[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 92 (Tuesday, May 12, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27914-27915]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09899]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0034; Airspace Docket No. 19-ASW-1]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Alpine, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Alpine-Casparis Municipal Airport,
Alpine, TX. This action is necessary due to the decommissioning of the
Brewster County non-directional radio beacon (NDB), and cancellation of
the NDB approach. It enhances the safety and management of standard
instrument approach procedures for instrument flight rules (IFR)
operations at this airport. Additionally, the geographic coordinates
are being updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, July 16, 2020. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1
Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Alpine-Casparis Municipal Airport, Alpine, TX, to
support instrument flight rule operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (84 FR 5016; February 20, 2019) for Docket No. FAA-2019-0034
to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Alpine-Casparis Municipal Airport, Alpine, TX. Interested
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments
were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
amends part 71 by: Modifying the Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface within a 6.6 mile radius of the Alpine-
Casparis Municipal Airport and within 2 miles each side of the 023[deg]
bearing from the Alpine-Casparis Municipal Airport extending from the
6.6-mile radius to 10.5 miles northeast of the airport. The geographic
coordinates of the airport are updated to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.
    This action is the result of an airspace reconfiguration due to the
decommissioning of the Brewster County NDB, and cancellation of the NDB
approach. This action enhances the safety and management of the
standard instrument approach.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Alpine, TX [Amended]

Alpine-Casparis Municipal Airport, TX
    (Lat. 30[deg]23'03'' N, long. 103[deg]41'01'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.6 mile radius of the Alpine-Casparis Municipal Airport
and within 2.0 miles each side of the 023[deg] bearing from the
Alpine-Casparis Municipal Airport extending from the 6.6-mile radius
to 10.5 miles northeast of the airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 5, 2020.
Steven T. Phillips,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2020-09899 Filed 5-11-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 198 (Thursday, October 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 70670]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24730]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14471-001]

West Street Hydro, Inc.; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, Approving Use of the
Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 14471-001.
    c. Date Filed: March 25, 2015.
    d. Submitted By: West Street Hydro, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Ashuelot River Dam Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Ashuelot River, in Cheshire County, New
Hampshire. No federal lands are occupied by the project works or
located within the project boundary.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Mr. Kenneth A. Stewart, West Street
Hydro, Inc., 20 Central Square, Keene, NH 03431; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Michael Watts at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. West Street Hydro, Inc., (West Street Hydro) filed its request
to use the Traditional Licensing Process on March 25, 2015. West Street
Hydro provided public notice of its request on April 2, 2015. In a
letter issued on May 13, 2015, the Director of the Division of
Hydropower Licensing approved West Street Hydro's request to use the
Traditional Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under section
7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations
thereunder at 50 CFR, part 402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating
consultation with the New Hampshire State Historic Preservation
Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic Preservation
Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. West Street Hydro filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD;
including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the Commission,
pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    m. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at
the address in paragraph h.
    n. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: October 6, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-24730 Filed 10-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 11, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44084-44087]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17079]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92574; File No. SR-C2-2021-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Enhance
and Clarify Its Price Adjust Process and Modify the Bulk Message Fat
Finger Check

August 5, 2021.
    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 28, 2021, Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``C2'') 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 Exchange. The Exchange filed the
proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\4\ 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``C2 Options'')
proposes to enhance and clarify its Price Adjust process and modify the
bulk message fat finger check. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/ctwo/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to enhance its Price Adjust (as defined
below) process for certain Market-Maker interest--specifically Book
Only \5\ orders and bulk messages \6\ submitted through bulk ports
\7\--and clarify other parts of that process, as well as modify the
bulk message fat finger check.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rule 5.6(c) defines a ``Book Only'' order as an order the
System ranks and executes pursuant to Rule 5.32, subjects to the
Price Adjust process pursuant to Rule 5.32, or cancels, as
applicable (in accordance with User instructions), without routing
away to another exchange. Users may designate bulk messages as Book
Only as set forth in Rule 5.5(c).
    \6\ The term ``bulk message'' means a bid or offer included in a
single electronic message a User submits with an M Capacity to the
Exchange in which the User may enter, modify, or cancel up to an
Exchange-specified number of bids and offers. A User may submit a
bulk message through a bulk port as set forth in Rule 5.5(c)(3). The
System handles a bulk message in the same manner as it handles an
order or quote, unless the Rules specify otherwise. See Rule 1.1.
    \7\ A ``bulk port'' is a dedicated logical port that provides
Users with the ability to submit bulk messages, single orders, and
auction responses, each subject to certain restrictions. See Rule
5.5(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 5.32(b) describes the Price Adjust process, which applies to
an order unless a user enters instructions for the order to not be
subject to the Price Adjust process. The System ranks and displays a
buy (sell) order that at the time of entry would lock or cross a
Protected Quotation of the Exchange or another exchange at one minimum
price increment below (above) the current national best offer (``NBO'')
(national best bid (``NBB'')) (``Price Adjust'').
    This Price Adjust process applies to Book Only orders and bulk
messages submitted that are designated as Price Adjust (and not
designated as Cancel Back). Separately, a Book Only order or bulk
message bid or offer (or unexecuted portion) is rejected if submitted
by a Market-Maker with an appointment in the class through a bulk port
if it would execute against a resting offer or bid, respectively with a
capacity of M. Therefore, if a Book Only bulk message bid of an
appointed Market-Maker does not execute upon entry and would rest at
the same price as an offer not represented by a capacity of M, that bid
price would be adjusted and rest on the book at one minimum price
variation below the offer. However, if the offer was represented by a
capacity of M, the System would reject the bid since it may not execute
against that resting offer.
    The proposed rule change amends the Price Adjust process so that an
appointed Market-Maker's Book Only bids and offers submitted through a
bulk port may have the opportunity to rest on the book if they are
submitted at the same price as the opposite side of the market when
represented by Market-Maker interest. Specifically, the proposed rule
change adds subparagraph (1)(B) to Rule 5.32(b),\8\ which states if the
bid (offer) of a Book Only order or bulk message \9\ submitted through
a bulk port at the time of entry would lock or cross (1) a protected
offer (bid) of another options exchange \10\ or a resting offer (bid)
with a Capacity of

M, the System ranks and displays the order at one minimum price
variation below (above) the better of the current away best offer
(``ABO'') (away best bid (``ABB'')) or resting M-Capacity offer
(bid).\11\ This will permit appointed Market-Maker orders and quotes
submitted through bulk ports (the primary purpose of which is to
provide liquidity to the Book) that are subject to the Price Adjust
process (indicating the submitting Market-Makers prefer a price
adjustment to rejection) so their quotes may rest in the Book if they
would otherwise lock interest against which they could not execute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ To accommodate this change, the proposed rule change numbers
the current introductory paragraph to Rule 5.32(b) as subparagraph
(1) (some of which becomes subparagraph (A)) and makes
nonsubstantive changes to reflect two subparagraphs to new
subparagraph (1).
    \9\ The Exchange notes that pursuant to Rule 5.5(c)(3)(A), only
appointed Market-Makers may submit such orders and bulk messages
through a bulk port.
    \10\ This is how these orders and messages are currently handled
pursuant to Rule 5.32(b).
    \11\ This is how these orders and messages are currently handled
pursuant to Rule 5.32(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change makes nonsubstantive changes to current
Rule 5.32(b) to set forth to which orders and bulk messages the
functionality in each subparagraph will apply; the proposed rule change
has no impact on how the Price Adjust process applies to orders and
bulk messages other than Book Only orders and bulk messages submitted
through a bulk port that would otherwise execute against resting M-
Capacity interest. Similarly, the proposed rule change updates Rule
5.32(c)(6) to indicate that provision will only apply to Cancel Back
\12\ Book Only orders and bulk messages submitted through bulk ports.
Book Only orders and bulk messages submitted through a bulk port may
either be Price Adjust or Cancel Back. As Price Adjust Book Only orders
and bulk messages submitted through a bulk port will be handled as
described above if they would execute against resting M-Capacity
interest, this provision will now only apply to Cancel Back Book Only
bulk messages and orders submitted through bulk ports.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Rule 5.6(c) defines a Cancel Back order as an order
(including a bulk message) a user designates to not be subject to
the Price Adjust process that the System cancels or rejects if
displaying the order on the book would create a violation of the
linkage rules or if the order cannot otherwise be executed or
displayed in the book at its limit price. The System executes a Book
Only--Cancel Back order against resting orders, and cancels or
rejects a Post Only--Cancel Back order, that locks or crosses the
opposite side of the BBO.
    \13\ The proposed rule change also clarifies in Rule 5.32(c)(6)
that it applies if the incoming order or bulk message would execute
against or lock resting M-Capacity interest. It is possible a Cancel
Back Book Only order or bulk message may otherwise not execute
against resting M-Capacity interest but would instead lock that
interest if it rested in the book, so the System would reject that
order or bulk message to prevent the dissemination of a locked
market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also clarifies in proposed Rule 5.32(b)(1)
that the Price Adjust process applies to an order or remaining portion
that does not execute upon entry. This is consistent with current
functionality, as Price Adjust orders may execute upon entry against
resting interest--the price adjustment applies only to permit any
remaining interest from an incoming order to rest at a price that would
not lock or cross opposite side interest in accordance with the linkage
plan.
    Additionally, current Rule 5.32(b)(1) (which the proposed rule
change renumbers as subparagraph (2) provides that if the NBBO changes
so that an order subject to Price Adjust would not lock or cross a
Protection Quotation,\14\ the System gives the Price Adjust order a new
timestamp. Currently, the rule states the System displays the order at
a price that at the price that locked the Protected Quotation at the
time of entry. Pursuant to current subparagraph (3), the ranked and
displayed price of an order subject to Price Adjust may be adjusted
once or multiple times depending upon the instructions of a User and
changes to the prevailing NBBO. The proposed rule change deletes
current subparagraph (2) and moves the concept of single or multiple
price adjust to proposed subparagraph (2).\15\ The proposed rule change
clarifies how each of single price adjust and multiple price adjust
currently function. Specifically, if a User designated an order as
eligible for single price adjust, the System ranks and displays the
order at the price of the Protected Quotation that was present in the
Book at the time of order entry. That is the price at which the Price
Adjust order would have entered the Book but for the presence of that
Protected Quotation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Exchange notes that a change in the NBBO would include
a change in M-Capacity interest resting at the top of the Book that
caused a Book Only bulk message or order to have its price adjusted.
    \15\ The proposed rule change also moves the latter part of
current subparagraph (2) regarding the priority of re-ranked and re-
displayed Price Adjust orders to proposed subparagraph (3). The
proposed rule change also renumbers current subparagraph (3) to be
subparagraph (4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the proposed rule change clarifies that bulk message
bids and offers are only subject to single price adjust. The Exchange
understands that Market-Makers' automated quote streaming systems
review their resting interest when the markets change and update as
appropriate in accordance with their business and risk models.
Therefore, the Exchange does not believe it is necessary for it also to
review resting Market-Maker interest continuously and reprice as the
market changes. The proposed rule change amends proposed subparagraph
(2)(B) to indicate it applies to orders designated as multiple price
adjust, and specifies the repricing described in that paragraph may
occur multiple times as the opposite side of the NBBO changes (up to
the order's limit price). The proposed rule change has no impact on how
the System handles order and bulk messages subject to single or
multiple price adjust; it rather more accurately describes this
process. The proposed rule change also amends this provision to reflect
that a Price Adjust bulk message may be re-priced upon entry due to the
presence of opposite side M Capacity interest (rather than rejected in
accordance with current functionality).
    With respect to multiple price adjust functionality, the proposed
rule change clarifies that the price at which the System reprices an
order is the ranked and displayed price (rather than or), which is
consistent with the remainder of paragraph (b). Price Adjust orders are
always ranked and displayed at the same price. Additionally, the
proposed rule change deletes the concept of the new price locking a new
Protected Quotation, as the new price will always be one minimum price
variation away to be consistent with linkage rules.
    Finally, the proposed rule change enhances the bulk message fat
finger check set forth in Rule 5.34(a)(5). In accordance with the fat
finger check, the System cancels or rejects any bulk message bid
(offer) above (below) the NBO (NBB) by more than a specified amount
determined by the Exchange.\16\ The proposed rule change indicates that
the Exchange may also determine a minimum and maximum dollar value for
the bulk message fat finger check.\17\ The Exchange believes Market-
Makers may be willing to accept an execution at a price beyond the NBBO
at the time of order entry, but not too far away. The purpose of the
fat finger check is intended to reject bulk message bids and offers
that on their face are likely to be entered at erroneous prices and
thus prevent potentially erroneous executions. The proposed rule change
to permit the Exchange to set a minimum and maximum value will provide
the Exchange with the opportunity to set a meaningful buffer that is
not ``too close'' to the NBBO (in other words, a de minimis buffer) but
not ``too far'' from the NBBO (in other words, a buffer that is more
likely to accept erroneously priced bulk messages). The proposed rule
change also permits the Exchange to set the relevant amounts for the
bulk message fat finger check on a class-by-

class basis. Option classes have different characteristics and trading
models, and the proposed flexibility will permit the Exchange to apply
different parameters to address those differences.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ This check does not apply to bulk messages submitted prior
to the conclusion of the opening process or when no NBBO is
available.
    \17\ The proposed rule change also makes a nonsubstantive change
to say the System cancels or rejects any bulk message bid (offer)
more than a buffer amount above (below) the NBO (NBB) to align the
language with other rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\18\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \19\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \20\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change to enhance the Price Adjust
process to adjust the price of Book Only orders and bulk messages
submitted by Market-Makers through bulk ports will remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market. Market-Makers
that have elected to have their bulk port interest subject to the Price
Adjust process have indicated their desire to have the prices of that
interest adjusted rather than have the System reject that interest. The
proposed rule change is consistent with that election and will cause
such interest to be repriced rather than rejected in a situation--when
it would otherwise execute or lock against other M-Capacity interest--
in addition to locking an away market. Therefore, the proposed rule
change will permit additional Market-Maker interest to enter the book
rather than be rejected. This additional liquidity may increase
execution opportunities and tighten spreads, which ultimately benefits
all investors.
    The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change to codify that
bulk message bids and offers may only be subject to single price adjust
will benefit investors by adding transparency to the Rules. The
Exchange understands that Market-Makers' automated quote streaming
systems review their resting interest when the markets change and
update as appropriate in accordance with their business and risk
models. Therefore, the Exchange does not believe it is necessary for it
also to review resting Market-Maker interest continuously and reprice
as the market changes.
    In addition, the Exchange believes the proposed change to the bulk
message fat finger check will protect investors and the public interest
as the check will continue to mitigate potential risks associated with
Market-Makers submitting bulk message bids and offers at unintended
prices, and risks associated with orders and quotes trading at prices
that are extreme and potentially erroneous, which may likely have
resulted from human or operational error. The proposed enhancement that
the Exchange will apply a minimum and maximum to the fat finger check
will permit the Exchange to apply the fat finger check to bulk messages
in a more meaningful way. The Exchange believes class flexibility is
appropriate to permit the Exchange to apply reasonable buffers to
classes, which may exhibit different trading characteristics and have
different market models. The Exchange has other price checks and risk
controls that permit it to set a minimum and maximum, as well as apply
parameters on a class basis.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See, e.g., Rule 5.34(a)(2) (market order NBBO width
protection).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed nonsubstantive and clarifying changes will protect
investors by adding transparency to the Rules.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket
competition, as the proposed changes will apply in the same manner to
all Book Only orders and bulk messages submitted through a bulk port.
The proposed rule change to codify that bulk messages will only be
subject to single price adjust is appropriate given that Market-Makers'
automated quote streaming systems review their resting interest when
the markets change and update as appropriate in accordance with their
business and risk models. Therefore, the Exchange does not believe it
is necessary for it also to review resting Market-Maker interest
continuously and reprice as the market changes. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intermarket
competition, as the proposed rule change applies to functionality that
applies to incoming interest that may only rest or execute on the
Exchange's book.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \22\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \23\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-C2-2021-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-2021-011. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-C2-2021-011 and should be submitted on
or before September 1, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-17079 Filed 8-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 92 (Friday, May 14, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26380-26381]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10211]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0001; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-2]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Durant, OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Durant Regional Airport-Eaker Field,
Durant, OK. This action is the result of an airspace review caused by
the decommissioning of the Texoma VHF omnidirectional range (VOR)
navigation aids as part of the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON)
Program. The name and geographical coordinates of the airport are also
being updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, August 12, 2021. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by

reference action under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at Durant Regional Airport-Eaker Field, Durant, OK, to
support instrument flight rule operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (86 FR 10885; February 23, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-0001
to amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Durant Regional Airport-Eaker Field, Durant, OK. Interested
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments
were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 amends the Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 6.6-mile
(decreased from a 6.9-mile) radius of Durant Regional Airport-Eaker
Field, Durant, OK; updates the name (previously Eaker Field) and
geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database; and removes the city associated with the airport
in the header of the airspace legal description to comply with changes
to FAA Order 7400.2M, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters.
    This action is the result of airspace reviews caused by the
decommissioning of the Texoma VOR, which provided navigation
information for the instrument procedures these airports, as part of
the VOR MON Program.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

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

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

* * * * *

ASW OK E5 Durant, OK [Amended]

Durant Regional Airport-Eaker Field, OK
    (Lat. 33[deg]56'23'' N, long. 96[deg]23'42'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.6-mile radius of Durant Regional Airport-Eaker Field.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 11, 2021.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-10211 Filed 5-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 20, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58068-58069]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22838]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: CP22-5-000.
    Applicants: Destin Pipeline.
    Description: Joint Abbreviated Application of Destin Pipeline
Company, L.L.C., for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
and Authorization to reacquire capacity under CP22-5. Aplication/
Petition/Request [bond] Abandonment of Service or Facility,
Application/Petition/Request Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity Public.
    Filed Date: 10/12/2021.
    Accession Number: 20211012-5187.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/2/21.

    Docket Numbers: CP22-7-000.
    Applicants: Southern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Application for Authorization of Abandonment for Rate
Schedule X-54 of Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C. under CP22-7.
Application/Petition/Request [bond] Abandonment of Service or Facility
Public.
    Filed Date: 10/12/21.
    Accession Number: 20211012-5650.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/2/21.

    Docket Numbers: PR21-53-002.
    Applicants: Moss Bluff Hub, LLC.
    Description: Submits tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: MBH
Amendment to PR21-53-000--FERC Housekeeping Items to be effective 10/
13/2021.
    Filed Date: 10/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20211013-5046.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/27/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-42-000.
    Applicants: NEXUS Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Cost & Revenue Study for NEXUS in
Compliance with CP16-22-000 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 10/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20211013-5068.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/25/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-43-000.
    Applicants: Arlington Storage Company, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing Concerning MBR
Authority.
    Filed Date: 10/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20211013-5161.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/25/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-44-000.
    Applicants: Stagecoach Pipeline & Storage Company LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing Concerning.
MBR Authority.
    Filed Date: 10/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20211013-5162.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/25/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-45-000.
    Applicants: Double E Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Double E Pipeline, LLC--Tariff
Cleanup Filing to be effective 11/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 10/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20211013-5194.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/25/21.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 14, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-22838 Filed 10-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55045-55049]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21616]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93178; File No. SR-ICEEU-2021-014]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Partial Amendment No. 1,
Relating to the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Membership Policy and
Clearing Membership Procedures

September 29, 2021.

I. Introduction

    On August 2, 2021, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'')
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 adopt a new Clearing Membership Policy (the
``Policy'') and new Clearing Membership Procedures (the ``Procedures,''
and together with the Policy, the ``Documents''). The proposed
Documents would consolidate and summarize ICE Clear Europe's existing
clearing membership criteria and document certain existing processes
and procedures concerning the membership application process. On August
11, 2021, ICE Clear Europe filed Partial Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.\3\ Notice of the proposed rule change, as
modified by Partial Amendment No. 1, was published in the Federal
Register on August 18, 2021.\4\ The Commission did not receive comments
on the proposed rule change, as modified by Partial Amendment No. 1.
For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the
proposed rule change, as modified by Partial Amendment No. 1 (hereafter
referred to as the ``proposed rule change'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ ICE Clear Europe filed Partial Amendment No. 1 to delete
from the filed Exhibit 5B, Clearing Membership Procedures, certain
statements in sections 2.4.1 and 2.4.2 of such Procedures concerning
the termination of clearing membership by a Clearing Member.
Specifically, ICE Clear Europe proposes to remove the statements
that it will define a minimum notice period and may publish a
Circular confirming that a Termination Notice has been issued,
because the appropriate minimum notice period and requirements for
publishing a Circular are set forth in existing Clearing Rule 209,
which is not proposed to be amended. Partial Amendment No. 1 did not
otherwise make any changes to the substance of the filing or the
text of the proposed rule change.
    \4\ Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Partial
Amendment No. 1, Relating to the ICE Clear Europe Clearing
Membership Policy and Clearing Membership Procedures, Exchange Act
Release No. 92652 (August 12, 2021), 86 FR 46290 (August 18, 2021)
(SR-ICEEU-2021-014) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    As described in more detail below, ICE Clear Europe proposes to
adopt the Documents to consolidate and summarize its existing clearing
membership criteria and to document certain existing processes and
procedures concerning its membership application and monitoring
processes to ensure that Clearing Members meet admission criteria upon
initial membership and continue to meet such criteria throughout their
membership.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules (the
``Rules''). The description herein of the proposed rule change is
substantially excerpted from the Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Clearing Membership Policy

    The proposed new Policy would consolidate and summarize ICE Clear
Europe's existing clearing membership criteria, which are set forth in
full detail in the Rules, and its related processes for assessing
applicants for membership, variations of permissions concerning
membership class, and termination of membership, all of which would be
documented in more detail in the proposed Procedures as described
below.
    The Policy would describe ICE Clear Europe's membership risks and
state the objectives of the Policy to ensure that such risks are
properly managed, and that clearing membership admission criteria are
non-discriminatory, transparent, and objective to ensure fair and open
access, and designed to meet relevant regulatory requirements. The
Policy also would describe how such objectives are met by ICE Clear
Europe through setting and monitoring appropriate membership criteria,
establishing a due diligence process, and requiring prompt
notifications from Clearing Members of any changes to their businesses
that may impact a Clearing Member's ability to meet the membership
criteria. The core clearing membership criteria, including holding
sufficient capital, being a party to a Clearing Membership Agreement,
and other financial and operational criteria, would be summarized in
the Policy, with the full criteria set out in Rule 201 and the CDS
Procedures.
    In addition to a summary of the core clearing membership criteria,
the Policy would provide that ICE Clear Europe has established
processes for clearing membership application, permission variations,
and clearing membership termination which are described in further
detail in the Procedures. The Policy also would address the ongoing
monitoring of membership criteria, including periodic in-depth
counterparty reviews, periodic review of financial positions, updates
to ICE Clear Europe's counterparty rating system, the maintenance of a
watch list, requiring an annual member return from Clearing Members,
and other operational monitoring processes such as daily margin calls
and CDS end-of-day (``EOD'') price submissions.
    Proposed section 5 of the Policy would provide document governance
arrangements for breach management, ongoing reviews, and exception
handling. Consistent with the document governance arrangements for
other ICE Clear Europe policies and procedures, proposed section 5
would state that (i) the document owner is responsible for ensuring
that documents remain up-to-date and are reviewed in accordance with
ICE Clear Europe's governance processes, (ii) the document owner will
report material breaches or unapproved deviations from the Policy
document to the document owner's Head of Department, the Chief Risk
Officer, and the Head of Compliance (or their delegates), who together
will determine if further escalation should be made to relevant senior
executives, the Board, and/or competent authorities, and (iii)
exceptions to the Policy are approved in accordance with ICE Clear
Europe's governance process for the approval of changes to the Policy
document.

B. Clearing Membership Procedures

    The proposed new Procedures would describe in further detail the
processes for reviewing and approving applications for clearing
membership, variations of membership permissions, ongoing monitoring,
and membership termination. The stated objective of the Procedures
would be to establish a due diligence process to ensure applicants meet
ICE Clear Europe's membership criteria at the time of application and
on an ongoing basis, and also provide notifications of any changes to
their businesses that could impact their ability to meet the membership
criteria.
    The Procedures would describe each phase of the Clearing Member
application process, starting with the Membership Department providing
applicants with all relevant application documentation; the internal
due diligence of applications by relevant ICE Clear Europe departments,
including Operations, Risk, Treasury, Membership, AML/KYC, Risk
Oversight, Compliance, and Legal; the process for approval or rejection
of applications by the Executive Risk Committee under authority
delegated by the Board, and the right to appeal to the Board;
notifications of new applications for clearing membership to the
relevant Product Risk Committees after their approval by the Executive
Risk Committee; additional membership conditions or criteria that ICE
Clear Europe may, in its discretion, require prior to approval; and
additional information requests that ICE Clear Europe may make during
the application process. The Procedures also would describe the process
for a Clearing Member to obtain membership to a different membership
class at ICE Clear Europe (i.e., a CDS Clearing Member authorized to
clear credit default swap (``CDS'') contracts, or an F&O Clearing
Member authorized to become party to Energy Contracts or Financials &
Softs Contracts, or both).

Regarding termination of clearing membership, the Procedures would
cross-reference the procedures in existing Rule 209 for a Clearing
Member to resign its clearing membership, and for ICE Clear Europe to
terminate a Clearing Member's clearing membership.
    The Procedures would provide detailed core membership requirements
and additional information on core membership criteria, which would
include minimum capital requirements as well as a description of
additional financial requirements that ICE Clear Europe may impose on
Clearing Members to meet the minimum capital requirement. The
Procedures would address certain aspects of the calculation of member
capital, including the disallowance of certain assets from such
calculation as well as the methods that Clearing Members may use to add
capital, where necessary, including the use of subordinated debt and
controller guarantees if approved by ICE Clear Europe. The Procedures
also would reference Guaranty Fund contributions for CDS and F&O
clearing services, including the required replenishment of
contributions in the event of application of the funds and the need to
meet any additional assessment; the margin-to-capital ratio
requirement; default management capabilities; and EOD price
submissions, which apply only to CDS Clearing Members as required by
the CDS EOD Price Discovery Policy.
    The Procedures also would summarize ICE Clear Europe's ongoing
monitoring of Clearing Members that include the following: (i) Periodic
review of the financial position and compliance with the relevant
membership requirements of each Clearing Member; (ii) quarterly review
of Clearing Members' capital situation and financial information, and
monthly reviews of the financial information of FCM/BD Clearing
Members; (iii) quarterly counterparty rating system report, which
aggregates risk factors covering credit, market price, liquidity, and
operational risk for each Clearing Member; (iv) the watch list
highlighting Clearing Members with special risk situations; (v) annual
member returns pursuant to which Clearing Members must provide certain
information to ICE Clear Europe on Anti-Money Laundering/Know Your
Client (``AML/KYC'') requirements, authorized signatories, compliance
with the Rules, and key contact information; and (vi) daily monitoring
of Clearing Member operational performance in fulfilling financial
obligations to cover cash payments, margin collateral, Guaranty Fund
contributions, and delivery obligations.
    Finally, the Procedures would also set out the same document
governance arrangements for breach management, ongoing reviews, and
exception handling as those described above with respect to the Policy.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization.\6\ For the reasons given below, the Commission finds that
the proposed rule change, as modified by Partial Amendment No. 1, is
consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \7\ and Rules 17Ad-
22(e)(2)(i) and (v), and (e)(18) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v), and (e)(18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of ICE Clear Europe be designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to
the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions, as well as to assure the safeguarding of securities and
funds which are in the custody or control of ICE Clear Europe or for
which it is responsible.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the proposed rule change would adopt a new
Clearing Membership Policy and new Clearing Membership Procedures. The
proposed Documents would consolidate and summarize existing clearing
membership criteria and related processes in the Rules that govern
clearing membership at ICE Clear Europe. For the reasons discussed
below, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change would
enable ICE Clear Europe to manage and mitigate the risks posed by
Clearing Members, including the risk of membership defaults and the
potential loss of mutualized funds resulting from Clearing Member
failures to meet clearing membership criteria. The Commission further
believes that, in turn, managing effectively such risks would enable
ICE Clear Europe to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and help assure the safeguarding
of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of ICE
Clear Europe or for which it is responsible.
i. Clearing Membership Policy
    As discussed above, the proposed rule change would establish a new
Policy that consolidates and summarizes ICE Clear Europe's existing
clearing membership criteria and the existing processes that ICE Clear
Europe undertakes to assess applicants for membership, monitor Clearing
Member adherence to the membership criteria on an ongoing basis,
authorize variations of permissions to Clearing Members, and terminate
membership, whether initiated by the Clearing Member or by ICE Clear
Europe. The Policy would state that it is designed to ensure that
membership risks are properly managed, and that clearing membership
admission criteria are non-discriminatory, transparent, and objective
to ensure fair and open access, and also meet relevant regulatory
requirements. The Policy would summarize how ICE Clear Europe achieves
such objectives by setting appropriate membership criteria and
monitoring ongoing adherence to such criteria; establishing a due
diligence process that ensures that applicants meet the membership
criteria when admitted and on a continuing basis; and requiring prompt
notifications from Clearing Members of any changes to their businesses
that may impact a Clearing Member's ability to meet the membership
criteria. The Policy also would establish document governance and
procedures for breach management and exceptions and changes to the
Policy document.
    By creating a consolidated summary of existing clearing membership
criteria for admitting applicants and the related processes that ICE
Clear Europe currently undertakes for monitoring and terminating
Clearing Members, the Commission believes that the Policy would
facilitate ICE Clear Europe's ability to implement the membership risk
management objectives of the Policy and thereby enhance its overall
risk management. In the Commission's view, enhanced management of
membership risks is critical to mitigating the risk of Clearing Member
defaults that could undermine ICE Clear Europe's ability to maintain
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
and the safeguarding of securities and funds at ICE Clear Europe. For
example, ICE Clear Europe relies on accurate end-of-day prices to
generate margin

requirements, which it uses to manage the risks associated with
clearing CDS portfolios. Similarly, ICE Clear Europe relies on its
default management tools to help manage and reduce the risks associated
with a defaulting Clearing Member's portfolio. Such risks, if not
properly managed, could cause ICE Clear Europe to realize losses on
such portfolios and could disrupt ICE Clear Europe's ability to
promptly and accurately clear CDS and other derivative transactions and
safeguard securities and funds which are in the custody or control of
ICE Clear Europe or for which it is responsible. For these reasons, the
Commission believes that the proposed rule change, in establishing a
new Policy that clearly and succinctly documents membership criteria
and the related processes for admitting, monitoring, and terminating
Clearing Members, would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and help assure the safeguarding
of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of ICE
Clear Europe or for which it is responsible. Finally, the Commission
believes that, in defining the responsibilities of the document owner
in document governance, breach management, and exception handling, the
Policy would help to ensure ongoing and consistent compliance with ICE
Clear Europe's clearing membership criteria and related processes for
admission to membership, monitoring, and termination of membership, as
well as establish a process to modify the Policy as needed.
ii. Clearing Membership Procedures
    As discussed above, the new Procedures would describe in further
detail ICE Clear Europe's existing processes for reviewing applications
for clearing membership, variations of membership permissions, ongoing
monitoring, and membership termination. The Procedures would have a
stated objective for the membership application process to establish a
due diligence process to ensure applicants meet ICE Clear Europe's
membership criteria at the time of application and on an ongoing basis
after admission, and also provide notifications of any changes to their
businesses that could impact their ability to meet the membership
criteria. The Procedures would provide the same document governance
arrangements for breach management, ongoing reviews, and exception
handling as those described above with respect to the Policy.
    By creating a consolidated summary that would describe the
application of ICE Clear Europe's existing procedures and processes for
reviewing applications for clearing membership, variations of
membership permissions, ongoing monitoring, and termination of
membership, the Commission believes that the Procedures would enhance
ICE Clear Europe's ability to implement the complementary objectives of
the Documents and thereby enhance its membership risk management
policies and procedures that contribute to the effectiveness of its
overall risk management. Also, in defining the responsibilities of the
document owner in document governance, breach management, and exception
handling, the Procedures would help to ensure ongoing and consistent
compliance with ICE Clear Europe's general governance and exceptions
process for the Procedures document.
iii. Promoting the Prompt and Accurate Clearance and Settlement of
Securities Transactions, and Assuring the Safeguarding of Securities
and Funds
    For the reasons discussed above, the Commission believes that the
proposed rule change would help to ensure that ICE Clear Europe
effectively manages the potential risks posed by its Clearing Members
in the clearance and settlement of CDS and other derivative contracts
and transactions cleared at ICE Clear Europe. Moreover, the Commission
believes that such membership risks, if not properly managed, could
threaten ICE Clear Europe's ability to operate and thereby clear and
settle cleared contracts, and also could threaten access to securities
and funds in ICE Clear Europe's control. Accordingly, the Commission
believes that, in ensuring that ICE Clear Europe has clear and
effective processes and procedures for identifying and managing
membership risks by setting appropriate membership criteria; assessing
applicants for membership based on such criteria; monitoring Clearing
Member adherence to the membership criteria on an ongoing basis;
authorizing variations of permissions to Clearing Members; terminating
membership; and establishing clear document governance procedures for
the Documents, the proposed rule change would promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and help
assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the
custody or control of the ICE Clear Europe or for which it is
responsible.
    Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change would
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, and assure the safeguarding of securities and funds in
ICE Clear Europe's custody or control, consistent with the Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v) Under the Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v) require that ICE Clear Europe
establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to provide for governance arrangements
that are clear and transparent and specify clear and direct lines of
responsibility, respectively.\11\ As discussed above, each of the
Documents would establish the general governance and exceptions process
for that document, and this process would be identical between the
Documents. The Commission believes that, in doing so, the Documents
would establish clear and transparent arrangements for ensuring that
ICE Clear Europe personnel adhere to the Documents and for modifying
the Documents as needed. The Commission also believes that the
Documents would define clearly the roles and responsibilities of the
document owner, the Head of Department, the Chief Risk Officer, and the
Head of Compliance for document governance, breach management, and
exception handling. The Commission believes that these lines of
responsibility would be clear and transparent because they would be
defined and readily available for review in the Documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Procedures would define the roles and
responsibilities of the relevant departments within ICE Clear Europe in
the application process prior to submission of applications to the
Executive Risk Committee for approval. The Procedures would specify
that applications for membership are formally considered, and approved
and rejected by, the Executive Risk Committee, and that the relevant
Product Risk Committees are notified of approved applications. The
Commission believes that these aspects of the proposed rule change
would help to ensure that the governance regarding review and approval
of applicants is clear and transparent, and also establishes a clear
and direct line of responsibility, by clearly specifying that the
Executive Risk Committee would approve or disapprove applications under
delegated authority from the Board. The Commission believes this would
therefore clearly specify the

responsibility of ICE Clear Europe management in approving or rejecting
applicants.
    For these reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) Under the Act

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) requires that ICE Clear Europe establish,
implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to establish objective, risk-based, and publicly
disclosed criteria for participation, which permit fair and open access
by direct and, where relevant, indirect participants and other
financial market utilities, to require participants to have sufficient
financial resources and robust operational capacity to meet obligations
arising from participation in the clearing agency, and monitor
compliance with such participation requirements on an ongoing
basis.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Documents would summarize the core
membership requirements and additional information on core membership
criteria, which would include minimum capital requirements as well as a
description of additional financial requirements that ICE Clear Europe
may impose on Clearing Members to meet the minimum capital requirement.
In particular, the Procedures would address more detailed aspects of
the calculation of member capital; Guaranty Fund contributions for both
CDS and F&O clearing services; the margin-to-capital ratio requirement;
default management capabilities; and EOD price submissions for CDS
Clearing Members. The Commission believes that these aspects of the
proposed rule change would establish objective, risk-based, and
disclosed clearing membership criteria that require applicants for
clearing membership to prove that they have sufficient financial
resources and robust operational capacity to meet obligations arising
from participation in ICE Clear Europe. Moreover, the Commission
believes that these criteria represent objective criteria which any
applicant for clearing membership could potentially satisfy, thereby
permitting fair and open access to membership at ICE Clear Europe.
    As discussed above, the Documents also would summarize ICE Clear
Europe's ongoing monitoring of Clearing Members that would include: (i)
Periodic review of the financial position and compliance with the
relevant membership requirements of each Clearing Member; (ii)
quarterly review of Clearing Members' capital situation and financial
information, and monthly reviews of the financial information of FCM/BD
Clearing Members; (iii) quarterly counterparty rating system report,
which aggregates risk factors covering credit, market price, liquidity,
and operational risk for each Clearing Member; (iv) the watch list
highlighting Clearing Members with special risk situations; (v) annual
member returns pursuant to which Clearing Members must provide certain
information to ICE Clear Europe on AML/KYC requirements, authorized
signatories, compliance with the Rules, and key contact information;
and (vi) daily monitoring of Clearing Member operational performance in
fulfilling financial obligations to cover cash payments, margin
collateral, Guaranty Fund contributions, and delivery obligations. The
Commission believes that these aspects of the proposed rule change
would facilitate ICE Clear Europe's ability to monitor compliance by
Clearing Members with its participation requirements on an ongoing
basis and thereby mitigate the risks posed by Clearing Members who may
no longer meet the requirements for continuing participation in ICE
Clear Europe.
    For these reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,
and in particular, with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act \15\ and Rules 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v), and (e)(18)
thereunder.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v), and (e)(18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\17\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ICEEU-2021-014), be, and hereby
is, approved.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \18\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-21616 Filed 10-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 13 (Thursday, January 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3621-3622]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1098]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

January 12, 2011.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-116-002.
    Applicants: Trans Bay Cable LLC.
    Description: Trans Bay Cable LLC submits update to its 10/23/09
filing re Cost of Service Rate Update.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110112-0201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2721-001.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: El Paso Electric Company submits tariff filing per 35:
Compliance Refiling of Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 9/17/
2010.
    Filed Date: 01/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110110-5101.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2288-002.
    Applicants: Optim Energy Marketing LLC.
    Description: Optim Energy Marketing LLC submits tariff filing per
35: Optim MBR Tariff Compliance filing to be effective 8/20/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5000.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-127-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance filing to Original Service Agreement No. 2656 to be
effective 9/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1993-001.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits tariff
filing per 35: Resubmission of the Eldorado Co-Tenancy and
Communication Agreements to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 01/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110110-5157.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2041-001.
    Applicants: Innovative Energy Systems, LLC.
    Description: Compliance Refund Report Filing of Innovative Energy
Systems, LLC.
    Filed Date: 01/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110110-5235.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2042-001.
    Applicants: Seneca Energy II, LLC.
    Description: Compliance Refund Report Filing of Seneca Energy II,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 01/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110110-5236.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2097-001.
    Applicants: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company submits tariff
filing per 35: WM-1 and WC-1 Tariff Compliance Filing to be effective
11/12/2010.
    Filed Date: 01/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110110-5000.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2166-001.
    Applicants: Planet Energy (USA) Corp.
    Description: Planet Energy (USA) Corp. submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): Planet Energy USA Supplement to MBR Application to be
effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5191.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2167-001.
    Applicants: Planet Energy (Pennsylvania) Corp.
    Description: Planet Energy (Pennsylvania) Corp. submits tariff
filing per 35.17(b): Planet Energy Pennsylvania Supplement to MBR
Application to be effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5185.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2168-001.
    Applicants: Planet Energy (Maryland) Corp.
    Description: Planet Energy (Maryland) Corp. submits tariff filing
per 35.17(b): Planet Energy Maryland Supplement to MBR Application to
be effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5183.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2179-001.
    Applicants: Planet Energy (New York) Corp.
    Description: Planet Energy (New York) Corp. submits tariff filing
per

35.17(b): Planet Energy New York Supplement to MBR Application to be
effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5184.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2589-001.
    Applicants: Evraz Claymont Steel, Inc.
    Description: Evraz Claymont Steel, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.17(b): MBRA Tariff to be effective 2/23/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2665-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2066 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA and NOA to be
effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5122.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2666-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Louisville Gas and Electric Company submits tariff
filing per 35: 1--11--11 Order 676E--Modify OATT Sect 4 to be effective
4/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5126.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2667-000.
    Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Committee.
    Description: New England Power Pool Participants Committee submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 122nd Agreement to be effective 3/
15/2011.
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5229.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2668-000.
    Applicants: PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC, PSEG Fossil LLC.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with the requirements of the RMR
agreement of PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC, et. al.
    Filed Date: 01/10/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110110-5237.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2669-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. Resource Termination Filing
(EnerNOC).
    Filed Date: 01/11/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110111-5266.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 01, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:
    Docket Numbers: RR09-6-003.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corp.
    Description: Errata of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation to January 10, 2011 filing.
    Filed Date: 01/12/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110112-5017.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 24, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed 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>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-1098 Filed 1-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 199 (Wednesday, October 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61875-61876]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24446]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0114]

Distinguishing Medical Device Recalls From Medical Device
Enhancements; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration
Staff; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a guidance entitled, ``Distinguishing Medical Device
Recalls From Medical Device Enhancements.'' This guidance is intended
to clarify when a potential change to a device is a medical device
recall, distinguish those instances from product enhancements, and
explain reporting requirements.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on this guidance at
any time.

ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for
download from the Internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written
requests for single copies of the guidance document entitled,
``Distinguishing Medical Device Recalls From Medical Device
Enhancements'' to the Office of the Center Director, Guidance and
Policy Development, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food
and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5431,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to
assist that office in processing your request.
    Submit electronic comments on the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronny Brown, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 2654, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

I. Background

    Defects or performance failures of marketed medical devices can
pose serious risks to public health. The recall process serves both to
correct the device defects and to notify users of potential risks and
steps to minimize the impact of device failure or improper function.
The recall process establishes a mechanism for firms that produce and
market medical devices to take timely action to correct or remove
violative devices.
    When a firm's recall process is operating effectively, the firm
identifies a device defect or failure, determines that a recall is
appropriate, and triggers the initiation of the recall process.
However, firms may have trouble identifying whether a change to a
device meets the definition of a recall, the appropriate scope of a
recall, and when FDA should be notified of a recall. These issues can
result in delays in notifying the public about unsafe medical devices.
    FDA also recognizes that continuous improvement activities, as part
of an effective quality system, often have a favorable impact on
medical device safety and are part of ongoing efforts to design and
manufacture devices that meet the needs of the user and patient. When a
new iteration of a device has improved design, for example, this does
not necessarily mean that the prior version of the device should be
recalled. Such changes may be appropriately characterized instead as
product enhancements. In addition to determining whether a proposed
change to a marketed device meets the definition of a device recall or
a product enhancement, a firm must assess whether it is required to
report the change to FDA.
    In the Federal Register of February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12329), FDA
announced the availability of the draft guidance document. Interested
persons were invited to comment by May 23, 2013. Multiple comments were
received with recommendations pertaining to three main areas: (1)
Clarification of definitions; (2) requests for more examples; and (3)
clarification of reporting obligations pertaining to 21 CFR part 806.
In response to these comments, FDA revised the guidance document to
enhance clarity through the inclusion of multiple new examples. Some
previously-included examples were deleted or reframed for improved
clarity, and some content was removed since it did not enhance clarity
and in some cases led to confusion. The guidance as revised provides
more succinct information about the distinctions between medical device
recalls and medical device enhancements and related reporting
obligations. The guidance is organized in a question-and-answer format,
providing responses to questions that FDA believes are helpful in
properly identifying medical device recalls and applying reporting
requirements.

II. Significance of Guidance

    The guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
Agency's current thinking on the difference between a medical device
recall and a

medical device enhancement. It does not create or confer any rights for
or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An
alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the
requirements of the applicable statute and regulations.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the guidance may do so by
using the Internet. A search capability for all CDRH guidance documents
is available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. Guidance
documents are also available at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons
unable to download an electronic copy of ``Distinguishing Medical
Device Recalls From Medical Device Enhancements,'' may send an email
request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to receive an electronic copy of
the document. Please use the document number 1819 to identify the
guidance you are requesting.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    The guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 7, subpart C, have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0249; the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 801 and 21 CFR 809.10 have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0485; the collections of information in
21 CFR part 803 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0437;
and the collections of information in 21 CFR part 810 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0432.

V. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: October 9, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-24446 Filed 10-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P