Toxics
and Indoor Air Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress
Street, 11th floor, (CAP), Boston, MA 02114-2023, telephone number
(617) 918-1653, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules Section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the Tribe's TIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action
rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse
comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on
this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
    For additional information, see the direct final rule which is
located in the Rules Section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: August 13, 2009.
Ira Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. E9-23262 Filed 9-25-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 27, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 142)]
[Notices]
[Page 37087-37090]
[DOCID:fr27jy09-99]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records Notice

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

ACTION: Notice to establish a system of records.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA intends to establish a system of records under the
Privacy Act of 1974 as part of its Consumer Assistance to Recycle and
Save program (CARS program), which implements the Consumer Assistance
to Recycle and Save Act of 2009 (CARS Act). The system of records will
contain personally identifiable information (PII) about individual car
purchasers/lessees and may contain PII about a limited number of sole
proprietor automobile salvage auctions and disposal facilities
participating in the CARS Program, which is a temporary program
covering eligible automobile purchases/leases occurring between July 1,
2009 and November 1, 2009. The system of records is more thoroughly
detailed below and in the Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) that NHTSA
will include in the docket for the CARS final rule at http://
www.regulations.gov, being published in the Federal Register on or
about July 24, 2009 and on the DOT Privacy Web site at http://
www.dot.gov/privacy.

DATES: Effective July 24, 2009. The CARS Act requires the Secretary of
Transportation, acting through NHTSA, to issue final regulations within
30 days after enactment (i.e., by July 24, 2009), ``notwithstanding''
the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act
(5 U.S.C. 553). NHTSA established a Web site to convey information
about the program and a hotline to answer questions about the program.
On July 2, 2009, NHTSA published a document in the Federal Register (74
FR 31812) providing additional useful information, in advance of
issuance of its final rule. NHTSA could not finalize its System of
Records Notice (SORN) prior to completion of the CARS final rule, so
this SORN is being published today, concurrent with the final rule. Due
to the extremely short time afforded by the CARS Act to develop and
complete the CARS rulemaking and implement this 4-month program, NHTSA
was precluded from publishing its rule for notice and comment. It found
for good cause that providing notice and comment on the final rule
would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. For the
same reason, NHTSA must begin operating the CARS program system of
records on or about July 24, 2009, prior to completion of a 30-day
public notice and comment period under this SORN. NHTSA nonetheless
seeks and will accept public comment on this SORN for a 30-day period.
Because our ability to consider comments received may be limited, we
encourage the earliest possible submission of comments. If feasible, we
may publish an amended SORN in light of any comments received.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Dee Smith, NHTSA Privacy Officer, NHTSA
Office of the CIO, NPO-420, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For privacy issues please contact: Dee
Smith, NHTSA Privacy Officer, NHTSA Office of the CIO, NPO-420, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. CARS Program

    On June 24, 2009, the President signed into law the Consumer
Assistance to Recycle and Save Act of 2009 (the CARS Act) (Pub. L. 111-
32). The Act establishes, within DOT's National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), a temporary program under which an owner of a
motor vehicle meeting statutorily specified criteria may trade in the
vehicle and receive a monetary credit from the dealer toward the
purchase or lease of a new motor vehicle meeting statutorily specified
criteria (the CARS Program or Program).
    The Program covers qualifying transactions that occur between July
1, 2009 and November 1, 2009. If all of the conditions of eligibility
are met and the dealer provides NHTSA with sufficient documentation
relating to the transaction, NHTSA will make an electronic payment to
the dealer equal to the amount of the credit extended by the dealer to
the consumer, not exceeding the statutorily authorized amount. The
dealer must agree to transfer the trade-in vehicle to a salvage auction
or disposal facility that will crush or shred it so that it will never
be returned to the road, although parts of the vehicle other than the
engine block may be sold prior to disposal.
    Under the Program, NHTSA must collect a variety of information from
individuals and entities about qualifying transactions. Vehicle
manufacturers must provide data about vehicles and authorized dealers.
Dealers must provide information about their business operations and
individual financial transactions. Salvage auctions and disposal
facilities may be required to provide comparable data about their
business operations and information confirming the sale or destruction
of trade-in vehicles. This information is required to ensure compliance
with the terms of the CARS Act--specifically, to verify that purchasing
consumers, new and trade-in vehicles, dealers, salvage auctions and
disposal facilities are eligible to participate in the Program; to
identify, prevent and penalize fraud; and to confirm appropriate
disposal of the trade-in vehicles. Participating car buyers also will
be asked to complete a survey about the Program for use in reporting to
Congress on the efficacy of the Program, as mandated by the CARS
statute. Surveys will be voluntary and anonymous. Additionally, under
the Act, NHTSA is required to coordinate with the U.S. Department of
Justice (DOJ) to ensure that the National Motor Vehicle Title
Information System (NMVTIS) (which is administrated by the American
Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA)) is updated
appropriately to reflect the disposal of vehicles traded in under the
CARS Program.

II. CARS Database System

    In order to support the CARS program, NHTSA will utilize one or
more secure databases (i.e., the CARS Database System) to collect,
process and store information about eligible transactions and about car
purchasers/lessees, dealers, salvage auctions and disposal facilities
participating in the CARS program. This information will include
Personally Identifiable Information (PII), including financial
transaction information of individual car purchasers/lessees, and may
include PII about a limited number of salvage auctions and disposal
facilities participating in the program, which in some States may be
operated by individuals (sole proprietors).

III. The Privacy Act

    The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) governs the means by which the
United States Government collects, maintains, and uses PII in a system
of records. A ``system of records'' is a group of any records under the
control of a Federal agency from which information about individuals is
retrieved by name or other personal identifier.
    The Privacy Act requires each agency to publish in the Federal
Register a notice (SORN) identifying and describing each system of
records the agency maintains, including the purposes for which the
agency uses PII in the system, the routine uses for which the agency
discloses such information outside the agency, and how individuals
record subject can exercise their rights under the Privacy Act (e.g.,
to determine if the system contains information about them).

IV. Privacy Impact Assessment

    NHTSA is publishing a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) to coincide
with this SORN.
    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), a report on the establishment
of this new system of records has been sent to Congress and to the
Office of Management and Budget.
SYSTEM NUMBER:
DOT/NHTSA 464

SYSTEM NAME:
    CARS Database System.

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:
    Sensitive, unclassified.

SYSTEM LOCATION:
    Servers: The Servers hosting the CARS Database System are housed in
a contractor-owned facility at Oracle On Demand in Austin, Texas.
    Portals: This system is accessed via portals located at:
     Registered, participating new car dealers via the Internet
at http://www.cars.gov.
     NHTSA Headquarters, located at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, and
in various of NHTSA's regional offices and at other off-site locations
used in connection with CARS Program.
     The off-site facilities of NHTSA and DOT Contractors.
    Authorized users at NHTSA Headquarters access their records in the
CARS Database System via the DOT Intranet. Authorized users at the
NHTSA portal locations and at the contractor portal locations access
their records in the CARS Database System via the Internet at http://
www.cars.gov.
    Some system software is maintained by Oracle On Demand in Austin,
Texas. The CARS Database System interfaces with participating new car
dealers, and with other DOT systems used to pay the dealers, through
that system software, as well as other software maintained by the
Federal Aviation Administration's Enterprise Services Center (ESC) at
the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Oklahoma City, OK.
    Any hard-copy files containing CARS-related records will be
maintained at the pertinent NHTSA, DOT or Contractor portal locations.

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:
    The system covers the following individuals:
     Individual buyers/lessees of new cars participating in the
CARS program.
     Sole proprietors of salvage auctions and automobile
disposal facilities participating in the CARS program.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
     Records about individual car buyers/lessees participating
in the CARS Program consist of transaction records containing the
following PII data elements: name and address of the purchaser/lessee;
the purchaser/lessee's State driver's license number or other State
identification number; the State driver's license number or other State
identification number of the co-purchaser/lessee (if any), as listed in
the title; and the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) of the trade-in
vehicle and the VIN of the new vehicle. Depending on the State and
content of the sales contract, PII also may be found on the following
documents required to

be scanned by dealers and entered into the system: Document of title of
trade-in vehicle (or, in certain States, documentation of paper-less
title), proof of insurance for trade-in vehicle (cards or letter from
insurer), trade-in registration, sales summary sheet, and salvage
certificate.
     Records about any sole proprietors of salvage auctions and
disposal facilities participating in the CARS Program consist of
business operation records that may include the following PII elements:
Name, home address, telephone number and e-mail address, to the extent
that such individuals operate their businesses out of their homes.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:
    Public Law 111-32, 123 Stat. 1859.

PURPOSE(S):
    The purpose for collecting records in the CARS Database System is
to implement the CARS Program and ensure compliance with the terms of
the CARS Act. Specifically:
     NHTSA personnel and contractors use the information that
each car dealer enters into the CARS database to verify that
purchasing/leasing consumers, new and trade-in vehicles, dealers,
salvage auctions and disposal facilities are eligible to participate in
the Program.
     NHTSA personnel and contractors use information entered
into the system to determine if individual transactions satisfy CARS
program requirements.
     NHTSA personnel and contractors use the system to send
information about eligible transaction to a DOT financial management
system to process vouchers and cause dealers to be paid by DOT/NHTSA
for eligible transactions.
     Both to establish eligibility and for audit purposes,
NHTSA compares dealer-entered information in the CARS Database System
to purchaser/lessee and transactional information already within the
system.
     NHTSA personnel and contractors and the DOT Inspector
General may use information about individual transactions, purchasers/
lessees, dealers, salvage auctions and disposal facilities
participating in the CARS Program to prevent, identify and investigate
program violations and fraud.
     NHTSA personnel and contractors will use survey data
provided by purchasers/lessees to report to Congress on the efficacy of
the Program.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES
OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:
    The CARS Database System shares PII about individual purchasers/
leasees and their new and trade-in vehicles, and about any sole
proprietors of salvage auctions and automobile disposal facilities, as
follows:
     NHTSA personnel and contractors will use VINs from the
system to update DOJ's NMVTIS database, as required by the CARS Act.
     NHTSA personnel and contractors, as well as the DOT
Inspector General, may provide to the U.S. Department of Justice
information about certain transactions, including PII about individual
purchasers/lessees and any sole proprietors of salvage auctions and
disposal facilities participating in the CARS Program, for purposes of
investigating and prosecuting criminal violations, including fraud.
     NHTSA personnel and contractors will provide to States
lists of VINs of trade-in vehicles for which they issued car titles,
for purposes of cancelling the car titles.
     Salvage auctions and disposal facilities receive the VIN
and voucher transaction code for each trade-in car sent to them for
sale or destruction. They include the VIN and code on a certificate
that they return to DOT/NHTSA.

    Other possible routine uses of the information, applicable to all
DOT systems, are published in the Federal Register at 65 FR 19476
(April 11, 2000), under ``Prefatory Statement of General Routine Uses''
(available at http://www.dot.gov/privacy/privacyactnotices/).

DISCLOSURE TO CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES:
    None.

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING,
AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
STORAGE:
    Records are stored in databases, on magnetic tape, on magnetic disk
and in secure file folders at DOT, NHTSA and contractor portal
locations, as required. The databases are on servers; the data is
typically stored on a Storage Area Network (SAN) and backed-up on tape
stored in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Kansas City, Kansas and Austin,
Texas. Magnetic tape and disk records are maintained at the central
maintenance site in Oklahoma City, at the disaster recovery site in
Kansas City, and at the remote hosting site in Austin. Storage of file
folders is at the geographic location of the pertinent portal location.

RETRIEVABILITY:
    Records related to individual purchasing/leasing consumers
participating in the CARS program are retrieved by State identification
number (ID). This will be either a State driver's license and/or
another form of State ID (i.e., driver's permit or standard ID).
    Records related to any sole proprietors of automobile disposal
facilities are retrieved through the use of a unique number given to
the proprietors through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The
EPA number will be listed on the http://www.cars.gov Web site for
disposal facilities that are authorized to receive CARS vehicles.

SAFEGUARDS:
    Access to records in the CARS Database system will be limited to
NHTSA personnel and contractors through password security, encryption,
firewalls, and secured operating system, except for bank account
information and a limited amount of eligible transaction information
which will be encrypted and sent securely to DOT's financial management
system for purposes of effecting payments to participating dealers for
eligible transactions.
    Registered dealers entering data into the system will be able to
access only records relating to transactions initiated by the same
dealer--and not records relating to other transactions entered into the
system.
    Any hard copies of CARS-related records containing PII at DOT,
NHTSA and contractor portal locations will be kept in file folders
locked in secure file cabinets during non-duty hours.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:
    Under the CARS Final Rule, records created under the CARS program
will be kept for 5 years. Records that are needed longer, such as to
resolve claims and audit exceptions and prosecute fraud, will be
retained until such matters are resolved.
    The records may be moved at a future date to one or more different
locations in response to the operational needs of DOT, NHTSA, the CARS
Program or DOT/NHTSA contractors

SYSTEM MANAGER AND ADDRESS:
    The CARS Database System Manager (NPO-400), Office of the Chief
Information Officer, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:
    Individuals or business entities wishing to know if their records
appear in this system should direct their

requests to the System Manager identified above.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURE:
    Individuals seeking access to information about them in this system
should follow the same procedure as indicated under ``Notification
Procedure.''

CONTESTING RECORDS PROCEDURE:
    Individuals seeking to contest the content of information about
them in this system should follow the same procedure as indicated under
``Notification Procedure.''

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
    Transaction information pertaining to individual purchasers/lessees
is obtained by car dealers, on behalf of NHTSA, directly from the
individuals, from source documents the individuals provide (some of
which are scanned into the database by the dealer), and/or directly
from their new and trade-in cars. Dealers scan and/or enter the
information into the CARS database and manually compare the information
to the source documents or systems to verify its accuracy. NHTSA
personnel and contractors then review the records to ensure accuracy
prior to assessing the eligibility of individual transactions.
    Business operations information about any sole proprietor salvage
auctions and disposal facilities is obtained directly from the
proprietors.

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THIS SYSTEM:
    None.

    Dated: July 21, 2009.
Habib Azarsina,
Departmental Privacy Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-17791 Filed 7-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 29 (Friday, February 12, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7539-7540]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02920]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0078; FRL-9940-65-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Proposed Information Collection Request;
Landfill Methane Outreach Program (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``Landfill Methane Outreach
Program'' (EPA ICR No. 1849.07 OMB Control No. 2060-0446) to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance
with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
March 31, 2016. Public comments were previously requested via the
Federal Register (80 FR 61210) on Friday, October 9, 2015 during a 60-
day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for
public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below,
including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may
not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 14,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2003-0078, to (1) EPA online

using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Swarupa Ganguli, Climate Change
Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 6207A, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP), created by
EPA as part of the United States' commitment to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change, is a voluntary program designed to encourage and facilitate the
development of environmentally and economically sound landfill gas
(LFG) energy projects across the United States to reduce methane
emissions from landfills. LMOP meets these objectives by educating
local governments and communities about the benefits of LFG recovery
and use; building partnerships between state agencies, industry, energy
service providers, local communities, and other stakeholders interested
in developing this valuable resources in their community; and providing
tools to evaluate LFG energy potential. LMOP signed voluntary Memoranda
of Understanding (MOUs) with these organizations to enlist their
support in promoting cost-effective LFG utilization. The information
collection includes completion and submission of the MOU, periodic
information updates, and annual completion and submission of basic
information on landfill methane projects with which the organizations
are involved as an effort to update the LMOP Landfill and Landfill Gas
Energy Project Database. The information collection is to be utilized
to maintain up-to-date data and information about LMOP Partners and LFG
energy projects with which they are involved. The data will also be
used by the public to access LFG energy project development
opportunities in the United States. In addition, the information
collection will assist LMOP in evaluating the reduction of methane
emissions from landfills.
    Form Numbers: 5900-157, 5900-158, 5900-159, 5900-160, 5900-161, and
5900-162.
    Respondents/affected entities: Private companies and municipalities
that own or operate landfills; manufacturers and suppliers of
equipment/knowledge to capture and utilize LFG; utility companies; end-
users of energy from landfills; developers of LFG energy projects;
State agencies; and other LFG energy stakeholders.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 1,135.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 2,522 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $196,272 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 1,694 hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This decrease is due to revised estimates of
respondent participation and attrition.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-02920 Filed 2-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 168 (Thursday, August 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45497-45500]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18713]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-2381]

Horizontal Approaches to Food Standards of Identity
Modernization; Public Meeting; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is

announcing a public meeting entitled ``Horizontal Approaches to Food
Standards of Identity Modernization.'' The purpose of the public
meeting is to give interested persons an opportunity to discuss FDA's
effort to modernize food standards of identity (SOI) and provide
information about changes we could make to existing SOI, particularly
changes that could be made across categories of standardized foods
(i.e., horizontal changes), to provide flexibility for the development
of healthier foods. We are also interested in discussing horizontal
changes that would better facilitate innovation. This effort is part of
the FDA's comprehensive, multiyear Nutrition Innovation Strategy (NIS)
designed to improve healthy dietary behavior and help reduce
preventable death and disease related to poor nutrition by, among other
things, providing incentives for food manufacturers to produce products
that have more healthful attributes.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on September 27, 2019, from 8:30
a.m. to 5 p.m. Submit either electronic or written comments on this
public meeting notice and request for comments by November 12, 2019.
See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for registration date and
information.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the Hilton Washington DC/
Rockville Hotel, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. For more
information on the hotel see http://www3.hilton.com/en/hotels/maryland/hilton-washington-dc-rockville-hotel-and-executive-meeting-ctr-IADMRHF/index.html.
    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely
filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be
submitted on or before November 12, 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of November 12, 2019. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions)
will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery
service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2018-N-2381 for ``Horizontal Approaches to Food Standards of
Identity Modernization.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely
manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for
those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between
9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' We will review
this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in our
consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed
confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for
public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both
copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name
and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide
this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your
comments and you must identify this information as ``confidential.''
Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except
in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law.
For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets,
see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For questions about registering for the meeting or to register by
phone: Mark Gifford, SIDEM, 1775 Eye St. NW, Suite 1150, Washington, DC
20006, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general questions about the meeting or for special
accommodations due to a disability: Juanita Yates, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-009), Food and Drug Administration,
5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Introduction

    On January 11, 2018, FDA released its 2018 Strategic Policy Roadmap
(https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/ucm591993.htm), which focuses, in part, on efforts to empower consumers
to make better and more informed decisions about their diets and
health, foster the development of healthier food options, and expand
the opportunities to use nutrition to reduce morbidity and mortality
due to chronic disease. The roadmap highlights FDA's commitment to
finding approaches to advance policies that better achieve these goals.
    On March 29, 2018, the Commissioner of Food and Drugs announced a
comprehensive, multiyear FDA Nutrition Innovation Strategy

(hereinafter the ``NIS'') (to access the speech, visit https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Speeches/ucm603057.htm). The NIS focuses, among
other things, on providing incentives for food manufacturers to produce
products that have more healthful attributes. Under the NIS, FDA is
seeking to modernize food SOI in a manner that will achieve three
primary goals: (1) Protect consumers against economic adulteration; (2)
maintain the basic nature, essential characteristics, and nutritional
integrity of food; and (3) promote industry innovation and provide
flexibility to encourage manufacturers to produce more healthful foods.
To inform this effort, we seek information from interested stakeholders
to learn what changes have occurred in food production and
manufacturing that impact industry's ability to comply with current SOI
regulations and what we should be aware of when reviewing and exploring
how to modernize our SOI regulations. We are also interested in
learning whether we can achieve our SOI modernization goals in ways
that produce cost savings.
    Many foods have definitions and SOI established by law. FDA began
establishing SOI to promote honesty and fair dealing in the interest of
consumers shortly after the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C
Act) was enacted in 1938. Since then, we have established more than 280
SOI for a wide variety of food products. SOI typically set forth
permitted ingredients, both mandatory and optional, and sometimes
specify the amount or proportion of each ingredient. Many SOI also
designate the method of production. A food is misbranded if it purports
to be or is represented as a food for which a SOI has been established
but fails to conform to the standard. See 21 U.S.C. 343(g). Because we
issued many SOI decades ago, various stakeholders have expressed
concerns that many SOI are out of date and may impede innovation,
including the ability to produce healthier foods.
    SOI protect consumers against economic adulteration and reflect
consumers' expectations about food. They may also describe the basic
nature and essential characteristics, including nutritional
characteristics, of the food (see FDA's May 20, 2005, proposed rule
entitled, ``Food Standards; General Principles and Food Standards
Modernization'' (70 FR 29214) for a discussion of the ``basic nature''
and ``essential characteristics'' of food). As consumers continue to
seek more nutritious and healthful food options, we seek to ensure that
SOI meet these expectations. Modernizing SOI can give manufacturers the
flexibility to improve the nutrition and healthfulness of standardized
foods, promote honesty and fair dealing in the interest of consumers,
and help achieve the goals of the NIS.
    On July 26, 2018, FDA held a public meeting to discuss the NIS
(including SOI modernization) and give interested parties an
opportunity to provide input. During the public meeting, many
participants expressed general support for FDA exploring modernization
options that could promote changes across all, or broad categories of,
SOI to facilitate innovation and flexibility to reformulate products to
produce more nutritious foods. Several participants highlighted that
rapid advances in technology and science necessitated revisions to
certain SOI. The participants, however, also stated that updating
individual standards (some stakeholders have referred to this as a
``vertical'' approach) would be time-consuming and may not be feasible
given FDA's limited resources. They proposed that a horizontal approach
that permits additional flexibility across all or broad categories of
standardized foods could help resolve this issue by allowing FDA to
efficiently make comprehensive changes that could impact many
standardized foods. For example, several participants cited FDA's
regulation entitled, ``Requirements for foods named by use of a
nutrient content claim and a standardized term'' (21 CFR 130.10) as a
potential model. This regulation provides for modified versions of
certain standardized foods that bear descriptive names that are
meaningful to consumers (e.g., ``fat free'' and ``low calorie''). Some
participants also said we should consider consumer demand for healthful
and nutritious foods as we explore how to modernize in ways that will
allow food manufacturers to produce more nutritious food options. The
NIS public meeting docket closed on October 11, 2018, and resulted in
more than 5,000 comments. We have reviewed the comments and are using
information provided to inform our strategy moving forward.
    There has been broad interest from stakeholders regarding
horizontal approaches to SOI modernization. Some offered concrete
proposals about the design and content of a regulation that creates a
horizontal standard to advance SOI modernization. For example, in
October 2006, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) submitted a
Citizen Petition asking FDA to amend 21 CFR part 130 to modernize food
standards (see Docket ID: FDA-2007-P-0463-0367). The Citizen Petition
identified six categories of variations from food standards that GMA
believed should be permitted to provide flexibility. Several comments
submitted to the NIS docket cited variations outlined in the GMA
Citizen Petition as examples of horizontal standard options we should
consider as part of SOI modernization.
    To maximize our limited resources, we must consider efficient
modernization approaches that will have the greatest potential impacts.
As such, we are interested in learning more about horizontal approaches
to SOI modernization that will encourage production of healthier foods
and/or facilitate innovation, specifically allowing for use of new
technologies and new or novel ingredients. We believe this focus
supports the NIS goals of reducing the burden of chronic disease
through improved nutrition. Furthermore, this will allow FDA to provide
manufacturers with additional flexibility without adversely impacting
the basic nature and essential characteristics of standardized foods.
    FDA is issuing this request for comment and will hold a public
meeting on September 27, 2019, to gather data and information from
stakeholders regarding horizontal approaches to SOI modernization.

B. Legal Authority

    Our authority to establish food standards is set forth in section
401 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 341). Section 401 of the FD&C Act
authorizes us to issue regulations fixing and establishing for any
food, under its common or usual name so far as practicable, a
reasonable definition and standard of identity, a reasonable standard
of quality, or reasonable standards of fill of container when such
action promotes honesty and fair dealing in the interest of consumers.
The standards of identity, quality, and fill of container for foods
regulated by FDA are codified in 21 CFR parts 130 to 169. FDA food
standards are established under the common or usual name of a food.

II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Meeting

    The public meeting will explore horizontal approaches to SOI
modernization that will support the goals of the NIS. We are interested
in learning more about horizontal changes that would improve the
nutrition or healthfulness of standardized foods and/or provide for
flexibility and innovation in their production. We are considering all
horizontal approaches that will ensure the basic nature and

essential characteristics of food are maintained. We also invite
comment on how these changes could be efficiently accomplished. For
example, we would like to know whether horizontal SOI might be a means
for implementing the changes and how such standards could be
structured.
    The public meeting will begin with a plenary session, followed by
breakout sessions that will discuss key topics relating to horizontal
approaches to SOI modernization. Approximately 2 weeks before the
meeting, we will post the public meeting agenda and additional
background materials on the internet at: https://www.fda.gov/food/news-events-cfsan/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements.
In addition to the opportunity to comment at the public meeting, there
will be an opportunity for interested stakeholders to submit written
comments following the meeting (see DATES).
    The first breakout session will explore nutrition topics. We are
interested in learning what changes to existing SOI would encourage
production of more nutritious foods. We are interested in hearing
stakeholder perspectives regarding the role of nutrition in SOI
modernization and how a horizontal approach to modernization could
encourage production of more nutritious foods. We want to learn if
current SOI pose barriers to production of more nutritious foods and,
if so, understand how horizontal changes to standardized foods could
help overcome these barriers. We also invite comments regarding how we
could design a horizontal standard to provide manufacturers of
standardized foods with the flexibility to reflect future advances in
science and technology as they relate to improved nutrition.
    The second breakout session will discuss issues related to
innovation and what horizontal approaches to modernization could better
accommodate advances in science and technology. We are interested in
learning how horizontal changes could provide the flexibility necessary
to accommodate future industry innovation while ensuring standardized
foods continue to meet consumer expectations and maintain the basic
nature and essential characteristics of food. We are particularly
interested in learning about horizontal changes to manufacturing
processes and permitted ingredients that could promote innovation. We
request that comments indicate the foods to which a proposed horizontal
change would apply, the current requirement(s) in the SOI to which the
change would apply, and the specific change requested (e.g., additional
manufacturing processes permitted or ingredients permitted).
    The third breakout session will discuss issues related to consumer
expectations and standardized foods. We are interested in learning what
flexibility we can provide in a horizontal approach to modernization,
while ensuring standardized foods continue to meet consumer
expectations. We want to learn about consumers' shifting expectations
and how horizontal changes could allow innovation and product
reformulation to meet such demands. For example, comments to the NIS
public meeting docket highlighted that consumers now demand healthier
foods and products that meet specific dietary needs (e.g., ``gluten
free'' products). As SOI are issued to ``promote honesty and fair
dealing in the interest of consumers,'' we believe the consumer
perspective is critical to understanding what flexibility we should
consider when exploring horizontal changes to current SOI and invite
comments on what, if any, limitations are appropriate to ensure
standardized foods continue to meet consumer expectations.
    We will consider all comments made at this public meeting or
received through the docket (see ADDRESSES) as we consider how
horizontal changes could support our SOI modernization goals.
Information concerning the FDA's NIS and more information on our work
to modernize SOI can be found at https://www.fda.gov/food/food-labeling-nutrition/fda-nutrition-innovation-strategy.

III. Participating in the Public Meeting

    Registration: To register for the public meeting, please visit the
following website: https://www.fda.gov/food/news-events-cfsan/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements. Please
provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name,
title, affiliation, address, email, and telephone.
    Registration is free and based on space availability. Persons
interested in attending this public meeting must register by 11:59 p.m.
on September 20, 2019. Early registration is recommended because
seating is limited; therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants
from each organization. Registrants will receive confirmation when they
have been accepted.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Juanita Yates (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) no later
than September 12, 2019.
    Requests for Oral Presentations: During online registration you may
indicate if you wish to present during a public comment session or
participate in a specific session, and which topic(s) you wish to
address. We will do our best to accommodate requests to make public
comments. We urge individuals and organizations with common interests
to consolidate or coordinate their presentations, and request time for
a joint presentation, or submit requests for designated representatives
to participate in the focused sessions. All requests to make oral
presentations must be received by September 12, 2019. We will determine
the amount of time allotted to each presenter and the approximate time
each oral presentation is to begin, and will select and notify
participants. Speakers will be limited to making oral remarks; there
will not be an opportunity to display materials such as slide shows,
videos, or other media during the meeting. No commercial or promotional
material will be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public
meeting.
    Persons attending FDA's public meetings are advised that FDA is not
responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.
    Streaming Webcast of the public meeting: This public meeting will
also be webcast. Webcast participants are asked to preregister at
https://www.fda.gov/food/news-events-cfsan/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements.
    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript of the
public meeting is available, it will be accessible at https://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Dockets Management Staff
(see ADDRESSES). A link to the transcript will also be available on the
internet at https://www.fda.gov/food/news-events-cfsan/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements.

    Dated: August 23, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-18713 Filed 8-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 15 (Thursday, January 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3895-3897]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01251]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71330; File No. SR-NYSE-2013-71]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Amending NYSE Rules 13, 70.25, 107C and
1000 To Adopt a New Order Type Called a Midpoint Passive Liquidity
Order

January 16, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On November 18, 2013, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend: (1) NYSE Rule 13 to adopt a new order
type called a Midpoint Passive Liquidity (``MPL'') Order; (2) NYSE Rule
1000 to specify that the proposed MPL Orders may interact with Capital
Commitment Schedule (``CCS'') interest; (3) NYSE Rule 70.25 to permit
d-Quotes to be designated with a midpoint modifier in order to set the
discretionary price to the midpoint of the protected best bid or best
offer (``PBBO''); and (4) NYSE Rule 107C to incorporate the proposed
MPL Order into the Retail Liquidity Program. The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on December 4,
2013.\3\ The Commission received no comment letters on the proposed
rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70956 (November 27,
2013), 78 FR 72968.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

A. Proposed MPL Order

    The Exchange proposes the MPL Order as an undisplayed limit order
that would automatically execute at the mid-point of the protected best
bid (``PBB'') and the protected best offer (``PBO''). An MPL Order
could interact with any incoming order, including another MPL Order,
and could execute at prices out to four decimal places.
    The proposed rule specifies certain limitations on the usage and
execution of an MPL Order. First, an MPL Order would not be eligible to
trade if it would trade at a price below $1.00 or if the execution
price would be out to five decimal places above $1.00. Second, an MPL
Order could not be designated as Good Till Cancelled. Finally, an MPL
Order would not execute if the market were locked or crossed. When a
market that had been locked or crossed becomes no longer locked or
crossed, the Exchange would execute all eligible MPL Orders and other
hidden interest eligible to execute at the midpoint of the PBBO.
    With regards to order allocation, MPL Orders would be allocated on
a parity-by-agent basis, consistent with NYSE Rule 72. Moreover, an MPL
Order's time priority would be based on its time of entry into Exchange
systems and would not reset when an MPL Order's price shifted due to
changes in the PBBO.
    Under the proposal, an MPL Order could also include a Minimum
Triggering Volume (``MTV''), in which case the MPL Order would not be
eligible to trade unless the aggregated contra-side quantity of all
interest marketable at the midpoint of the PBBO were equal to or
greater than the MPL Order's MTV. There would be no guaranteed trade
size based on the MTV. Exchange systems would enforce an MTV
restriction even if the unexecuted portion of an MPL Order with an MTV
were less than the MTV.
    An MPL Order that included an MTV would be rejected if it also
included a Self Trade Prevention (``STP'') Modifier. As proposed, STP
Modifiers could be used with MPL Orders that do not include an MTV. An
MPL Order with an STP Modifier, however, might be cancelled depending
on the type of order on the contra-side. An MPL Order with an STP
Modifier would not execute against another MPL Order or against a non-
MPL Order with an STP Modifier with the same market participant
identifier (``MPID'').
    Further, under the proposal, users could designate an MPL Order
with an add-liquidity-only (``ALO'') modifier (``MPL-ALO Order''). An
MPL-ALO Order would not execute on arrival, even if marketable, but
would remain non-displayed in the book until triggered to trade by
arriving contra-side marketable interest. An incoming non-marketable
MPL-ALO Order, however, could trigger a discretionary trade.\4\ An MPL-
ALO Order would only be eligible to trade against incoming contra-side
interest and would not interact with contra-side interest resting in
the book. A resting MPL-ALO Order would not be eligible to trade when
arriving same-side interest triggered a trade with contra-side
interest. An MPL-ALO Order would have to be at least one round lot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Under the proposal, an MPL-ALO Order triggering a
discretionary trade would be the ``liquidity provider,'' and the
triggered discretionary order would be the ``liquidity taker.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An MPL Order would not be eligible for manual executions, including
openings, re-openings, or closing transactions. As such, MPL Orders
would not be available to be designated as Limit ``On-the-Open''
(``LOO'') or Limit ``At-the-Close'' (``LOC'') Orders. As fully
undisplayed interest, MPL Orders would not be visible to the DMM on the
Floor under any circumstances.
    Additionally, MPL Orders would not be available to be entered for
high-priced securities. High-priced securities are securities with a
closing price--or, if the security did not trade, the closing bid
price--on the Exchange of $10,000 or more on the previous trading
day.\5\ Such securities are not available for automatic execution.
Because MPL Orders are not eligible for manual executions, MPL Orders
would not be available for these high-priced securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See NYSE Rule 1000(a)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. MPL Order Interaction With CCS Interest

    The CCS is a liquidity schedule setting forth various price points
at which the DMM is willing to interact with incoming orders. CCS
interest will either execute at the price at which the full size of the
order can be satisfied (``completion price'') or at the next price that
is one minimum price variation (``MPV'') higher (in the case of an
order to sell) or lower (in the case of an order to buy). The Exchange
has stated that it believes that CCS interest cannot be designated as
an MPL Order because MPL Orders are priced at the midpoint of the PBBO
and could be priced less than one MPV above or below the completion
price.
    While, under the proposal, CCS interest cannot be designated as an
MPL Order, CCS interest would be eligible to interact with MPL Orders.
Currently, CCS interest is eligible to trade inside the Exchange BBO at
a price representing (1) the non-displayable reserve interest of
Reserve Orders \6\ or (2) the reserve interest of Floor broker agency
interest files. The Exchange is

proposing to expand this list by amending NYSE Rule 1000(f)(1)(B) to
include MPL Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A Reserve Order means a limit order entered into Exchange
systems that may contain displayable and non displayable interest.
See NYSE Rule 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Proposed MPL Order Interaction With d-Quotes

    MPL Orders would not be available for d-Quotes \7\ since the
Exchange proposes to allow d-Quotes with a mid-point modifier as
described below. MPL Orders would not be available for pegging interest
since pegging interest is set to track the PBB or the PBO as the PBBO
changes, while MPL Orders would always be priced at the midpoint of the
PBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See NYSE Rule 70.25 (defining d-Quotes as discretionary
instructions with respect to a Floor broker's agency interest file
(e-Quotes)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to make a midpoint modifier available for d-
Quotes that would have a discretionary range up to the midpoint of the
PBBO.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange notes that the MPL Order and the midpoint
modifier are distinct functionalities. An MPL Order would always be
priced at the midpoint of the PBBO and would execute at that price.
A d-Quote designated with a midpoint modifier would use its
discretion to execute up to the midpoint but could execute at a
less-aggressive price. As such, a d-Quote with a midpoint modifier
would operate as a d-Quote that updated with changes in the PBBO to
set the discretionary price range to the midpoint of the PBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to accommodate the use of a midpoint modifier, the
Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 70.25(b)(ii), which states that the
minimum price range for a d-Quote is the minimum price variation set
forth in Exchange Rule 62. Rule 62 sets the minimum price variation at
$0.01 for stocks priced greater than $1.00. However, with the midpoint
modifier, a d-Quote can have a minimum price variation of $0.005.
Therefore, the Exchange is proposing to amend this restriction by
excepting d-Quotes with a midpoint modifier.

D. Incorporation of MPL Orders Into Retail Liquidity Program

    Retail Orders or Retail Price Improvement Interest, as defined in
NYSE Rule 107C, could not be designated as MPL Orders. MPL Orders,
however, could interact with incoming Retail Orders.
    The Exchange proposed that MPL Orders be available to interact with
Retail Orders within the Retail Liquidity Program (``Retail Program''),
a pilot program.\9\ The Exchange proposes to permit all Retail Orders
to interact with, in addition to available contra-side RPIs, available
contra-side MPL Orders. When determining the price to execute a Retail
Order, Exchange systems would consider all eligible RPIs and MPL
Orders. If the only interest were MPL Orders, the Retail Order would
execute against one or more MPL Orders at the midpoint of the PBBO. If
the only interest were RPIs, then the execution would occur against one
or more RPIs at the price level that completes the incoming order's
execution. If both RPIs and MPL Orders were present on the book, then
Exchange systems would determine the price level at which the incoming
Retail Order could be executed in full (``clean-up price''). If the
clean-up price were equal to the midpoint of the PBBO, RPIs would
receive priority over MPL Orders, and Retail Orders would execute
against both RPIs and MPL Orders at the midpoint. If the clean-up price
were worse than the midpoint of the PBBO, the Retail Order would
execute first with the MPL Orders at the midpoint of the PBBO, and any
remaining quantity of the Retail Order would execute with the RPIs at
the clean-up price. If the clean-up price were better than the midpoint
of the PBBO, then the Retail Order would execute against the RPIs at
the clean-up price and would ignore the MPL Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Under the Retail Program, retail liquidity providers
(``Providers'') are able to provide potential price improvement in
the form of a non-displayed order that is priced better than the
PBBO, called a Retail Price Improvement Order (``RPI''). Retail
Member Organizations (``RMOs'') can submit a Retail Order to the
Exchange, which interacts, to the extent possible, with available
contra-side RPIs. Retail Orders may be designated as Type 1, Type 2,
or Type 3. A Type 1 Retail Order interacts with available contra-
side RPIs and does not interact with other available contra-side
interest in Exchange systems or route to other markets. A Type 2
Retail Order interacts with available contra-side RPIs and any
remaining portion of the Retail Order is executed as a Regulation
NMS-compliant Immediate or Cancel Order pursuant to NYSE Rule 13. A
Type 3 Retail Order interacts first with available contra-side RPIs
and any remaining portion of the Retail Order is executed as an NYSE
Immediate or Cancel Order pursuant to Rule 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\10\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest and that the rules of a national
securities exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act. The Commission believes that the
proposed MPL Order is designed to enhance order execution opportunities
on the Exchange by providing market participants with an additional
order type to interact with other trading interests. The Commission
also believes that the proposed MPL Orders is designed to allow for
additional opportunities for investors to trade at the midpoint of the
PBBO, which may provide price improvement to incoming orders.
Additionally, the Commission believes that the proposed introduction of
the MPL Order could provide market participants with better control
over their execution costs and with a means to offer price improvement
opportunities. The Commission notes that other exchanges offer similar
functions as the MPL Order.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(h)(5). See also EDGA
Exchange, Inc. Rule 11.5(c)(7); BATS Exchange, Inc. Rule 11.9(c)(9);
and NASDAQ Stock Market LLC Rule 4751(f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that it is appropriate for the Exchange not
to allow DMMs to enter MPL Orders through CCS, because CCS interest
must observe the MPV in certain circumstances, but MPL Orders would be
tied to the midpoint of the protected NBBO and could therefore have
prices that do not observe the MPV. Further, the Commission believes
that it is appropriate not to allow d-Quotes to enter MPL Orders, as d-
Quotes would have a mid-point modifier that would provide a
functionality similar to MPL Orders.\13\ Finally, the Commission
believes that allowing MPL Orders to interact with retail orders in the
Retail Program is designed to expand the potential for price
improvement to retail investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Commission notes that pegging interests would also
conflict with the nature of MPL Order, since pegging interests are
orders that are pegged to the PBB or PBO as the PBBO changes. See
NYSE Rule 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2013-71) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-01251 Filed 1-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 13024]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04890]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-344, OMB Control No. 3235-0391]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Form T-6

    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.
    Form T-6 (17 CFR 269.9) is an application for eligibility and
qualification for a foreign person or corporation under the Trust
Indenture Act of 1939 (15 U.S.C. 77aaa et seq.). Form T-6 provides the
basis for determining whether a foreign person or corporation is
eligible to serve as a trustee for qualified indenture. Form T-6 takes
approximately 17 burden hours per response and is filed by
approximately one respondent annually. We estimate that 25% of the 17
hours (4.25 hours) is prepared by the filer for an annual reporting
burden of 4 hours (4.25 hours per response x 1 response).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is 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 by May 9, 2022.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Please direct your written comment to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: March 3, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-04890 Filed 3-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									     OFFICE OF

									AIR AND RADIATION

February 24, 2014

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Meeting with CARB Staff 10/28/13 on HDV In-Use Emissions
Standards

FROM:	Don Kopinski

TO:  EPA Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472

This memo documents a phone meeting held on October 28, 2013 between
representatives of the California Air Resources Board and EPA to discuss
Tier 3 heavy-duty vehicle in-use emissions standards.  The meeting
attendees from CARB included Paul Hughes and David Eiges, and from EPA
included Tony Fernandez, Michael Olechiw, and myself.

The purpose of the meeting was to clarify the thinking of the two
agencies on the subject topic.  No written materials were exchanged.