transparency in Exchange rules by using consistent terminology
governing trading on both the Exchange's cash equity and options
trading platforms, thereby ensuring that members, regulators, and the
public can more easily navigate the Exchange's rulebook and better
understand how options trading is conducted on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \56\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, the Exchange believes that adding new rules with the
modifier ``P'' to denote those rules that would be operative for the
Pillar trading platform would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
providing transparency of which rules would govern trading once a
symbol has been migrated to the Pillar platform. The Exchange similarly
believes that adding a preamble to those current rules that would not
be applicable to trading on Pillar would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because it would promote transparency regarding which rules
would govern trading on the Exchange during and after the transition to
Pillar.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that incorporating functionality
currently available on the Exchange's cash equity market for options
trading would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system because the Exchange would
be able to offer consistent functionality across both its options and
cash equity trading platforms, adapted as applicable for options
trading. Accordingly, with the transition to Pillar, the Exchange will
be able to offer additional features to its OTP Holders and OTP Firms
that are currently available only on the Exchange's cash equity
platform. For similar reasons, the Exchange believes that using Pillar
terminology for the proposed new rules would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because it would promote consistency in the Exchange's rules
across both its options and cash equity platforms.
Definitions and Applicability
    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to Rule 1.1,
including moving definitions from Rule 6.1-O and Rule 6.1A-O to Rule
1.1, would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system because the proposed
changes are designed to promote clarity and transparency in Exchange
rules by consolidating into Rule 1.1 definitions relating to both cash
equity and options trading. The Exchange believes that the proposed
changes to eliminate obsolete definitions and make non-substantive
edits to existing definitions would further remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because it would ensure that the definitions used in Exchange
rules are updated and consistent. Finally, the Exchange believes that
organizing Rule 1.1 alphabetically and eliminating sub-paragraph
numbering would make the proposed rules easier to navigate.
    The Exchange further believes that proposed new Rule 6.1P-O
relating to applicability would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because the proposed rule would include those elements of current Rule
6.1-O that would remain applicable and eliminates duplicative text that
would no longer be necessary after the transition to Pillar. The
Exchange further notes that proposed Rule 6.1P-O is similar to NYSE
American Rule 900.1NY.
Order Ranking and Display
    The Exchange believes that proposed new Rule 6.76P-O would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because the Exchange is not proposing
substantive changes to how the Exchange would rank and display orders
and quotes on Pillar as compared to the OX system. Rather, the proposed
revisions to the Exchange's options trading rules would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because the proposed changes are designed to
simplify the structure of the Exchange's options rules and use
consistent Pillar terminology for both cash equity and options trading,
without changing the underlying functionality. For example, the
Exchange believes the proposed definitions set forth in Rule 6.76P-O,
i.e., display price, limit price, working price, working time, and
Aggressing Order/Aggressing Quote, would promote transparency in
Exchange rules and make them easier to navigate because these proposed
definitions would be used in other proposed Pillar options trading
rules. The Exchange notes that these proposed definitions are
consistent with the definitions set forth in Rule 7.36-E for cash
equity trading with differences only as necessary to address
functionality associated with options trading that are not applicable
to cash equity trading, e.g., reference to quotes.
    The Exchange further believes that moving descriptions of order
type behavior, which are currently set forth in Rule 6.76-O, to
proposed Rule 6.62P-O, and therefore not include such detail in
proposed Rule 6.76P-O, would make Exchange rules easier to navigate
because information regarding how a specific order type would operate
would be in a single location in the Exchange's rulebook. The Exchange
notes that this proposed structure is consistent with the Exchange's
cash equity rules, which similarly set forth information relating to an
order type's ranking in Rule 7.31-E. Moreover, the Exchange is not
proposing any functional changes to how it would rank and display
orders and quotes on Pillar as compared to the OX system.
Order Execution and Routing
    The Exchange believes that proposed new Rule 6.76AP-O would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because the proposed rule would set forth a
price-time priority model for Pillar that is substantively the same as
the Exchange's current price-time priority model as set forth in Rule
6.76A-O. The proposed differences as compared to Rule 6.76A-O are
designed to use Pillar terminology that is based in part on Rule 7.37-
E, if applicable, without changing the functionality that is currently
available for options trading.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed modifications to the LMM
Guarantee would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system because it provides
clarity of how multiple quotes from an LMM would be allocated. The
Exchange similarly believes that eliminating Directed Order Market
Makers and Directed Orders would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because these features are not currently used on the Exchange, and
therefore eliminating Directed Orders and Directed Order

Market Makers would streamline the Exchange's rules. The Exchange notes
that the remaining differences in proposed Rule 6.76AP-O relating to
the LMM Guarantee are designed to promote clarity and transparency in
Exchange rules and would not introduce new functionality.
    The Exchange believes that the structure and content of the rule
text in proposed Rule 6.76AP-O promotes transparency by using
consistent Pillar terminology. The Exchange also believes that adding
more detail regarding current functionality in new Rule 6.76AP-O, as
described above, would promote transparency by providing notice of when
orders would be executed or routed by the Exchange.
Orders and Modifiers
    The Exchange believes that proposed new Rule 6.62P-O would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because it would use existing Pillar
terminology to describe the order types and modifiers that would be
available on the Exchange's options Pillar trading system. As noted
above, the Exchange proposes to offer order types and modifiers that
are either based on existing order types available on the OX system as
described in Rule 6.62-O, or orders and modifiers available on the
Exchange's cash equity trading platform, as described in Rule 7.31-E.
The Exchange believes that structuring proposed Rule 6.62P-O based on
the structure of Rule 7.31-E would remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because it would promote transparency and consistency in the Exchange's
rulebook.
    In addition to the terminology changes to describe the order types
and modifiers that are currently available on the Exchange, the
Exchange further believes that the order types and modifiers proposed
for options trading on Pillar that either differ from order types and
modifiers available on the OX system or that would be new would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
national market system because:
     Market Orders on Pillar would function similarly to how
Market Orders function under current options trading rules, including
being subject to Trading Collars, with additional proposed
functionality that is designed to ensure that Market Orders do not
execute either when there is no prevailing market in a series, or if
the displayed prices are too wide to assure a fair and orderly
execution of a Market Order. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule describing Market Orders would promote transparency by providing
notice of when a Market Order would be subject to such validations.
     The Exchange is not proposing any new or different
behavior for Limit Orders than is currently available for options
trading on the Exchange, other than the application of Limit Order
Price Protection and Trading Collars, which would differ on Pillar. The
Exchange believes using Pillar terminology based on Rule 7.31-E(a)(2)
to describe Limit Orders would promote consistency and clarity in
Exchange rules.
     The proposed Limit Order Price Protection functionality is
based in part on the existing ``Limit Order Filter'' for orders and
price protection filters for quotes because an order or quote would be
rejected if it is priced a specified percentage away from the contra-
side NBB or NBO. The proposed Limit Order Price Protection
functionality is also based in part on the functionality available on
the Exchange's cash equity trading platform, and therefore is not
novel. The Exchange believes that using the same mechanism for both
orders and quotes would simplify the operation of the Exchange and
achieve similar results as the current rules, which is to reject an
order or quote that is priced too far away from the prevailing market.
The Exchange believes that re-applying Limit Order Price Protection
after an Auction concludes would ensure that Limit Orders and quotes
continue to be priced consistent with the prevailing market, and that
using an Auction Price (if available, and if not available, Auction
Collars, and if not available, the NBBO) to assess Limit Orders and
quotes after an Auction concludes would ensure that the Exchange would
be applying the most recent price in a series in assessing whether such
orders or quotes should be cancelled.
     The proposed Trading Collar functionality is based in part
on how trading collars currently function on the Exchange because the
proposed functionality would create a ceiling or floor price at which
an order could be traded or routed. The proposed Pillar Trading Collar
functionality is designed to simplify the process by applying a static
ceiling price (for buy orders) or floor price (for sell orders) at
which such order could be traded or routed that would be applicable to
the order until it is traded or cancelled. The Exchange believes that
the proposed functionality would provide greater determinism to an OTP
Holder or OTP Firm of the Trading Collar that would be applicable to
its orders and when such orders may be cancelled if it reaches its
Trading Collar.
     The Exchange is not proposing any new or different Time-
in-Force modifiers than are currently available for options trading on
the Exchange. The Exchange believes using Pillar terminology based on
Rule 7.31-E(b) to describe the time-in-force modifiers would promote
consistency and clarity in Exchange rules.
     Auction-Only Orders, and specifically, the proposed MOO
and LOO Orders, would operate no differently than how ``Opening-Only
Orders'' currently function on the OX system. The Exchange proposes
non-substantive differences to use Pillar terminology that is based on
Rule 7.31-E(c) terminology. The Exchange further believes that offering
its IO Order type, which is currently available for Trading Halt
Auctions on the Exchange's cash equity platform, for Auctions on the
options trading platform would provide OTP Holders and OTP Firms with
new, optional functionality to offset an Imbalance in an Auction.
     The Exchange would continue to offer Reserve Orders, AON
Orders, Stop Orders, and Stop Limit Orders, which are currently
available on the OX system. The proposed differences to Reserve Orders
for options trading would harmonize with how Reserve Orders function on
the Exchange's cash equity market, with changes as applicable to
address options trading (e.g., no round lot/odd lot concept for options
trading). The proposed changes to AON Orders would provide greater
execution opportunities for such orders by allowing them to be
integrated in the Consolidated Book and once resting, trade with
incoming orders and quotes. The changes are also based on how orders
with an MTS Modifier, which are also conditional orders, function on
the Exchange's cash equity market. The proposed differences for Stop
Orders and Stop Limit Orders are designed to promote transparency by
providing clarity of circumstances when either order may be elected.
Finally, the Exchange believes that offering Non-Displayed Limit Orders
for options trading on Pillar, which are available on the Exchange's
cash equity platform, would provide additional, optional trading
functionality for OTP Holders and OTP Firms. The Exchange notes that
the proposed Non-Displayed Limit Order would function similarly to how
a PNP Blind Order that locks or crosses the contra-side NBBO would be
processed because in such circumstances, a PNP Blind Order is not
displayed. A Non-Displayed Limit Order would differ from a PNP Blind

Order only because it would never be displayed, even if its limit price
doesn't lock or cross the contra-side NBBO.
     The Exchange believes that the proposed orders (and
quotes) with instructions not to route (i.e., Non-Routable Limit Order,
ALO Order, and ISOs) would streamline the offerings available for
options trading on the Exchange by making the functionality the same
for both orders and quotes and consolidating the description of non-
routable orders and quotes in proposed Rule 6.62P-O(e). The Exchange
believes that using Pillar terminology, including order type names,
that is based on the terminology used for cash equity trading will
promote clarity and consistency across the Exchange's cash equity and
options trading platforms. The Exchange believes that the proposed Non-
Routable Limit Order is not novel because it is based on how the PNP,
RPNP, and MMRP orders and quotes currently function on the OX system.
The Exchange believes that the proposed differences would provide OTP
Holders and OTP Firms with greater determinism of when such orders or
quotes may be repriced or be cancelled, including providing additional
opportunities to cancel such orders. Similarly, the proposed ALO Order
is not novel because it is based in part on how the RALO and MMLO
orders and quotes currently function on the OX system. Finally, the
proposed IOC ISO is not novel for options trading on the Exchange. The
proposed DAY ISO and DAY ISO ALO functionality would be new for options
trading and are based in part on how such order types function in the
Exchange's cash equity market. In addition, the proposed DAY ISO
functionality is consistent with existing Rule 6.95-O(b)(3), which
currently provides an exception to locking or crossing an Away Market
Protected Quotation if the OTP Holder or OTP Firm simultaneously routed
an ISO to execute against the full displayed size of any locked or
crossed Protected Bid or Protected Offer. The Exchange notes that this
exception is not necessary for IOC ISOs because such orders would never
be displayed at a price that would lock or cross a Protected Quotation;
they cancel if they cannot trade. Accordingly, this existing exception
in the Exchange's rules contemplates an ISO that would be displayed,
which would mean it would need a time-in-force modifier of ``Day.'' In
addition, Day ISOs are available for options trading on other options
exchanges, and therefore are not novel.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ See supra notes 39, 40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The Exchange believes that the proposed additional detail
defining Complex Orders to define the ``legs'' and ``components'' of
such orders would promote transparency in Exchange rules.
     On Pillar, the only electronically-entered crossing orders
would be QCC Orders, which is consistent with current functionality.
The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive differences,
including using Pillar terminology and consolidating rule text relating
to QCC Orders in proposed Rule 6.62P-O, would promote transparency and
clarity in Exchange rules. In addition, the Exchange believes that the
proposed descriptions of how a QCC Order priced at the market would be
traded would provide transparency regarding at which price such orders
would trade.
     The Exchange believes that moving the descriptions of
orders available only in open outcry from Rule 6.62-O to proposed Rule
6.62P-O(h) would ensure that these order types remain in the rulebook
after the transition to Pillar is complete. For CTB Orders, the
Exchange believes that the proposed substantive difference on Pillar to
allow a CTB Order to satisfy any displayed interest (including non-
Customer interest) at better prices than the latest-arriving displayed
Customer interest would increase execution opportunities and achieve
the goal of a CTB Order, which is to clear priority on the Consolidated
Book for orders executed in open outcry. The Exchange also believes
that codifying this order type and the associated regulatory
obligations would add clarity and transparency in Exchange rules.
     The proposed Proactive if Locked/Crossed Modifier, STP
Modifier, and MTS Modifier are not novel and are based on the
Exchange's current cash equity modifiers of the same name. The Exchange
believes that extending the availability of these existing modifiers to
options trading would provide OTP Holders and OTP Firms with
additional, optional functionality that is not novel and is based on
existing Exchange rules. The Exchange further believes that extending
the availability of STP Modifiers to all orders, and not just Market
Maker orders and quotes, would provide additional protections for OTP
Holders and OTP Firms.
Market Maker Quotations
    The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 6.37AP-O would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because it is based on current Rule 6.37A-O,
with such changes as necessary to use Pillar terminology. The Exchange
believes that consolidating functionality for orders and quotes, and
cross referencing Non-Routable Limit Orders and ALO Orders in proposed
Rule 6.37AP-O, rather than restating how quotations would be processed
in proposed Rule 6.37AP-O, would streamline the Exchange's rules and
promote transparency and consistency.
Pre-Trade and Activity-Based Risk Controls
    The Exchange believes that the proposed Rule 6.40P-O, setting forth
pre-trade and activity-based risk controls, would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system and promote just and equitable principles of trade
because the proposed functionality would incorporate existing activity-
based risk controls, without any substantive differences, and augment
them with additional pre-trade risk controls and related functionality
that are based on the pre-trade risk controls currently available on
the Exchange's cash equity trading platform. The Exchange believes that
the proposed differences are designed to provide greater flexibility to
OTP Holders and OTP Firms in how to set risk controls for both orders
and quotes. In addition, the Exchange believes that aggregating a
Market Maker's quotes and orders for purposes of calculating activity-
based risk controls would better reflect the aggregate risk that a
Market Maker has with respect to its quotes and orders. The proposed
kill switch functionality would also provide OTP Holders and OTP Firms
with greater flexibility to provide bulk instructions to the Exchange
with respect to cancelling existing orders and quotes and blocking new
orders and quotes.
Price Reasonability Checks--Orders and Quotes
    The Exchange believes that the proposed Rule 6.41P-O, setting forth
Price Reasonability Checks, would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because they are based on existing functionality, with differences
designed to use Pillar terminology and promote consistency and
transparency in Exchange rules. Specifically, on Pillar, the Exchange
proposes to apply the same types of Price Reasonability Checks to both
orders and quotes, and therefore proposes to describe those checks in a
single rule--proposed Rule 6.41P-O. The proposed rule also provides
specificity regarding when the Price

Reasonability Checks would be applied to an order or quote, which would
promote transparency and clarity in Exchange rules.
Auction Process
    The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 6.64P-O would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because the proposed rule maintains the
fundamentals of an auction process that is tailored for options trading
while at the same time enhancing the process by incorporating Pillar
auction functionality that is currently available on the Exchange's
cash equity platform, as described in Rule 7.35-E. For example, the
Exchange proposes to augment the imbalance information that would be
disseminated in advance of an Auction to include fields available on
the Exchange's cash equity market (e.g., Book Clearing Price and Far
Clearing Price) as well as information specific to options trading
(e.g., Auction Collars based on a Legal Width Quote and Auction
Indicator). The Exchange believes that the proposed Auction Imbalance
Information would promote transparency to market participants in
advance of an Auction. The Exchange also proposes to transition to
continuous trading following an Auction in a manner similar to how the
Exchange's cash equity market transitions to continuous trading
following a cash equity Trading Halt Auction, including how orders and
quotes that are received during an Auction Processing Period would be
processed, which the Exchange believes would promote consistency across
the Exchange's options and cash equity trading platforms. Because the
Exchange would be harnessing Pillar technology to support Auctions for
options trading, the Exchange believes that structuring proposed Rule
6.64P-O based on Rule 7.35-E would promote transparency in the
Exchange's trading rules.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed Auction Process for
options trading on Pillar would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. The
proposed process is based on the current options auction process,
including that orders are matched based on price-time priority and that
an Auction would not be conducted if the bid-ask differential is not
within an acceptable range. As proposed, the Auction Process on Pillar
would begin with the proposed Rotational Quote, which would provide
notice not only of when the process would begin, but also whether
Market Makers on the Exchange have quoted in a series. The Exchange
believes that the proposed Opening MMQ Time Parameter would promote
transparency in Exchange rules of when the Exchange could open a
series, including circumstances of when the Exchange would wait to
provide Market Makers time to submit a two-sided quotation in a series
and when the Exchange would proceed with opening or reopening a series
based on a Legal Width Quote even if there are no Market Maker quotes
in that series. The proposed rule would also provide transparency of
when the Exchange would open or reopen a series for trading when the
Calculated NBBO is wider than the Legal Width Quote for the series. The
Exchange believes that the proposed process is designed to provide
opportunities for a series to open or reopen, while at the same time
preserving the existing requirement that a series would not open on a
trade if there is no Legal Width Quote.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange operates in a
competitive market and regularly competes with other options exchanges
for order flow. The Exchange believes that the transition to Pillar
would promote competition among options exchanges by offering a low-
latency, deterministic trading platform. The proposed rule changes
would support that inter-market competition by allowing the Exchange to
offer additional functionality to its OTP Holders and OTP Firms,
thereby potentially attracting additional order flow to the Exchange.
Otherwise, the proposed changes are not designed to address any
competitive issues, but rather to amend the Exchange's rules relating
to options trading to support the transition to Pillar. As discussed in
detail above, with this rule filing, the Exchange is not proposing to
change its core functionality regarding its price-time priority model,
and in particular, how it would rank, display, execute or route orders
and quotes. Rather, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
changes would promote consistent use of terminology to support both
options and cash equity trading on the Exchange, making the Exchange's
rules easier to navigate. The Exchange does not believe that the
proposed rule changes would raise any intra-market competition as the
proposed rule changes would be applicable to all OTP Holders and OTP
Firms, and reflects the Exchange's existing price-time priority model,
including existing LMM Guarantee, without proposing any substantive
changes.

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

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

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-NYSEArca-2021-47 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-NYSEArca-2021-47. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the

Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2021-47 and should be submitted
on or before July 30, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\58\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-14391 Filed 7-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 31 (Thursday, February 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10152-10154]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03217]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91114; File No. SR-ICEEU-2021-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to the ICE
Clear Europe Price Submission Disciplinary Framework

February 11, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on February 2, 2021, ICE Clear Europe Limited filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission the proposed rule changes described
in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared primarily
by ICE Clear Europe. 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. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The principal purpose of the proposed amendments is for ICE Clear
Europe to modify its Price Submission Disciplinary Framework (to be
renamed the ``Price Submission Disciplinary Procedure'', referred to
herein as the ``Procedure'') to update the review period for the
Clearing House when investigating missed price submissions, permit an
annual one-time waiver available to Clearing Members in respect of any
instance in which a Clearing Member has failed to timely provide
submissions for which they hold cleared open interest with the Clearing
House (a ``Missed Submission''). ICE Clear Europe is also proposing to
modify provisions relating to governance and exception handling to
conform to other Clearing House procedures and remove unnecessary
appendices and make certain other updates and clarifications as
discussed herein.

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

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

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

(a) Purpose
    ICE Clear Europe is proposing to amend its Price Submission
Disciplinary Procedure to: (i) Remove the description of the End of Day
Price Discovery Process as unnecessary since it is set forth in the
existing CDS End of Day Price Discovery Policy; (ii) update the process
in respect of Missed Submissions to provide that (a) a Clearing Member
may be granted one waiver per product class in a calendar year for a
Missed Submission, rather than one waiver over the course of the
clearing membership, and (b) the Clearing House has an additional five
days to review a Clearing Member's response to an initial Notice of
Investigation under Rule 1002(b) before sending the subsequent Letter
of Mindedness under Rule 1002(f); (iii) update governance and exception
handling provisions; and (iv) make various drafting clarifications and
improvements.
General Drafting Clarifications and Improvements
    By way of general drafting clarifications and improvements, the
document title would be changed from ``Price Submission Disciplinary
Framework'' to ``Price Submission Disciplinary Procedure''. Former
Section 2.2 (End of Day Price Discovery Process) and Appendix A would
be removed as these matters are covered in the existing CDS End Of Day
Price Discovery Policy (the ``Policy''), and current Section 2.3 would
be renumbered 2.2. A cross-reference to the Policy would be added to
Section 1.1. To aid with readability, the term ``CDS Clearing Member''
would be shortened to ``CM'' throughout the Procedure and several
sentences would be shortened or reformulated with [sic] change to their
substantive meanings. References to CDX products would be replaced by
references to CDX indices, a more precise term. A reference to Markit
Group Limited would be updated to its current name IHS Markit.
Price Submission Disciplinary Procedure
    The stated purpose of the Procedure would be simplified and
clarified to provide that the document outlines the procedure to be
used internally by ICE Clear Europe when taking disciplinary action in
relation to price submissions. The statement that spread submissions
will be counted as Missed Submissions would be replaced by a statement
that submissions not adhering to the format described in Section 2.2.3
of the End of Day Price Discovery Policy, which requires index
submissions to follow market convention in terms of providing prices as
spreads, and be either midpoint or bid-offer, will be counted as Missed
Submissions. The legal basis description would be amended to include a
cross reference to Rule 503(g), rather than restate the text of Rule
503(g).
Price Submission Incentives
    In this section, a cross-reference to the deleted section 2.2 would
be removed. Certain non-substantive drafting clarifications would be
made to the discussion of Obvious Errors.
Fixed Cash Assessments for Missed Submissions
    The amendments would provide that a CM in receipt of a Notice of
Investigation issued in respect of an alleged Missed Submission will
have five days to submit written comments. The amendments would provide
for an additional five days for the Clearing House to review the
Clearing Member's comments before sending a Letter of Mindedness under
Rule 1002(f). Such amendment would improve the process by affording the
Clearing Member an opportunity to respond to the initial notice and
giving the Clearing House time to assess the Clearing Member's response
before determining whether to take further action under the Rules.
    The amendments would also change the process for waiver of Missed
Submissions (if a waiver is granted, no assessment would be due for the
Missed Submission). Rather than a Clearing Member receiving one waiver
over the course of its clearing membership for a Missed Submission, a
Clearing Member would be eligible for one waiver per calendar year for
Missed Submissions for single-name products and one waiver per calendar
year for Missed Submissions for index products. Waivers would be
limited to Missed Submissions caused by technical failures. The
Clearing Members would be required to provide an adequate written
explanation of the technical failure and summary of planned remedial
actions. Only the first instance of a Missed Submission for the product
category in any calendar year will be eligible for a waiver.
    Following the expiry of the ten day period from the Issuance of a
Letter of Mindedness with respect to a Missed

Submission, where an assessment amount would be collected, a cash
assessment notice would be issued, which would be calculated according
to the cash assessment calculation details provided in the procedure.
    The amendments would also clarify the procedures by which a
Clearing Member may assert that one or more Missed Submissions were due
to extraordinary circumstances outside of its control, including to
provide that the Head of Regulation and Compliance will determine
whether such circumstances apply.
    Based on its experience with Missed Submissions, ICE Clear Europe
believes the revised approach to waivers strikes a better balance than
the current, one-time waiver, between the need for robust submissions
under the Policy and the goal of not unnecessarily penalizing Clearing
Members for technical failures.
Document Governance and Exception Handling
    The amendments would include detail with respect to the governance
and exception handling of the Procedure. Specifically, the Procedure
would state that the document owner is responsible for ensuring that
the Procedure remains up-to-date and is reviewed in accordance with the
Clearing House's governance processes. The Procedure would further
provide that the document owner is to report material breaches or
unapproved deviations from the Procedure to the document owner's Head
of Department, the Chief Risk Officer and the Head of Compliance (or
their delegates) who together will determined if further escalation is
required. Finally, exceptions to the Procedure would be approved in
accordance with the Clearing House's governance process for the
Procedure. The approach to governance and exception handling is
consistent with that of other ICE Clear Europe procedures.
(b) Statutory Basis
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed amendments to the Price
Submission Disciplinary Procedure are consistent with the requirements
of Section 17A of the Act \3\ and the regulations thereunder applicable
to it. In particular, Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \4\ requires,
among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions and, to the extent applicable, derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions, the safeguarding of securities and funds
in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible, and the protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed changes to the Price Submission Disciplinary Procedure
are designed to strengthen ICE Clear Europe's arrangements and
disciplinary procedures for managing Missed Submissions by Clearing
Members and the relevant disciplinary procedures. The amendments
provide an opportunity for a Clearing Member that has received to
Notice of Investigation to provide comments, and for the Clearing House
to review those comments before proceeding with disciplinary
procedures. The amendments would also increase the Clearing House's
ability to provide a limited number of waivers for Missed Submissions
from technical failures, from one waiver over the course of the
clearing membership to one waiver per product class in a calendar year.
The other proposed clarifications and changes to the Procedure enhance
readability and ensure that the Procedure remains clear and up-to-date.
In ICE Clear Europe's view, the amendments will thus Through enhance
the overall End of Day Price Submission process and the quality of
submissions, which in turn supports the stability of the Clearing House
and the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of cleared
contracts. The enhanced risk management is therefore also generally
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest in
the safe operation of the Clearing House. (ICE Clear Europe would not
expect the amendments to affect the safeguarding of securities and
funds in ICE Clear Europe's custody or control or for which it is
responsible.) Accordingly, the amendments satisfy the requirements of
Section 17A(b)(3)(F).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In addition, in ICE Clear Europe's view, the amended Procedure,
like the current framework, would provide an appropriately tailored set
of cash assessments for Missed Submissions, and waivers thereof, in
light of the importance of end-of-day price submissions to the Clearing
House's risk management and settlement procedures. The Procedure is
gthus consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the
Act.\6\ The amendments also enhance the procedures for investing [sic]
potential Missed Submissions, and for Clearing Members to submit
comments with respect to investigations. In ICE Clear Europe's view,
this aspect of the Procedure is consistent with the requirements of
Section 17A(b)(3)(H) of the Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In addition, ICE Clear Europe believes the amendments satisfy Rule
17Ad-22(e)(3)(i),\8\ which requires the covered clearing agency to
maintain a sound risk management framework for comprehensively managing
legal, credit, liquidity, operational, general business, investment,
custody, and other risks that arise in or are borne by the covered
clearing agency which include risk management policies, procedures, and
systems designed to identify, measure, monitor, and manage the range of
risks that arise in or are borne by the covered clearing agency. The
proposed amendments are intended to strengthen the End of Day Price
Discovery Process by clarifying disciplinary procedures for Missed
Submissions and the process for waivers. The inclusion of an
opportunity for a Clearing Member's response to an initial Notice of
Investigation, and an opportunity for the Clearing House to review the
response will better ensure that the Clearing House has sufficient time
and information to assess a Clearing Member's formal response in
respect of a Missed Submission before determining whether to take
further action under the Rules. ICE Clear Europe believes that the
amendments to the Procedure are therefore consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(3)(i).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(3)(i).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2) \10\ requires clearing agencies to establish
reasonably designed policies and procedures to provide for governance
arrangements that are clear and transparent and specify clear and
direct lines of responsibility. The proposed amendments to the
Procedure more clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the
document owner, the Head of Department, the Chief Risk Officer and the
Head of Compliance (or their delegates), consistent with governance
arrangement for other ICE Clear Europe policies and procedures. ICE
Clear Europe believes that the amendments to the Procedure are
therefore consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2).
    \11\ Id.

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

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

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed amendments would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The amendments
are being adopted to update and clarify the Price Submission
Disciplinary Procedure and would apply equally to all CDS Clearing
Members. As a result, ICE Clear Europe does not expect that the
proposed changes will adversely affect access to clearing or the
ability of Clearing Members, their customers or other market
participants to continue to clear contracts. ICE Clear Europe also does
not believe the amendments would materially affect the cost of clearing
or otherwise impact competition among Clearing Members or other market
participants or limit market participants' choices for selecting
clearing services. Accordingly, ICE Clear Europe does not believe the
amendments would impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act.

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

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

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change 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 the 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, security-based swap submission or advance notice is consistent
with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following
methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2021-002 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2021-002. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE
Clear Europe's website at https://www.theice.com/notices/Notices.shtml?regulatoryFilings.
    All comments received will be posted without change. Persons
submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2021-002 and should be
submitted on or before March 11, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-03217 Filed 2-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                             JON M. HUNTSMAN, JR.
Governor

                                 GARY HERBERT
Lieutenant Governor
                             JON M. HUNTSMAN, JR.
Governor

                                 GARY HERBERT
Lieutenant Governor
                                State of Utah

                      Department of Environmental Quality

                           Dianne R. Nielson, Ph.D.
Executive Director

                            DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
                               Richard W. Sprott
Director

                                State of Utah

                      Department of Environmental Quality

                           Dianne R. Nielson, Ph.D.
Executive Director

                            DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
                               Richard W. Sprott
Director

150 North 1950 West  ::  PO Box 144820  ::  Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820 :: phone<PHONE_NUMBER> :: fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
T.D.D.<PHONE_NUMBER> ::  www.deq.utah.gov

                                                              DAQE-AN3031001-05
January 6, 2005

Tom Cameron
Summit Vineyard LLC
6682 W. Greenfield Ave, Suite 109
West Allis, WI  53214

Dear Mr. Cameron:

Re:	Approval Order:  Approval for Lake Side Power Plant, Utah County, CDS A; NA; NSPS, NESHAPS, HAPs, TITLE V MAJOR, PSD MAJOR, NAA/NSR MAJOR
	Project Code:  N3031-001

The attached document is the Approval Order (AO) for the above-referenced project.

Future correspondence on this Approval Order should include the engineer's name as well as the DAQE number as shown on the upper right-hand corner of this letter.  Please direct any technical questions you may have on this project to Mr. John D. Jenks.  He may be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Sincerely,

Richard W. Sprott, Executive Secretary
Utah Air Quality Board

RWS:JJ:jc

cc:
Utah County Health Department

Mike Owens, EPA Region VIII

                                 STATE OF UTAH

                      Department of Environmental Quality

                            Division of Air Quality

             APPROVAL ORDER:  Approval for Lake Side Power Plant

                     Prepared By:  John D. Jenks, Engineer
<PHONE_NUMBER>
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

                             APPROVAL ORDER NUMBER

                               DAQE-AN3031001-05

                            Date:  January 6, 2005

Summit Vineyard LLC
                                Source Contact
Tom Cameron
<PHONE_NUMBER>

                               Richard W. Sprott
Executive Secretary
Utah Air Quality Board

                                   Abstract

Summit Vineyard LLC, has submitted a Notice of Intent (NOI) to install and operate a 560 MW electric generation plant in Utah County.  The plant would be located on the site of the old Geneva Steel facility, and would consist of two (2) combustion turbine and heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) arrangements and a single steam turbine generator.  The combustion turbines and HRSG units will be equipped with CO catalysts, SCR, and combustion controls featuring dry-low NOx burners.  This source is major under both the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Non-attainment Area New Source Review (NAA/NSR) regulations.  Utah County is a Non-attainment area of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM10. New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) A, Db, Dc, and GG regulations apply to this source.  The Acid Rain Program (Title IV) of the Clean Air Act applies to this source.  Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act applies to this source, with the requirement that the source submit a Title V Operating Permit application within one year of beginning operations.

The emissions, in tons per year, will be as follows: PM10 95.8, NOx 138.3, SO2 26.5, CO 547.1, VOC 72.8, HAPs (Formaldehyde) 6.2.

Offsets requirements of 260.6 x 1.2 = 312.72 tons, of which PM10 = 114.96, SO2 = 31.8, NOx = 165.96.  This is referenced in DAQE-040-05.

The project has been evaluated and found to be consistent with the requirements of the Utah Administrative Code Rule 307 (UAC R307).  A public comment period was held in accordance with UAC R307-401-4 and comments were received.  The comments were evaluated and no comment was found to be adverse to the proposed AO.  This air quality Approval Order (AO) authorizes the project with the following conditions, and failure to comply with any of the conditions may constitute a violation of this order.

General Conditions:

 This Approval Order (AO) applies to the following company:

            Site Office	Corporate Office Location
            Summit Vineyard LLC	Summit Vineyard LLC
            1825 North Pioneer Lane	C/O PEC, Suite 109
            Vineyard, UT 84058	6682 W. Greenfield Ave
            	West Allis, WI 53214

            Phone Number<PHONE_NUMBER>
            Fax Number<PHONE_NUMBER>

            The equipment listed in this AO shall be operated at the following location:

            1825 North Pioneer Lane, the project is located on the south side of 200 South Road, between North Pioneer Lane and 250 West (Proctor) Road.

            Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Coordinate System:  UTM Datum NAD27
                  4,464.5 kilometers Northing, 436.0 kilometers Easting, Zone 12

 All definitions, terms, abbreviations, and references used in this AO conform to those used in the Utah Administrative Code (UAC) Rule 307 (R307) and Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR).  Unless noted otherwise, references cited in these AO conditions refer to those rules.

 The limits set forth in this AO shall not be exceeded without prior approval in accordance with R307-401.

 Modifications to the equipment or processes approved by this AO that could affect the emissions covered by this AO must be reviewed and approved in accordance with R307-401-1.

 All records referenced in this AO or in applicable NSPS standards, which are required to be kept by the owner/operator, shall be made available to the Executive Secretary or Executive Secretary's representative upon request, and the records shall include the two-year period prior to the date of the request.  Records shall be kept for the following minimum periods:

             Emission inventories	Five years from the due date of each emission statement or until the next inventory is due, whichever is longer.

 All other records	Five years

 Summit Vineyard LLC (Summit) shall install and operate the Lake Side Power Plant and shall conduct its operations of the same in accordance with the terms and conditions of this AO, which was written pursuant to Summit's Notice of Intent submitted to the Division of Air Quality (DAQ) on May 24, 2004.

 The approved installations shall consist of the following equipment or equivalent*:

 Two (2) Siemens-Westinghouse* 501F natural gas-fired dry low-NOx, combined cycle turbines, each with 130 foot stack (as measured from the base of the stack)

 Two (2) heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs), equipped with low NOx duct burners (184 MMBtu/hr each)

 Two (2) CO catalysts, one for each turbine/HRSG set

 Two (2) Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) systems with ammonia injection, one for each turbine/HRSG set

 One (1) steam turbine**

 One (1) natural gas-fired 49 MMBtu/hr auxiliary boiler with
            	40 ft. boiler stack (as measured from the base of the stack)

 One (1) 1,490 hp diesel-fired emergency generator

 One (1) 290 hp diesel-fired fire pump

 One (1) 3.67 MMBtu/hr fuel dew point heater

 One (1) 10 Cell mechanical draft evaporative cooling tower with drift elimination

 Water treatment and storage facilities**

 Aqueous ammonia storage and handling equipment**

            *	Equivalency shall be determined by the Executive Secretary.
            ** 	This equipment is listed for informational purposes only.  There are no emissions from this equipment.

 Summit shall notify the Executive Secretary in writing when the installation of the equipment listed in Condition #7 has been completed and is operational, as an initial compliance inspection is required.  To insure proper credit when notifying the Executive Secretary, send your correspondence to the Executive Secretary, attn: Compliance Section.

            If construction and/or installation has not been completed within eighteen months from the date of this AO, the Executive Secretary shall be notified in writing on the status of the construction and/or installation.  At that time, the Executive Secretary shall require documentation of the continuous construction and/or installation of the operation and may revoke the AO in accordance with R307-401-11.

Limitations and Tests Procedures

 Emissions to the atmosphere from the indicated emission point(s) shall not exceed the following rates and concentrations:

	Source: Auxiliary Boiler

            Pollutant		Limitations at 15% O2	Averaging Period
	PM10	0.01 lb/MMBtu	3-hour
            NOx 	0.017 lb/MMBtu	3-hour
	CO	0.037 lb/MMBtu	3-hour

	Source: Each Turbine/HRSG Stack

            Pollutant		Limitations at 15% O2	Averaging Period
	PM10	10.8 lb/hour (0.01 lb/MMBtu)	24-hour**
            NOx 	2.0 ppmvd (14.9 lb/hr)*	3-hour
	CO	3.0 ppmvd (14.1 lb/hr)*	3-hour

            *	Under steady state operation.
            ** 	Based on a 24-hour test run or any method approved by the Executive Secretary, which will provide 24-hour data

	Source: Each Turbine/HRSG Stack

            Pollutant	Emission Limit at 15% O2	Averaging Period
            NOx 	744.0 lb/24 hour period	24-hour
            CO 	3,182 lb/8 hour period	8-hour
	Source: Each Turbine (NSPS Subpart GG Limitation)

            Pollutant		Limitation at 15% O2	Averaging Period
            NOx 	112.0 ppmvd	***

            ***	NSPS Subpart GG Limitation (see Condition #18)

 Stack testing to show compliance with the emission limitations stated in the above condition shall be performed as specified below:

 	Testing	Test
                  Emissions Point	Pollutant	Status	Frequency

                  HRSG Stack(s)	PM10	*	$
                                       NOx	*	#
                                       CO	*	#

                  Auxiliary Boiler	PM10	*	%
                                       NOx	*	%
                                       CO	*	%

 Testing Status  (To be applied to the source listed above)

                  *	Initial compliance testing is required.  The initial test date shall be performed as soon as possible and in no case later than 180 days after the start up of a new emission source, an existing source without an AO, or the granting of an AO to an existing emission source that has not had an initial compliance test performed.  If an existing source is modified, a compliance test is required on the modified emission point that has an emission rate limit.

                  $	Test every year or testing may be replaced with parametric monitoring if approved by the Executive Secretary

                  %	Test every five (5) years or testing may be replaced with parametric monitoring if approved by the Executive Secretary

                  #	Compliance shall be demonstrated through use of a Continuous Emissions Monitoring System (CEM) as outlined in Conditions #14.A and #20 below.  The Executive Secretary may require testing at any time.

 Notification

                  The Executive Secretary shall be notified at least 30 days prior to conducting any required emission testing.  A source test protocol shall be submitted to DAQ when the testing notification is submitted to the Executive Secretary.

                  The source test protocol shall be approved by the Executive Secretary prior to performing the test(s).  The source test protocol shall outline the proposed test methodologies, stack to be tested, and procedures to be used.  A pretest conference shall be held, if directed by the Executive Secretary.

 Sample Location

                  The emission point shall be designed to conform to the requirements of 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 1, or other methods as approved by the Administrator.  An Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) or Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) approved access shall be provided to the test location.

 Volumetric Flow Rate

                  40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 2 or EPA Test Method No. 19 "SO2 Removal & PM, SO2, NOx Rates from Electric Utility Steam Generators" or other testing methods approved by the Administrator.

 PM10

                  For stacks in which no liquid drops are present, the following methods shall be used: 40 CFR 51, Appendix M, Methods 201, 201a and 202, or other testing methods approved by the Administrator.  All particulate captured shall be considered PM10.  The back half condensibles shall be used for compliance demonstration as well as for inventory purposes.

                  For stacks in which liquid drops are present, methods to eliminate the liquid drops should be explored.  If no reasonable method to eliminate the drops exists, then the following methods shall be used:  40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 5, 5a, 5d, or 5e as appropriate, or other testing methods approved by the Administrator.  The back half condensibles shall also be tested using the method specified by the Administrator.  The portion of the front half of the catch considered PM10 shall be based on information in Appendix B of the fifth edition of the EPA document, AP-42, or other data acceptable to the Administrator.

 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

                  40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 7, 7A, 7B, 7C, 7D, 7E, or other testing methods approved by the Administrator.

 Carbon Monoxide (CO)

                  40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 10, or other testing methods approved by the Administrator.

 Calculations

                  To determine mass emission rates (lb/hr, etc.) the pollutant concentration as determined by the appropriate methods above shall be multiplied by the volumetric flow rate and any necessary conversion factors determined by the Executive Secretary, to give the results in the specified units of the emission limitation.

 Compliance with the 3-hour NOx and CO emission limitations specified in Condition #9 shall not be required during short-term excursions, limited to a cumulative total of 160 hours annually.  Short-term excursions are defined as 15-minute periods designated by the Owner/Operator that are the direct result of transient load conditions, not to exceed four consecutive 15-minute periods, when the 15-minute average NOx and CO concentrations exceed 2.0 ppmv and 3.0 ppmv, dry @ 15% O2, respectively.  Transient load conditions include the following:

            (1) Initiation/shutdown of combustion turbine inlet air-cooling
            (2) Rapid combustion turbine load changes
      (3) Initiation/shutdown of HRSG duct burners
            (4) Provision of Ancillary Services and Automatic Generation Control

            During periods of transient load conditions, the NOx concentration shall not exceed 25 ppmv and the CO concentration shall not exceed 50 ppmv, dry @ 15% O2.  All NOx and CO emissions during these events shall be included in all calculations of annual mass emissions as required by this permit.

 Steady state operation means all periods of combustion turbine operation, except for periods of startup and shutdown as defined below, and periods of transient load conditions as defined in condition 11.  Startup is defined as the period beginning with turbine initial firing until the unit meets the ppmvd emission limits in the first table of Condition #9 for steady state operation.  Shutdown is defined as the period beginning with the initiation of turbine shutdown sequence and ending with the cessation of firing of the gas turbine engine.  Startup and shutdown events shall not exceed 613.5 hours per turbine per calendar year and are counted toward the applicable annual emission limitations.

            The total startup and shutdown period shall not exceed 14-hours in any one calendar day, commencing at midnight.  Emissions during startup and shutdown periods must be counted toward the applicable annual emission limitations.

 Visible emissions from the following emission points shall not exceed the following values:

 All natural gas combustion exhaust stacks - 10% opacity
 All other points - 20% opacity

            Opacity observations of emissions from stationary sources shall be conducted according to 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, Method 9.

 The following limits shall not be exceeded:

            Combined emissions of PM10+ NOx + SO2 shall not be greater than 260.6 tons per calendar year (from the plant-gas turbines, the duct burners, fire pump, auxiliary boiler, cooling tower and emergency generator)

            Compliance with the above emission limitation for required offsets shall be determined as follows:

                  A.	NOx from the gas turbine and the duct burner shall be obtained from CEMS recorded data

                  B	PM10 from the gas turbine and the duct burner shall be obtained from the 	latest emission test record data

                  C.	SO2 from the gas turbine and the duct burner shall be from the latest emission test or if testing is not required by the other alternative method as approved by the Executive Secretary or Administrator.

            	D.	NOx, PM10 and SO2 for auxiliary boiler, emergency generator, cooling tower and fire pump shall be obtained from the U.S. EPA's compilation of air pollutants emission factors, AP-42.

            To determine compliance with the combined annual limit the owner/operator shall calculate average hourly rate (using CEMS recorded data as outlined in Condition #21, test results and AP-42 calculations) and sum them over calendar year.

 Emergency generators shall be used for electricity producing operation only during the periods when electric power from the public utilities is interrupted, and for regular maintenance and testing.  Records documenting generator usage shall be kept in a log and they shall show the date the generator was used, the duration in hours of the generator usage, and the reason for each generator usage.

Fuels

 The owner/operator shall use natural gas as fuel in the combustion turbines, duct burners and auxiliary boiler.

 The owner/operator shall use a combination of #2 fuel oil or diesel fuel in the emergency generators and fire pump.

            The sulfur content of any #2 fuel oil or diesel fuel burned shall not exceed 0.05 percent by weight.  Sulfur content shall be determined by ASTM Method D-4294-89, or approved equivalent.  Certification of fuels shall be either by the owner/operator's own testing or test reports from the fuel marketer.  For purposes of demonstrating compliance with this limitation, the owner/operator may obtain the above specifications by testing each purchase of fuel in accordance with the required methods; by inspection of the specifications provided by the vendor for each purchase of fuel; or by inspection of summary documentation of the fuel sulfur content from the vendor; provided that the above specifications are available from the vendor for each purchase if requested.

Federal Limitations and Requirements

 In addition to the requirements of this AO, all applicable provisions of 40 CFR 60, New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) Subpart A, 40 CFR 60.1 to 60.18; Subpart GG, 40 CFR 60.330 to 60.334 (Standards of Performance for Stationary Gas Turbines); Subpart Db, 40 CFR 60.40b to 60.49b (Standards of Performance for Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units); and Subpart Dc, 40 CFR 60.40c to 60.49c (Standards of Performance for Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units)  -  apply to this installation as follows:

            Subpart Db:	Heat Recovery Steam Generators (HRSGs)
            Subpart Dc:	Auxiliary Boiler
            Subpart GG:	Combustion Turbines

 In addition to the requirements of this AO, all applicable provisions of 40 CFR Part 72, 73, 75, 76, 77 and 78, Federal Regulations for the Acid Rain Program under Clean Air Act Title IV apply to this installation.

Monitoring - Continuous Emissions Monitoring

 The owner/operator shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous emissions monitoring system on each of the HRSG stacks.  The owner/operator shall record the output of the system, for measuring the NOx and CO emissions.  The monitoring system shall comply with all applicable sections of R307-170; 40 CFR 13; and 40 CFR 60, Appendix B.

            All continuous emissions monitoring devices as required in federal regulations and state rules shall be installed and operational prior to placing the affected source in operation.
            Except for system breakdown, repairs, calibration checks, and zero and span adjustments required under paragraph (d) 40 CFR 60.13, the owner/operator of an affected source shall continuously operate all required continuous monitoring systems and shall meet minimum frequency of operation requirements as outlined in 40 CFR 60.13 and Section R307-170.

Records & Miscellaneous

 At all times, including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, owners and operators shall, to the extent practicable, maintain and operate any equipment approved under this Approval Order including associated air pollution control equipment in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether acceptable operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to the Executive Secretary which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, opacity observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the source.  All maintenance performed on equipment authorized by this AO shall be recorded.

 The owner/operator shall comply with R307-150 Series.  Inventories, Testing and Monitoring.

The Executive Secretary shall be notified in writing if the company is sold or changes its name.

Under R307-150-1, the Executive Secretary may require a source to submit an emission inventory for any full or partial year on reasonable notice.

This AO in no way releases the owner or operator from any liability for compliance with all other applicable federal, state, and local regulations including R307.
A copy of the rules, regulations and/or attachments addressed in this AO may be obtained by contacting the Division of Air Quality.  The Utah Administrative Code R307 rules used by DAQ, the Notice of Intent (NOI) guide, and other air quality documents and forms may also be obtained on the Internet at the following web site:
     http://www.airquality.utah.gov/

The annual emissions estimations below are for the purpose of determining the applicability of Prevention of Significant Deterioration, non-attainment area, maintenance area, and Title V source requirements of the R307.

They are not to be used for determining compliance.

The Potential To Emit (PTE) emissions for this source are currently calculated at the following values:

                  Pollutant	Tons/yr

 PM10	95.8
 SO2	26.5
 NOx	138.3
 CO  	547.1
 VOC	72.8
 HAPs
			Formaldehyde	6.2

Offsets requirements of 260.6 x 1.2 = 312.72 tons, of which PM10 = 114.96, SO2 = 31.8, NOx = 165.96

Approved By:

Richard W. Sprott, Executive Secretary
Utah Air Quality Board


[Federal Register: June 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 37557]
[DOCID:fr30jn06-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-396-000]

Egan Hub Storage, LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas
Tariff

June 23, 2006.
    Take notice that on June 21, 2006, Egan Hub Storage, LLC (Egan Hub)
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised
Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on Appendix B to the filing, to
become effective July 22, 2006.
    Egan Hub states that the purpose of this filing is to make
miscellaneous, non-substantive changes to various sections of the Egan
Hub Tariff.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-10308 Filed 6-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P