[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 216 (Monday, November 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69261-69264]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28402]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76331; File No. SR-ICC-2015-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Revise the ICC Risk Management
Framework and ICC Treasury Operations Policies and Procedures, and
Adopt the ICC Risk Management Model Description Document

November 3, 2015.
    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 October 20, 2015, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') 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 primarily by ICC. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICC proposes reorganizing the ICC Risk Management Framework
(``RMF'') in response to a recommendation from the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (``CFTC'') regarding improvements related to the
governance of ICC's risk management documentation. Specifically, ICC
proposes organizational and clarifying edits to the RMF and the
Treasury Operations Policies and Procedures, and proposes adopting a
new Risk Management Model Description Document. These revisions do not
require any changes to the ICC Clearing Rules (``Rules'').
Additionally, the edits are not substantive and do not affect the
nature of ICC's risk management program.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, ICC 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. ICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B
and C below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.

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

    ICC proposes reorganizing the ICC RMF in response to a CFTC
recommendation regarding improvements related to the governance of
ICC's risk management documentation. Specifically, ICC proposes
organizational and clarifying edits to the RMF and the Treasury
Operations Policies and Procedures, and proposes adopting a new Risk
Management Model Description Document. ICC believes such revisions will
facilitate the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions and derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions for which it is responsible. The proposed revisions are
described in detail as follows.
    ICC moved the Collateral Assets Risk Management Framework appendix
from the RMF to the Treasury Operations Policies and Procedures.
Accordingly, references throughout the RMF to the Collateral Assets
Risk Management Framework appendix were updated to refer instead to the
Treasury Operations Policies and Procedures. ICC moved appendices
containing technical risk management information (formerly, RMF
Appendices 3-5) to the new ICC Risk Management Model Description
Document. Accordingly, references throughout the RMF to these
appendices were updated to refer to the Risk Management Model
Description Document.
    ICC also made general updates and edits throughout the RMF for
clarity and consistency. Such edits include correcting verb tenses,
adopting consistent abbreviations, and adjusting sentence order to
assure logical presentation and word flow, and to use more concise,
succinct language. ICC also made additional clarifying edits, as
described below. The edits are not substantive and do not affect the
nature of ICC's risk management program.
    Within the Overview section of the RMF, ICC refined the Business
Overview details to more accurately describe the business operations of
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. and ICC.
    ICC made edits to the Governance and Organization section of the
RMF to more fully describe which topics the Risk Committee is
responsible to advise the Board. The list of documents reviewed by the
Risk Committee on at least an annual basis was revised to include the
ICC Risk Management Model Description Document, the ICC Treasury
Operations Policies and Procedures, and the ICC Liquidity Risk
Management Framework. The Risk Working Group (``RWG'') description was
updated to note that the group consists of risk personnel from ICC
Clearing Participants (``CPs''), and to clarify that the RWG is
responsible for reviewing ICC's risk philosophy and recommending
changes to ICC's RMF. The validation function of the risk philosophy
and tolerance was removed from the list of RWG responsibilities, as
such functions are the ultimate responsibility of the Board. The
Advisory Committee description was updated to note that the committee
is comprised of representatives of up to twelve clients/customers of
ICC CPs (currently there are twelve client/customer members). The CDS
Default Committee description was updated to note that the committee is
comprised of representatives from ICC CPs on a rotating basis and to
remove reference to a duty to provide feedback on ICC's RMF and
parameters because the CDS Default Committee is only convened upon the
declaration of a default. The committee description was enhanced to
note that, as the CDS Default Committee assists ICC in determining and
managing Minimum Target Prices for auctioned portfolios related to a
default, the committee oversees necessary auction(s) as well as the
process to re-establish a matched book. The Risk Management
Organization section was updated to remove outdated language stating
that the Risk Management Department conducts an annual review of ICC's
Risk Management Framework Policy Statement and submits proposed changes
to the RWG, Risk Committee, and Board. Further, the section was updated
to remove reference to the Risk Management Department being responsible
for ICC's intellectual capital and personnel, while creating,
implementing and maintaining ICC's risk management policies.
    ICC made edits to the Product Summary section of the RMF. ICC
clarified language to refer to Index CDS Instruments (as opposed to
Index

Products), Single Name CDS Instruments (as opposed to Single Name CDS),
and reference entities (as opposed to companies). The Index CDS
instruments section was revised to remove reference to the
International Index Company. The Single Name CDS Instruments section
was modified to refine language concerning what constitutes a credit
event. The list of attributes defining a CDS contract was enhanced to
include Maturity, as well as reference Notional Amount, as opposed to
Notional Principal. Reference to the terms of the contracts being
prescribed by the ICC Rules and Participant Agreement was removed. The
Risk Factors, Risk Sub-Factors and Instruments section was revised to
enhance the definition of Risk Sub-Factor to refer to a specific single
name reference obligation seniority and doc clause combination.
    ICC made edits to the Systemic Risk Management Approach section of
the RMF, which includes Waterfall Levels 1 through 5. ICC revised
Waterfall Level 1: Membership Criteria to remove reference, within the
Operational Criteria, to employee participation on industry committees
(e.g. ISDA, DTCC, etc.). Furthermore, the ongoing monitoring of
participants section was enhanced to state: (i) Intraday monitoring
includes intraday CDS market levels and potential equity price
movements, as well as news from Bloomberg and other information
sources; and (ii) daily monitoring and analysis includes prior day's
final pays by CP, daily change in Initial Margin (``IM''), margin
deficits, unrealized intraday profits/losses for cleared portfolios,
risk impact of new intraday trades on cleared portfolios, daily end-of-
day (``EOD'') levels, CPs' Guaranty Fund (``GF'') obligations, CPs'
day-over-day change in GF requirements relative to each firms prior day
levels, and CPs' day-over-day change in GF requirements relative to the
total GF balance. ICC has removed from the ongoing monitoring of
participants section review of the following components: Daily prices
and spreads (including missed EOD submissions), daily EOD prices
(including missed prices), prior day's and intraday total IM as a
percentage of CP's or CP's guarantor's capital, collateral pricing
report for missing prices, and collateral deposits no longer in
compliance with ICC's acceptable collateral policy. Such elements are
included in the enhanced daily monitoring and analysis section or have
been deemed no longer to relevant to the monitoring process. Further,
ICC clarified that the Risk Management Department reviews weekly stress
test results for extreme risk event scenarios to ensure sufficient
margin cover under market conditions, as opposed to drastic market
conditions. The Participant Withdrawal subsection was revised to remove
reference to ICC's right of One Time Assessment and instead refer more
generally to ICC's power of assessment.
    ICC revised the Waterfall Level 2: Initial Margin description to
clarify that ICC's IM requirements consist of a set of individual
components that account for various risks and that the methodology
includes consideration of hypothetical scenarios for those components.
ICC added language to the Spread Response requirements section to note
that the hypothetical prices used in calculating the instrument spread
response risk IM requirement reflect the time-to-maturity horizon
reduced by one day. ICC revised the distributions and related
parameters subsection to refer to the more specific feature Mean
Absolute Deviation (``MAD'') as opposed to the more general term
``scale.'' ICC removed reference to a set EWMA decay factor, as the
factor is dynamic and subject to review and changes by the Risk
Department in consultation with the Risk Committee. ICC also removed
outdated language regarding the initial setting of Auto Regressive
process for first order parameters.
    ICC revised the description of the considered scenarios to provide
a mathematical description of how the considered scenarios are
constructed based on statistical analysis of historical time series.
The term structure scenario construction is now clearly defined in
terms of 99% Value-at-Risk equivalent risk measures for different
tenors and the cross-tenor correlation structure is estimated from time
series analysis. ICC revised the term ``contracting'' to ``tightening''
in the context of spread behavior to provide conformity to more
commonly used credit market terminology.
    Within the Recovery Rate (``RR'') Sensitivity Requirements
subsection, ICC clarified that two additional single name-specific
stress-test RRs are considered in determining the requirements.
    ICC revised Waterfall Level 3: Mark-to-Market Margin description.
Specifically, ICC revised the methodology section to remove specific
calculations regarding the methodology and instead refer to the ICC EOD
Price Discovery Policies and Procedures, which contain a more fulsome
methodology description.
    ICC revised Waterfall Level 4: Intra-day Risk Monitoring/Special
Margin Call Execution to clarify language describing the calculation of
prices to determine the adequacy of collected IM intraday.
Specifically, as part of the calculation, ICC utilizes bid-offer quotes
which are automatically fed into the ICC risk management intraday
monitoring system.
    ICC revised Waterfall Level 5: Guaranty Fund description. The ICC
GF is designed to provide adequate funds to cover losses associated
with the default of the two CPs, as well as any affiliated CPs (i.e.
any other CP that owns, is owned by, or is under common ownership with
such a CP) with the greatest potential uncollateralized losses. ICC
added language to note that the set of all affiliated CPs is considered
as a CP affiliate group. Within the Waterfall Level 5 description, ICC
revised language to reinforce this CP affiliate group concept. Within
the Guaranty Fund Calculation for Clearing Participants subsection, ICC
removed reference to summary concepts of uncollateralized loss given
default, uncollateralized spread response losses, uncollateralized
basis risk losses, and uncollateralized interest rate losses,
previously used in describing the computations of the stress scenario
losses. ICC more precisely defined the factors considered within the GF
calculation and related stress test scenarios as the following:
Occurrence of multiple credit events, uncollateralized loss-given-
default from self-referencing positions, adverse spread scenarios,
adverse index-single-name basis widening, adverse interest rate
scenarios, and anti procyclicality.
    ICC added language to the Guaranty Fund Allocation subsection of
the RMF to state that the CP's total uncollateralized GF stress loss is
the difference between the sum of the stress loss given default, GF
stress spread response, GF stress basis risk and interest rate losses
and the sum of the IM idiosyncratic jump-to-default requirements, IM
spread response requirement, IM basis and interest risk requirement.
    ICC revised the General Wrong Way Risk and Contagion Measures
subsection to remove technical information that was moved to the Risk
Management Model Description Document.
    ICC revised the Position Concentration Limits subsection of the
Risk Limits and Controls section to clarify that ICC's concentration
charge is designed to increase a CP's IM requirement toward the risk of
maximum loss and ultimately, at the extreme, toward the full expected
notional amount of liability of the sold protection or the present
value of the

amount of coupon payments for bought protection. ICC summarized
language referring to the notional liability of the protection sold or
the full value of coupon payments to refer more generally to loss
associated with the portfolio. ICC revised the Model Time Horizon
subsection to note that the standard risk horizon can be increased by
the ICC Risk Management Department during banking holiday periods to
reflect ICC's limited ability to execute margin calls without Risk
Committee consultation. ICC further revised the Position Concentration
Thresholds subsection to clarify that, if at any point, either the
margin requirements or concentration charges grow to be a concern, ICC
has the authority to execute special or intraday margin calls, and/or
to increase the rate at which the concentration charges grow.
    ICC revised the Stress Testing subsection of the Back Testing and
Stress Testing section to remove specific assumptions associated with
the various stress scenarios used in the daily risk management process.
For proprietary reasons, these specific assumptions are now included in
ICC's Stress Testing Framework. ICC also clarified that the Risk
Management Department presents stress results at the monthly Risk
Committee meetings, as well as recommendations about next steps and
recommendations to add or retire stress tests.
    ICC made edits to the Default Treatment section to remove outdated
language stating that ICC seconds traders eligible to serve on the ICE
Clear Europe Default Management Committee. ICC removed language
regarding the auctioning of multi-currency portfolios for stylistic
reasons, as the following sentences provide the information in a more
accessible format.
    ICC revised the Cash Settlement subsection of the Settlement
section to remove outdated language stating that ICC will evaluate a
transition to a Central bank model for US cash if available.
    ICC made edits to the Market Investment Risk Management section of
the RMF. Specifically, ICC deleted redundant language regarding ICC's
investment policy that can be found in the ICC Treasury Operations
Policies and Procedures.
    ICC enhanced the ICC Clearing Participant Risk Management
Questionnaire appendix to add more specific details that better capture
the intent of the questions contained within.
    ICC revised the Overview section of the Clearing Participant
Default Management Procedures appendix to refer more generally to ICC's
default management procedures, as opposed to offering specific details
provided elsewhere within the appendix. ICC also revised the CDS
Default Committee subsection to remove language stating that the CDS
Default Committee Members are responsible for determining and adjusting
minimum target prices for auctions. ICC added language to the Hedging
and Liquidation subsection to note that the CDS Default Committee is
responsible for assisting ICC with respect to liquidating and hedging
positions with the Non-Defaulting CPs, in consultation with the Chief
Risk Officer. ICC clarified the Auction Procedures/Competitive Bidding
section to state that the auction bidding process will be open for an
ICC specified minute window, as opposed to a specific 15-minute window.
    ICC removed the Collateral Assets Risk Management Framework
Appendix 7 from the RMF and added it as an appendix to the ICC Treasury
Operations Policies and Procedures. Accordingly, references within the
Treasury Operations Policies and Procedures to the RMF were updated.
Additionally, ICC updated its list of banking relationships contained
within the document. ICC also made conforming, non-material edits to
the document.
    Finally, ICC has created the Risk Management Model Description
Document, which includes the technical risk information previously
included in Appendices 3 to 5 of the RMF as well as information
previously included in explanatory risk documents. Technical risk
information, previously included in explanatory risk documents, is
incorporated consistently throughout the new Risk Management Model
Description Document. The inclusion of such information does not
constitute a substantive change to the RMF, as it serves to enhance the
transparency of the technical details of the current implementation
described in the previous RMF. In the Risk Management Model Description
Document, ICC provides additional technical information to improve the
understanding and/or replication of the models. ICC also provides
improved logical connections among all model components, which should
contribute to developing a general intuition for ICC's risk approach.
    Material changes to the Risk Management Model Description Document
will be approved by ICC's Board of Managers and submitted, in the
appropriate form to regulators consistent with other documents
constituting ICC's RMF. The Risk Management Model Description Document
includes a technical description of ICC's Initial Margin methodology
(Recovery Rate Sensitivity Risk Analysis; Loss Given Default Risk
Analysis; Liquidity Risk Analysis; Large Position Risk Analysis; Jump-
To-Default Risk Analysis; Interest Rate Sensitivity Risk Analysis;
Basic Risk Analysis; Spread Risk Analysis; Multi-Currency Portfolio
Treatment; and Portfolio Loss Boundary Condition) and ICC's Guaranty
Fund methodology (Guaranty Fund Size Estimation; Guaranty Fund
Requirements and Periodic Adjustments; and General Wrong Way Risk and
Contagion Stress Tests). Within the Spread Risk Analysis section, where
ICC previously had listed explicit risk factors within the RMF, ICC
replaced such explicit risk factors with the underlying formulas used
in deriving such factors.
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \3\ requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, and
to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts and
transactions and to comply with the provisions of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder. ICC believes that the proposed rule changes
are consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to ICC, in particular, to Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F),\4\ because ICC believes that the proposed rule changes
will promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions, derivatives agreements, contracts, and
transactions. The revised RMF, the revised Treasury Operations Policies
and Procedures, and the Risk Management Model Description Document
provide additional clarity regarding ICC's RMF. ICC believes the
proposed revisions provide further clarity in terms of ICC's risk
management policies and procedures, through the consolidation of
technical risk documents into one singular document. ICC believes the
revisions to ICC's RMF will continue to ensure proper governance of the
RMF. Further, by revising the RMF and the Treasury Operations Policies
and Procedures, and establishing the Risk Management Model Description
document, ICC is complying with a directive from the CFTC regarding
clarity and transparency of its RMF. As such, the proposed rule changes
are designed to promote the

prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, derivatives agreements, contracts, and transactions
within the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICC does not believe the proposed rule changes would have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition. ICC is reorganizing its
risk management policies and not making any substantive changes to its
overall RMF. Therefore, ICC does not believe the proposed rule changes
impose any burden on competition that is inappropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by ICC.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICC-2015-017 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-ICC-2015-017. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Credit
and on ICE Clear Credit's Web site at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2015-017
and should be submitted on or before November 30, 20155.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-28402 Filed 11-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20382-20383]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8023]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13305-003]

Whitestone Power and Communications; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On March 5, 2012, Whitestone Power and Communications filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Microturbine Hydrokinetic River-In-Stream Energy Conversion Project
(Whitestone Project or project) to be located on the Tanana River
within an Unorganized Borough, near Delta Junction, Alaska. The sole
purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed Whitestone Project would consist of: (1) A 12-foot-
wide, 16-foot-diameter Poncelet undershot water wheel; (2) a 34-foot-
long, 19- to 24-foot-wide, aluminum-frame floatation platform mounted
on a 34-foot-long, 3.5-foot-diameter high-density-polyethylene (HDPE)
pontoon and a 34-foot-long, 3-foot-diameter HDPE pontoon; (3) a 100-
kilowatt turbine/generator unit; (4) a 33-foot-long, 3.5-foot-wide
gangway from the shore to the floating pontoon; (5) three anchoring
cables to secure the flotation platform to the shore, including a 30-
foot-long primary safety tether, a 117-foot-long primary cable, and a
100-foot-long secondary cable; (6) an approximately 900-foot-long
transmission cable from the floatation platform to an existing Golden
Valley Electric Association distribution line; and (7) appurtenant
facilities. The project is anticipated to operate from April until
October, with an estimated annual generation of 200 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Steven M. Selvaggio, Whitestone Power and
Communications, P.O. Box 1630, Delta Junction, Alaska 99737; phone:
(907) 895-4938.
    FERC Contact: Dianne Rodman; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of

intent to file competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of
this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of
intent, and competing applications may be filed electronically via the
Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the
Commission's Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without
prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact
information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission
strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-
filed. To paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D.
Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13305) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 28, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-8023 Filed 4-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 20, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 64060]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25125]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP20-11-000]

Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on November 4, 2019, Southern Star Central Gas
Pipeline, Inc. (Southern Star), 4700 State Highway 56, Owensboro,
Kentucky 42301, filed in the above referenced docket a prior notice
request pursuant to sections 157.205(b), 157.208(c), and 157.210 of the
Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act and its blanket
certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-479-000 for authorization to make
modifications and replacements at its Grabham Compressor Station in
Montgomery County, Kansas. Specifically, Southern Star plans to modify
the Grabham yard piping to allow Unit #13 to discharge gas into the
southern trunk loop. Southern Star states that the proposed project
would create up to 40,000 dekatherms per day of additional firm
transportation capacity. Southern Star estimates the cost of the
project to be approximately $3.0 million, all as more fully set forth
in the request which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
    The filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website web at
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 at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Cindy Thompson, Manager, Regulatory, Southern Star Central Gas
Pipeline, Inc., 4700 Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky 42301, by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's
public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and
state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary
reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list and will be
notified of any meetings associated with the Commission's environmental
review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve
copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party
commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other
parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek
court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 3 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426.

    Dated: November 14, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-25125 Filed 11-19-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19380-19381]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8244]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0187]

Notice of Entry Into Effect of MARPOL Annex V Wider Caribbean
Region Special Area

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces the date for the entry into effect
of discharge requirements from ships in the Wider Caribbean Region
(WCR) special area (SA) as specified in the International Convention
for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) Annex V, Regulation
5 and Coast Guard regulations. MARPOL Annex V and the U.S. regulations
apply to vessel and reception facility activities in the WCR region.

DATES: IMO Resolution MEPC.191(60) established the date of entry for
discharge requirements in the WCR SA as May 1, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this notice is available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this
docket on the Internet by going

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0187 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice, call or e-mail Mr. David Condino, MARPOL Certificate of
Adequacy Project Manager, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or LCDR Kevin P. Lynn, Chief, Facility Safety
Branch, Commandant, CG-5442, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing material in the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    Under Coast Guard regulation 33 CFR 151.53(b), the Coast Guard
announces the May 1, 2011 date for entry into effect of discharge
requirements from ships in the WCR SA. The WCR is defined in 33 CFR
151.06(a)(12). As of May 1, 2011, the discharge restrictions for SAs
set forth in 33 CFR 151.71 will be applicable to the WCR SA.
    In accordance with the provisions of regulation 5(4)(b) found in
MARPOL Annex V, the United States, along with a sufficient number of
WCR States that are parties to MARPOL, submitted notices on the
availability of adequate reception facilities in the region to the
International Maritime Organization's (IMO) Marine Environment
Protection Committee (MEPC) at a meeting of the MEPC in March, 2010.
During the meeting the WCR States requested that the MEPC establish a
date for the entry into effect of the WCR SA. The MEPC noted the
information provided by Member States in the WCR SA, to include the
United States, and decided that the requirements for sufficient
notification of adequate reception facilities for the WCR SA had been
met. The MEPC adopted resolution MEPC.191(60) and the IMO Secretariat
transmitted the text of the resolution to all interested parties via
Circular Letter No.3053 dated April 14, 2010. These documents are
available on the IMO's Web site at http://www.imo.org.
    As a party to MARPOL Annex V, the United States proposed to the
IMO's MEPC to establish the Gulf of Mexico as an SA under MARPOL Annex
V in September 1990. The country of Venezuela submitted an amendment to
the proposal to include the WCR along with the Gulf of Mexico as an SA
under MARPOL Annex V in November 1990. The MEPC adopted the proposal to
establish the WCR SA, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean
Sea, in July 1991. The SA entered into force in April 1993, and MARPOL
Annex V discharge requirements for the SA will enter into effect May 1,
2011. When the discharge requirements in regulation 5 of MARPOL Annex V
enter into effect for the WCR SA, the discharge restrictions in 33 CFR
151.71 will also enter into effect. These regulations state that no
person may discharge garbage from a ship except food wastes. The
disposal of food wastes into the sea shall be made as far as
practicable from land, but in any case not less than 12 nautical miles
from the nearest land. Food wastes comminuted or ground and capable of
passing through a screen with openings no greater than 25 mm may be
discharged not less than 3 nautical miles from the nearest land.
    The Coast Guard intends to update the list of SAs, in accordance
with 33 CFR 151.53(b), to include where discharge restrictions are
effective in a separate rule change.

    Dated: March 18, 2011.
Kevin S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Prevention Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-8244 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14388-14390]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05018]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68997; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2013-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relocating Certain
Futures and Options Trading Conducted on ICE Futures U.S. From Rented
Space at the New York Mercantile Exchange to the Exchange's Facilities
at 20 Broad Street and Amending Rule 6A--Equities, Which Defines the
Terms ``Trading Floor'' and ``NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor''

February 27, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on February 13, 2013, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to relocate certain futures and options
trading conducted on ICE Futures U.S. (``IFUS'') \4\ from rented space
at the New York Mercantile Exchange (``NYMEX'') to the Exchange's
facilities at 20 Broad Street and amend Rule 6A--Equities, which
defines the terms ``Trading Floor'' and ``NYSE Amex Options Trading
Floor'' (together, the ``Proposal''). The text of the proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ IFUS is a Designated Contract Market pursuant to the
Commodity Exchange Act, as amended, and is regulated by the U.S.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC''). IFUS was formerly
known as the New York Board of Trade (``NYBOT'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to make trading space at 20 Broad Street,
commonly known as the ``Blue Room'', available to IFUS to accommodate
electronic trading of certain futures and options contracts currently
conducted on IFUS in space rented from the NYMEX. The arrangement would
be pursuant to an arms-length commercial lease. IFUS's lease on its
NYMEX trading space expires in June 2013. The Exchange notes that on
December 20, 2012, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (``ICE'') entered
into a merger agreement to acquire the Exchange's parent, NYSE Euronext
(the ``Transaction''). IFUS, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ICE,
requested assistance in relocating its remaining trading floor
following announcement of the Transaction.
    IFUS trades its products exclusively on an electronic trading
platform and no longer utilizes open outcry trading. Approximately 40
traders (the ``IFUS Traders'') \5\ currently utilize the IFUS trading
floor (along with a small group of clerical staff they employ) as a
place from which they may accept customer orders and execute electronic
transactions in IFUS contracts. The IFUS Traders that are proposed to
relocate to the Blue Room can execute transactions electronically in
all products listed for trading by the IFUS, including futures and
options on futures on cotton, frozen concentrated orange juice, coffee,
sugar, cocoa, energy, foreign currencies, and certain Russell
Indices.\6\ However, most of the IFUS Traders predominantly execute
transactions in options on cotton futures. The IFUS Traders,
collectively, transact less than 5% of average daily IFUS volume
excluding IFUS energy contracts (which account for approximately 83% of
IFUS's daily volume) \7\ and a fraction of 1% of the total average
daily IFUS volume (which includes the energy contracts transacted on
IFUS). The IFUS Traders do not engage in trading in equity securities
or securities options through IFUS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ None of the IFUS Traders are members of the Exchange, New
York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') or NYSE Amex Options.
    \6\ These include the Russell 2000, Russell 1000, and Russell
Value and Growth, all of which qualify as broad-based indices. The
Exchange understands, however, that the IFUS Traders primarily trade
Russell 2000 mini-contracts.
    \7\ In other words, the IFUS Traders transact less than 5% of
the 17% of IFUS's average daily volume that is not related to energy
contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, six of the forty IFUS Traders engage in proprietary-only
trading while the rest execute customer orders \8\ in addition to
proprietary trading. IFUS customer orders may be accepted by telephone
or electronically; however, the IFUS Traders cannot verbally discuss
orders or transactions with each other while on the trading floor.
Communications between traders on the floor must be made via instant
message, email, or recorded telephone line. Order tickets are prepared
and time-stamped

for each customer order, and IFUS, as it does today, would have a
compliance officer from IFUS Market Regulation in the Blue Room
performing on-site surveillance on a regular basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Pursuant to the definition of the term ``floor broker'' in
Section 1a(22) of the Commodity Exchange Act, the Floor Traders can
only execute customer orders from a trading floor that is operated
and supervised by a contract market such as IFUS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The IFUS Traders will be sitting together in dedicated space in the
Blue Room. A small group of NYSE MKT Floor brokers, currently in the
Blue Room, will have their booths nearby.\9\ Both the space to be
assigned to the IFUS Traders and the NYSE MKT Floor broker booths have
privacy barriers consisting of eight foot walls which provide visual
and sound insulation to reduce the likelihood that trading screens can
be viewed or conversations overheard between firms and traders.\10\
Consequently, the Exchange believes that the combination of these
visual and acoustical barriers, coupled with the IFUS limitations on
verbal communications related to an order, substantially eliminate the
risk that either the IFUS Traders or NYSE MKT Floor brokers could
overhear each other's customer orders or other confidential trading
information. Nonetheless, the names of the IFUS Traders will be
provided to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'')
which conducts surveillance of the NYSE MKT and NYSE markets to enable
FINRA to more readily identify any potentially violative trading by the
IFUS Traders.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ However, the Exchange expects to relocate the NYSE MKT Floor
brokers to an area adjacent to the Garage once certain ongoing
renovations are complete.
    \10\ The booths are approximately 40 feet long by 10 feet wide.
The barriers are eight feet high on both sides except for the two
gated and badge access entry and exit points at the front and back
of the booth, which are four feet high.
    \11\ Providing the names of the IFUS Traders to FINRA will be
for the purpose of regulatory information sharing. Neither the
Exchange nor FINRA will be responsible for regulating or surveilling
the IFUS Traders' activity and the IFUS Traders will not be subject
to the Exchange's jurisdiction. Rather, the IFUS Traders will
continue to be regulated by IFUS as they are today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the fact that the IFUS Traders do not trade any of the
products traded on NYSE MKT, and the extremely limited overlap in
related products traded by the IFUS Traders and on the NYSE MKT, as
well as the very small volume of predominantly cotton options executed
by the IFUS Traders, it is highly unlikely that any order handled by
one of them could impact the price of any individual security traded on
the Exchange. In this regard, the Exchange believes that the pricing
correlation between order flow in IFUS products and securities traded
on NYSE MKT is tenuous at most. Consequently, even if an NYSE MKT Floor
broker in the Blue Room were to overhear the terms of an order handled
by an IFUS Trader, or vice-a-versa, the likelihood that the information
could be used to benefit that trader's or broker's proprietary,
personal or other customer trading is extremely unlikely. This is also
true with respect to the Russell Index products given their broad-based
nature. The Exchange believes that the same considerations apply with
respect to the NYSE, which operates on the same Trading floor, and NYSE
Amex Options, which operates on a trading floor that is adjacent to
NYSE MKT. Nonetheless, NYSE MKT Floor brokers initiating trades based
on confidential order information overheard from the IFUS Traders would
be subject to disciplinary action for violating NYSE MKT rules,
including Rules 2010--Equities and 2020--Equities, which require
members and member organizations to observe high standards of
commercial honor, to use just and equitable principles of trade, and
prohibit the use of manipulative, deceptive or fraudulent devices.
    Further, IFUS will issue a regulatory notice specifying the method
IFUS Traders must use to access the Blue Room and prohibiting the IFUS
Traders from entering the Main Room, where most of the NYSE MKT and
NYSE Equities Floor brokers and all NYSE MKT and NYSE Designated Market
Makers (``DMMs'') are located as well as the NYSE Amex Options trading
floor. Specifically, the IFUS Traders will be required to take the 18
Broad Street entrance elevator and enter the Trading Floor using the
turnstile nearest the Blue Room. The Exchange will periodically monitor
badge swipes at that turnstile. Moreover, the Exchange will install a
security door requiring a badge swipe to enter and exit the physical
area to be occupied by the IFUS Traders. The IFUS Traders will also
wear distinctive badges and trading jackets. NYSE MKT Floor Governors
and FINRA's On Floor Surveillance Unit will be instructed to identify
and promptly report violations of the restriction on entering the Main
Room to the IFUS Market Supervision officer. IFUS Traders entering the
Main Room in violation of this restriction could face disciplinary
action pursuant to IFUS Rule 4.04, which prohibits conduct or practices
inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade or conduct
detrimental to the best interests of IFUS. The Exchange believes that
these restrictions are appropriate to prevent the IFUS Traders from
having potential access to any nonpublic information that might be
available at the DMM booths.
    Based on the limited trading conducted by the IFUS Traders, the
extremely limited overlap in products traded and the controls that will
be put in place, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
relocation of the IFUS Traders to the Blue Room raises any regulatory
concerns.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 6A--Equities, which
defines the term ``Trading Floor'' to update the definition. Rule 6A--
Equities provides that the term ``Trading Floor'' means the restricted-
access physical areas designated by the Exchange for the trading of
securities, commonly known as the ``Main Room'' and the ``Garage.''
Rule 6A--Equities further provides that the Exchange's Trading Floor
does not include the areas where NYSE Amex-listed options are traded,
commonly known as the ``Blue Room'' and the ``Extended Blue Room,''
which, for the purposes of the Exchange's Rules, are referred to as the
``NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor.''
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6A--Equities to add ``Blue
Room'' to the definition of ``Trading Floor'' and remove that term from
the definition of ``NYSE Amex Options Trading Floor''.
    The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change would not have an
impact on the Exchange's trading rules or the IFUS rules, nor would it
have an impact on the Exchange's or IFUS' authority to bring a
disciplinary action for violation of those rules.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the Proposal is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\12\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act,\13\ in particular, in that it is 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 facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system. The Exchange believes that the
Proposal is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system. The Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will permit the Exchange to
allow IFUS Traders to utilize space on the trading floor within the
existing regulatory framework at the Exchange, to efficiently and
effectively conduct business in their respective area consistent with
maintaining

necessary distinctions between the two organizations. Moreover, the
proposed rule changes will impose restrictions designed to prevent
inappropriate information sharing by and between members and member
firm employees on the Trading Floor of the Exchange and the IFUS
Traders in the proposed IFUS Trading area. The Exchange believes that
updating the references in the Exchange rules to reflect the correct
use of the Exchange Trading Floor may help eliminate potential
confusion among investors and other market participants on the Exchange
who may not be aware of which portion of the trading space will be used
as the Trading Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5) [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the Proposal will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal is designed to
promote competition by providing the Exchange the additional
flexibility to maximize the use of its trading floor space.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\15\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \16\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\17\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSEMKT-2013-13 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2013-13. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090, on official business days between the
hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be
available for inspection and copying at the NYSE's principal office and
on its Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. All comments received will be
posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2013-13 and should be submitted
on or before March 26, 2013.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-05018 Filed 3-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 42)]
[Notices]
[Page 9610]
[DOCID:fr05mr09-39]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER09-732-000]

Windhorse Energy, Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

February 25, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Windhorse Energy, Inc.'s application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC, 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.

Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is March 17, 2009.

    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-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive 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>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-4707 Filed 3-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 154 (Thursday, August 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 47628]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19512]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-2388-000]

BFES Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate
Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of BFES Inc.'s application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is August 24, 2012.
    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-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 3, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-19512 Filed 8-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 120 (Friday, June 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37645-37646]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14793]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69772; File No. SR-OCC-2013-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Change the Expiration Date For
Most Option Contracts to the Third Friday of the Expiration Month
Instead of the Saturday Following the Third Friday

June 17, 2013.

I. Introduction

    On April 17, 2013 The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change SR-OCC-2013-04 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on May 6, 2013.\3\ The Commission received one
comment in response to the proposed rule change, in which the commenter
expressed support for the change.\4\ This order approves the proposed
rule change.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-69480 (April 30,
2013), 78 FR 26413 (May 6, 2013).
    \4\ See Comment from John V. Bruzzese dated May 3, 2013 (stating
that the change would be ``beneficial for [the] option expiration
process'') (http://sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2013-04/occ201304-1.htm).
    \5\ OCC also filed the proposed rule change as an advance notice
under Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act'') entitled the
Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010
(``Clearing Supervision Act''). 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1); SR-OCC-2013-
802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

Proposal

    The primary purpose of the proposed rule change is to allow OCC to
change the expiration date for most option contracts to the third
Friday of the expiration month instead of the Saturday following the
third Friday. Most option contracts (``Standard Expiration Contracts'')
currently expire at the ``expiration time'' (11:59 p.m. Eastern Time)
on the Saturday following the third Friday of the specified expiration
month (``Expiration Date'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the definition of ``expiration time'' in Article I of
OCC's By-Laws. According to OCC, the expiration time would continue
to be 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the Expiration date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change applies only to series of Standard Expiration
Contracts opened for trading after the effective date of this proposed
rule change and having Expiration Dates later than February 1, 2015.
Option contracts having non-standard expiration dates (``Non-standard
Expiration Contracts'') are unaffected by this proposed rule change.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Examples of options with Non-standard Expiration Contracts
include flex options and quarterly, monthly, and weekly options
where the expiration exercise processing for such options presently
occurs on a weekday.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to provide a smooth transition to the Friday expiration,
OCC intends to, beginning June 21, 2013, move the expiration exercise
procedures to Friday for all Standard Expiration Contracts even though
the contracts would continue to expire on Saturday.\8\ After February
1, 2015, virtually all Standard Expiration Contracts will expire on
Friday. According to OCC, the only Standard Expiration Contracts that
will expire on a Saturday after February 1, 2015 are certain options
that were listed prior to the effectiveness of this rule change,\9\ and
a limited number of options that may be listed prior to necessary
systems changes of the options exchanges, which are expected to be
completed in August 2013.\10\ After the transition period and the
expiration of all existing Saturday-expiring

options, expiration processing should be a single operational process
and should run on Friday night for all Standard Expiration Contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For contracts having a Saturday expiration date, exercise
requests received after Friday expiration processing is complete but
before the Saturday contract expiration time will continue to be
processed so long as they are submitted in accordance with OCC's
procedures governing such requests.
    \9\ According to OCC, certain option contracts have already been
listed on exchanges with expiration dates as distant as December
2016. Such options have Saturday expiration dates and OCC cannot
change the terms of existing option contracts. In addition, clearing
members have expressed a clear preference not to have open interest
in any particular month with different expiration dates. Therefore,
OCC will designate certain expiration dates as ``grandfathered,''
and any option contract that is listed, or may be listed in the
future, that expires on a grandfathered date will have a Saturday
expiration date even if such expiration date is after February 1,
2015. After OCC designates an expiration date as grandfathered, the
exchanges have agreed not to permit the listing of, and OCC will not
accept for clearance, any newly listed standard expiration option
contract with a Friday expiration in the applicable month.
    \10\ The exchanges have agreed that once these systems changes
are made they will not open for trading any new series of option
contracts with Saturday expiration dates falling after February 1,
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with moving from Saturday to Friday night processing
and expiration, OCC reviewed other aspects of its business to confirm
that there would be no unintended consequences, and concluded that
there would be none. For example, OCC believes the proposed changes do
not affect OCC's liquidity forecasting procedures, nor do they impact
OCC's liquidity needs, since OCC's liquidity forecasts and liquidity
needs are driven by settlement obligations, which occur on the same day
(T+3) irrespective of the move to Friday night processing and
expiration dates.
    According to OCC, industry groups, clearing members, and options
exchanges have been active participants in planning for the transition
to the Friday expiration. OCC has obtained assurances from all options
industry participants that they will be ready to move to Friday night
expiration processing by June 2013.

Rule Changes

    In order to implement the change to Friday expiration processing
and eventual transition to Friday expiration for all Standard
Expiration Contracts, OCC is amending the definition of ``expiration
date'' in Article I and certain other articles of the By-Laws. As
amended, the applicability of the definition is no longer limited to
stock options, and the definition of ``expiration date'' in certain
articles of the By-Laws therefore is deleted in reliance on the Article
I definition. OCC is also amending Rule 805, and all rules
supplementing or replacing Rule 805, to allow for Friday expiration
processing during the transition to Friday expiration. OCC is also
amending section 18 of Article VI of the By-Laws to align procedures
for delays in producing Expiration Exercise Reports and submission of
exercise instructions with the amended expiration exercise procedures
in Rule 805. OCC is amending Rule 801 to modify the prohibition against
exercising an American-style option contract on the business day prior
to its expiration date, because this prohibition is necessary only for
options expiring on a Saturday and to remove clearing members' ability
to revoke or modify exercise notices in order to accommodate the
compressed Friday expiration processing expiration schedule.
    Finally, OCC is amending Rules 801 and 805 to allow certain
determinations to be made by high-level officers of OCC, rather than
the Board of Directors, in order to provide OCC with greater
operational flexibility in processing exercise requests received after
Friday expiration processing is complete but before the Saturday
contract expiration time, and to replace various references to the
expiration date of options with reference to the procedures of Rule
805.
    Under the proposed change, OCC is preserving the ability of the
options exchanges to designate (or, in the case of flexibly structured
options, permit clearing members to designate) non-standard expiration
dates for options, or classes or series of options, so long as the
designated expiration date is not a date OCC has specified as
ineligible to be an expiration date.

III. Discussion

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \11\ 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. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \12\
requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency are
designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions and foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in the clearance and settlement of securities
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By changing the expiration date for most Standard Expiration
Contracts to the third Friday of the expiration month and moving the
expiration exercise procedures to Friday for all Standard Expiration
Contracts, the rule change should help to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions as well as
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in the
clearance and settlement of securities transactions. As mentioned
above, the rule change will allow OCC to streamline the expiration
process among Standard Expiration, Non-standard Expiration Contracts,
quarterly options, and weekly options and also align expiration
processing schedules for United States markets with expiration
processing schedules for European markets.

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \13\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-OCC-2013-04) be and
hereby is approved.\15\ However, the proposed changes that are the
subject of the proposed rule change shall not take effect until all
regulatory actions required with respect to the proposed changes are
completed.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \15\ 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).
    \16\ OCC also filed the proposed rule change as an advance
notice under Section 806(e)(1) of the Clearing Supervision Act. 12
U.S.C. 5465(e)(1); SR-OCC-2013-802. Proposed changes filed under the
Clearing Supervision Act may be implemented pursuant to Section
806(e)(1)(G) of the Clearing Supervision Act if the Commission does
not object to the proposed change within 60 days of the later of (i)
the date that the proposed change was filed with the Commission or
(ii) the date that any additional information requested by the
Commission is received. 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(G).

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary .
[FR Doc. 2013-14793 Filed 6-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 112 (Monday, June 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31502-31504]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12402]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2021-0286; FRL-10023-61]

Electronic Option for Export Notifications Under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA); Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the availability of an electronic option for
submitting the export notifications that are required under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). As an alternative to the hardcopy
approach, which is still available, EPA is also now accepting the
required export notifications electronically using EPA's electronic
document submission system, the Central Data Exchange (CDX). Use of CDX
to prepare and submit the required export notifications to EPA will
help streamline and reduce the administrative costs and burdens
associated with submitting paper-based export notifications for both
the submitters and the Agency.

DATES: TSCA export notifications may be submitted electronically using
CDX as of June 14, 2021.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0286, is available online at
http://www.regulations.gov or in-person at the Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is
(202) 566-0280. Please note that due to the public health concerns
related to COVID-19, the EPA/DC and Reading Room is closed to visitors
with limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on the EPA/DC and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Jeffrey Santacroce, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001: telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
process, import, or distribute in commerce chemical substances and
mixtures. The following North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to
exporters of chemical substances, which are mostly chemical companies
classified under NAICS Codes 325 and 324.
    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What action is the Agency taking?

    The Agency is announcing the availability of an electronic
reporting option for use by those who must submit notifications of
export under TSCA section 12(b). EPA is providing an electronic
reporting option as part of broader Federal government efforts to move
to modern, electronic methods of information collection, which
streamline processes and reduce overall burdens for all involved.
    Currently, TSCA section 12(b) export notifications can only be
submitted to the Agency in hardcopy, by mail or in person, requiring
the Agency to manually scan and process submissions. The modernization
of the TSCA section 12(b) export notification process will allow the
option for users to prepare and submit their notifications to the
Agency electronically using a web-based application. To file
electronically, submitters must use the EPA provided

application. To access the application, users must register with EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX). CDX is the Agency's portal for submitting
information to EPA in a secure manner. When registering, a user will
need to ensure they are registering for the Chemical Safety and
Pesticide Programs (CSPP) data flow which will provide them access to
the Chemical Information Submission System (CISS) where the TSCA
section 12(b) reporting application can be accessed. (Note: Users who
have previously registered with CDX are able to add ``Submission for
Chemical Safety and Pesticide Program (CSPP)'' to their current
registration.) This reporting tool is compatible with Windows, Mac,
Linux, and UNIX based computers, and uses ``Extensible Markup
Language'' (XML) specifications for efficient data transmission across
the internet.

C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    TSCA section 12(b) requires exporters to submit a notice to EPA for
each country to which a chemical subject to TSCA section 12(b)
requirements is exported. Specifically, TSCA section 12(b) states, in
part, that any person who exports or intends to export to a foreign
country a chemical substance or mixture for which submission of
information is required under TSCA section 4 or 5(b), or for which a
rule, action or order has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA
section 5, 6, or 7, shall notify the EPA Administrator of such export
or intent to export. The Administrator in turn will notify the
government of the importing country of the notice and of EPA's
regulatory action with respect to the substance. Regulations
implementing the statutory mandate in TSCA section 12(b) appear in 40
CFR part 707, subpart D, and include the following additional
provisions:
     No notice of export will be required for articles, except
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) articles, unless the Agency so requires
in the context of individual TSCA section 5, 6, or 7 actions.
     Any person who exports or intends to export PCBs or PCB
articles, for any purpose other than disposal, shall notify EPA of such
intent or exportation under TSCA section 12(b). PCBs and PCB articles
are defined at 40 CFR 761.3
     Any person who would be prohibited by a TSCA section 5 or
6 regulation from exporting a chemical substance or mixture, but who is
granted an exemption by EPA to export that chemical substance or
mixture, shall notify EPA under TSCA section 12(b) of such intent to
export or exportation.
     An exporter will be subject to possible enforcement action
(including penalties) for not complying with the applicable provisions
of TSCA section 12(b).
    The Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) (Pub. L. 105-277,
Title XVII) (44 U.S.C. 3504) requires Executive agencies to provide,
when practicable, for the option of the electronic maintenance,
submission, or disclosure of information as a substitute for paper; and
the use and acceptance of electronic signatures.

D. What are the anticipated benefits of CDX reporting and use of CISS?

    EPA encourages submitters of TSCA section 12(b) export
notifications to adopt electronic reporting as the preferred submission
method. Electronic reporting reduces the reporting burden for
submitters by reducing the cost and time required to review, edit, and
transmit data to the Agency in a hardcopy format, as well as the cost
to retain required records related to that submission. CISS, the web-
based reporting tool, enables efficient data transmittal and reduces
errors with built-in validation procedures. CISS also allows submitters
to share a draft submission within their organization, and more easily
save an electronic copy for their records or future use. The resource
and time requirements for EPA to review and process these export
notifications will also be reduced, including increased efficiencies in
communicating with submitters, as well as the storage and retrieval of
submission.

II. Electronic Reporting Procedures

    This unit provides an overview of CDX, CSPP, and the CISS web-based
reporting tool. It also provides instructions for the electronic
reporting process for TSCA section 12(b) export notifications. As a
reminder, the regulations implementing the statutory mandate in TSCA
section 12(b) appear in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

A. What is CDX?

    CDX is EPA's point of entry for environmental data submissions to
the Agency. CDX also provides the capability for submitters to access
their data using web services. CDX enables EPA to work with
stakeholders, including governments, regulated industries, and the
public to enable streamlined, electronic submission of data via the
internet. To report under the procedures discussed in this notice,
submitters would register with CDX, select the CSPP option, and use
CISS to access reporting of TSCA section 12(b) export notifications.
More information about CDX is available online at: http://www.epa.gov/cdx/.

B. What is CISS?

    CISS is a web-based reporting tool for the submission of forms,
reports, and other documents including TSCA section 12(b) export
notifications, electronically to the Agency. The tool is available for
use with Windows, Mac, Linux, and UNIX computer systems, using
``Extensible Markup Language'' (XML) specifications for efficient data
transmission across the internet. CISS provides user-friendly
navigation, works with CDX to secure online communication, creates a
completed Portable Document Format (PDF) for review prior to
submission, and enables data, reports, and other information to be
submitted easily as PDF attachments, or by other electronic standards,
such as XML. As currently implemented, one or more representatives from
each facility must establish an account with EPA's CDX to prepare,
transmit, certify, and submit forms, reports, and other documents.

C. How will TSCA section 12(b) export notifications be submitted via
the internet using CDX?

    Once registered with EPA's CDX, submitters of TSCA section 12(b)
export notifications will select the CSPP Program and use CISS to
prepare a data file for submission.
    1. Registering with CDX. To submit electronically to EPA via CDX, a
user would register with CDX at: http://cdx.epa.gov/epa_home.asp. CDX
registration enables EPA to authenticate user identities and verify
user authorizations.
    To register in CDX, the CDX registrant (also referred to as
``Electronic Signature Holder'' or ``Public/Private Key Holder'') would
agree to the Terms and Conditions, provide information about the user
and organization, select a user-name and password, and follow the
procedures outlined in the guidance document for CDX available online
at: http://www.epa.gov/cdr/tools/CDX_Registration_Guide_v0_02.pdf.
    2. Submission. Submitters choosing to submit electronically will
use CISS to prepare their submissions. CISS guides users through a
``hands-on'' process of creating an electronic submission. Once a user
completes the relevant data fields and attaches appropriate PDF files
or other file types, such as XML files, the web-based tool validates
the submission by performing a basic error check and

makes sure all the required fields and attachments are provided and
complete.
    Further instructions on submitting information and instructions for
uploading PDF attachments or other file types, such as XML will be
available through CISS reporting guidance available online at: https://www.epa.gov/tsca-import-export-requirements/tsca-requirements-exporting-chemicals.

D. Can CBI be submitted using CISS?

    Yes, CISS enables the user to submit CBI and substantiate that CBI
claim in an electronic format. All information sent by the user via CDX
is transmitted securely to protect CBI. CISS also guides the user
through the process of submitting CBI by prompting the user to check a
CBI checkbox if using a form or by submitting a scanned document
containing CBI by bracketing, underlining, or otherwise marking the
confidential information on the document prior to scanning. As with
paper-based submissions, a sanitized copy of any document containing
CBI would be included by the user in the electronic submission. The
CISS reporting guidance instructs users on how to submit CBI and
substantiate CBI claims information using CISS.

E. How will CBI be protected when submitting via CDX?

    The Agency ensures secure transmission of the data, reports, and
other documents sent from the user through the internet via the
Transport Layer Security (TLS) 1.0 protocol. TLS 1.0 is a widely used
approach for securing internet transactions and is endorsed by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) as a means for
protecting data sent over the internet. See NIST Special Publication
800-52, ``Guidelines for the Selection and Use of Transport Layer
Security (TLS) Implementations,'' available online at: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-52/SP800-52.pdf.
    In addition, CISS enables the submitter to electronically sign,
encrypt, and transmit submissions, which the Agency subsequently
provides back to the user as an unaltered copy of record. This assures
the user that the Agency has received exactly what the user sent to the
Agency. CISS encrypts using a module based on the 256-bit Advanced
Encryption Standard (AES) adopted by NIST. Details about AES can be
found on the NIST website at: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips197/fips-197.pdf. EPA may incorporate other encryption modules into
future versions of CISS. Information submitted via CDX is processed
within EPA by secure systems certified for compliance with Federal
Information Processing Standards (FIPS) that are available online at:
http://www.nist.gov/itl/fips.cfm.

III. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    According to PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct
or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information that requires OMB approval under the PRA, unless it has
been approved by OMB and displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR,
after appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9,
and included on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable.
    The information collection requirements associated with export
notifications under TSCA section 12(b) and contained in 40 CFR part
707, subpart D are approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA under OMB
Control No. 2070-0030 (EPA ICR No. 0795.16) on May 18, 2021. This
action does not impose any burden requiring additional OMB approval.
The annual paperwork burden per export notification is estimated to
average 19 hours for hardcopy submissions and 12 hours for electronic
submissions. This burden estimate includes the time needed to review
instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the
data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required export
notification to EPA. For additional details, please see the Information
Collection Request document that is available in the docket.
    Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and
any suggested methods for further minimizing respondent burden,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, to the
Director, Regulatory Support Division, Office of Mission Support
(2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control
number in any correspondence, but do not submit any export
notifications or related questions to this address.

(Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.)

    Dated: June 8, 2021.
Michal Freedhoff,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2021-12402 Filed 6-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 231 (Monday, December 4, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 57279]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26013]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-4853]

Receipt of Notice That a Patent Infringement Complaint Was Filed
Against a Biosimilar Applicant

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is publishing notice
that an applicant for a proposed biosimilar product notified FDA that a
patent infringement action was filed in connection with the applicant's
biologics license application (BLA). Under the Public Health Service
Act (PHS Act), an applicant for a proposed biosimilar product or
interchangeable product must notify FDA within 30 days after the
applicant was served with a complaint in a patent infringement action
described under the PHS Act. FDA is required to publish notice of the
complaint in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Orr, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 51, Rm. 6246, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Biologics Price Competition and
Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act) was enacted as part of the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act (Pub. L. 111-148) on March 23, 2010.
The BPCI Act amended the PHS Act and created an abbreviated licensure
pathway for biological products shown to be biosimilar to, or
interchangeable with, an FDA-licensed biological reference product.
Section 351(k) of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262(k)), added by the BPCI
Act, describes the requirements for a BLA for a proposed biosimilar
product or a proposed interchangeable product (351(k) BLA). Section
351(l) of the PHS Act, also added by the BPCI Act, describes certain
procedures for exchanging patent information and resolving patent
disputes between a 351(k) BLA applicant and the holder of the BLA
reference product. If a 351(k) applicant is served with a complaint for
a patent infringement described in section 351(l)(6) of the PHS Act,
the applicant is required to provide FDA with notice and a copy of the
complaint within 30 days of service. FDA is required to publish notice
of a complaint received under section 351(l)(6)(C) of the PHS Act in
the Federal Register.
    FDA received notice of the following complaint under section
351(l)(6)(C) of the PHS Act:
    AbbVie, Inc., et al. v. Boehringer Ingelheim Intl. GMBH., et al.,
17-cv-01065 (D. Del., filed August 2, 2017).
    This complaint involves the product Humira.
    FDA has only a ministerial role in publishing notice of a complaint
received under section 351(l)(6)(C) of the PHS Act, and does not
perform a substantive review of the complaint.

    Dated: November 28, 2017.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-26013 Filed 12-1-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P