65351 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2002 / Notices be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search, '' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. Did EPA Conditionally Approve the Application? A conditional registration may be granted under section 3( c)( 7)( C) of FIFRA for a new active ingredient where certain data are lacking, on condition that such data are received by the end of the conditional registration period and do not meet or exceed the risk criteria set forth in 40 CFR 154.7; that use of the pesticide during the conditional registration period will not cause unreasonable adverse effects; and that use of the pesticide is in the public interest. The Agency has considered the available data on the risks associated with the proposed use of Macleaya extract, and information on social, economic, and environmental benefits to be derived from such use. Specifically, the Agency has considered the nature and its pattern of use, application methods and rates, and level and extent of potential exposure. Based on these reviews, the Agency was able to make basic health and safety determinations which show that use of Macleaya extract during the period of conditional registration will not cause any unreasonable adverse effect on the environment, and that use of the pesticide is, in the public interest. Consistent with section 3( c)( 7)( C) of FIFRA, the Agency has determined that these conditional registrations are in the public interest. Use of the pesticides are of significance to the user community, and appropriate labeling, use directions, and other measures have been taken to ensure that use of the pesticides will not result in unreasonable adverse effects to man and the environment.

III. Conditionally Approved Registrations EPA issued a notice, published in the Federal Register of January 19, 2000 (65 FR 2948) (FRL– 6485– 1), which announced that Camas Technologies, Inc., P. O. Box 1357, Broomfield, CO 80038– 1357, had submitted an application to conditionally register the pesticide product, Qwel Fungicide (EPA File Symbol 69876– R), containing Macleaya extract at 1.5% an active ingredient not included in any previously registered product. The application was conditionally approved on September 19, 2002, as Qwel (CTI 13 19B) Liquid Concentrate, an end use product; for foliar application to ornamental crops in enclosed greenhouses for the control of powdery mildew and Alternaria and Septoria leaf spots (EPA Registration Number 69876– 1).

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pest.

Dated: October 6, 2002. Debra Edwards, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 02– 27128 Filed 10– 23– 02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560– 50– S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [OPP– 2002– 0267; FRL– 7276– 2]

Thymol and Eucalyptus Oil; Receipt of Application for Emergency Exemption, Solicitation of Public Comment AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA has received a specific exemption request from the Maine Department of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Resources to use the pesticide thymol and eucalyptus oil (CAS numbers 89– 83– 8 and 8000– 48– 4, respectively) to treat up to 13,000 hives of honey and beeswax to control Varroa mite. The Applicant proposes the use of the new chemical, eucalyptus oil which has not been registered by EPA and the Applicant proposes a first food use of thymol. EPA is soliciting public comment before making the decision whether or not to grant the exemption. DATES: Comments, identified by docket ID number OPP– 2002– 0267, must be received on or before November 8, 2002. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Madden, Registration Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460– 0001; telephone number: (703) 305– 6463; fax number: (703) 308– 5433; e mail address: Sec 18 Mailbox@ epamail. epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are a federal or state government agency involved in administration of environmental quality programs. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: Federal or state government entity, (NAICS 9241), e. g., Department of Agriculture, Environment, etc. This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The 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. To determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions in Unit II. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification (ID) number OPP– 2002– 0267. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is (703) 305– 5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select `` search, ''

VerDate 0ct< 09> 2002 16: 23 Oct 23, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24OCN1. SGM 24OCN1 65352 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2002 / Notices then key in the appropriate docket ID number. Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket. For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff.

C. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket ID number in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked `` late. '' EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Unit I. D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e mail to submit CBI or information protected by statute. 1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed in this unit, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once in the system, select `` search, '' and then key in docket ID number OPP– 2002– 0267. The system is an `` anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. ii. E mail. Comments may be sent by e mail to opp docket@ epa. gov, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP– 2002– 0267. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system is not an `` anonymous access'' system. If you send an e mail comment directly to the docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system automatically captures your e mail address. E mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e mail system are included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I. C. 2. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. 2. By mail. Send your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency (7502C), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460– 0001, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP– 2002– 0267. 3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver your comments to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP– 2002– 0267. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation as identified in Unit I. B. 1.

D. How Should I Submit CBI To the Agency?

Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e mail. You may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

VerDate 0ct< 09> 2002 16: 23 Oct 23, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24OCN1. SGM 24OCN1 65353 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2002 / Notices E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/ or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the notice. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this document. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

II. Background A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

Under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U. S. C. 136p), at the discretion of the Administrator, a federal or state agency may be exempted from any provision of FIFRA if the Administrator determines that emergency conditions exist which require the exemption. The Maine Department of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Resources has requested the Administrator to issue a specific exemption for the use of thymol and eucalyptus oil on honey and beeswax to control Varroa mite. Information in accordance with 40 CFR part 166 was submitted as part of this request. As part of this request, the Applicant asserts that Varroa mites were first detected in Maine in November of 1987. Since 1988, beekeepers have treated their colonies with fluvalinate to control Varroa. Varroa mite resistance to fluvalinate is widespread in Maine. In 1999, a section 18 emergency exemption was granted by EPA for the treatment of Varroa and the small hive beetle. During the fall of 2001, a Florida Maine migratory beekeeping operation was determined to have Varroa with resistance to coumaphos and fluvalinate. Maine produced 231,000 pounds of honey in 2000 valued at $173,000 wholesale. The honey bee and beekeeping industry is essential for crop pollination. Maine is the primary producer of blueberries in the world, an industry that contributes $75  100 million to the state's annual economy. Honey bees also pollinate the state's apple crop and other fruits and vegetables with an estimated value of over $30 million per year. The Applicant proposes to treat 13,000 hives in late summer or fall at least 5 months prior to harvesting the honey. A maximum of 26,000 tablets weighing 11 grams each will be used. This notice does not constitute a decision by EPA on the application itself. The regulations governing section 18 of FIFRA require publication of a notice of receipt of an application for a specific exemption proposing use of a new chemical (i. e., an active ingredient) which has not been registered by EPA, as well as a first food use of a chemical. The notice provides an opportunity for public comment on the application. The Agency, will review and consider all comments received during the comment period in determining whether to issue the specific exemption requested by the Maine Department of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Resources.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

Dated: October 6, 2002. Debra Edwards, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 02– 27129 Filed 10– 23– 02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560– 50– S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL– 7398– 3]

Proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement under CERCLA for the Midwest Portland Cement Superfund Site AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (`` USEPA'').

ACTION: Proposal of CERCLA prospective purchaser agreement for the Midwest Portland Cement Superfund Site.

SUMMARY: USEPA is proposing to execute a Prospective Purchaser Agreement (`` PPA'') under authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (`` CERCLA''), 42 U. S. C. 9601 et seq., as amended, and under the inherent authority of the Attorney General of the United States to compromise and settle claims of the United States, for the transfer of title to property at the Midwest Portland Cement Superfund Site, located in East Fultonham, Ohio, to a purchaser who will obtain title to the Site through the judicial sale process. The PPA is intended to resolve the liability under CERCLA of the purchaser for costs incurred by USEPA in conducting response actions at the Site. In return for a covenant not to sue and contribution protection from USEPA, subject to standard reservations of rights, the purchaser will pay $350,000 in reimbursement of USEPA's response costs. The Site was operated by the Midwest Portland Cement Company (`` MPC'') as a cement manufacturing and limestone mining facility until ceasing operations in March, 1993. USEPA's response action at the Site was completed on January 20, 1998. The Site is not on the National Priorities List. No further response activities by USEPA are anticipated at the Site at this time. The MPC estate is being liquidated under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (Case No. 97– 23098– JLC). MPC's real estate was the subject of a judicial sale that took place on June 18, 2002. DATES: Comments on this proposed PPA must be received by November 25, 2002. ADDRESSES: A copy of the proposed PPA is available for review at USEPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Please contact Kevin C. Chow at (312) 353– 6181, prior to visiting the Region 5 office. Comments on the proposed PPA should be addressed to Kevin C. Chow, Office of Regional Counsel (C– 14J), USEPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin C. Chow, Office of Regional Counsel, at (312) 353– 6181. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with CERCLA, notice is hereby given of a proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement concerning the Midwest Portland Cement Superfund Site, located at 6400 Maysville Pike, East Fultonham, Muskingum County, Ohio. The proposed PPA has been signed and approved by USEPA and the Department of Justice, subject to review by the public pursuant to this Notice. The purchaser— Belmont Leasing, Inc. (`` Belmont Leasing'')— participated in the judicial sale of the Site and successfully bid for title to the property. Belmont Leasing will be required to execute the signature page for the PPA at the closing of the sale. Under the proposed PPA, the Settling Respondent will pay $350,000 in reimbursement of USEPA's response costs, and will VerDate 0ct< 09> 2002 16: 23 Oct 23, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24OCN1. SGM 24OCN1


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 48 (Tuesday, March 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13690-13697]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04921]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80171; File No. SR-OCC-2017-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Concerning Enhancements to
OCC's Stock Loan Programs

March 8, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 28, 2017, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by OCC. 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

    This proposed rule change by OCC is designed to enhance the overall
resilience of OCC's Stock Loan/Hedge Program (``Hedge Program'') and
Market Loan Program (collectively, the ``Stock Loan Programs''). The
proposed rule change would, among other things: (1) Require Clearing
Members to have robust processes in place to reconcile open interest in
the Stock Loan Programs at least once per stock loan business day; (2)
provide further clarity and certainty regarding the formal record of
stock loan positions being guaranteed by OCC at any given time
(``golden copy'' rules); (3) further clarify that stock loan positions
at OCC are not terminated until the records of OCC reflect the
termination of such stock loan; (4) provide a specific timeframe in
which Clearing Members in the Stock Loan Programs must buy-in or sell-
out of stock loan positions in the event of another Hedge or Market
Loan Clearing Member suspension (as applicable); (5) provide OCC with
the authority to withdraw from a Clearing Member's account the value of
any difference between the price reported by a Clearing Member
instructed to execute a buy-in or sell-out of loaned stock as a result
of another Clearing Member suspension and the price that OCC determines
to be reasonable; and (6) allow OCC to close out the Matched-Book
Positions of suspended Hedge Clearing Members through the termination
by offset and ``re-matching'' of such positions without requiring the
transfer of securities against the payment of settlement prices as
currently required under OCC's rules.
    All terms with initial capitalization not defined herein have the
same meaning as set forth in OCC's By-Laws and Rules.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ OCC's By-Laws and Rules can be found on OCC's public Web
site: http://optionsclearing.com/about/publications/bylaws.jsp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    OCC proposes a number of amendments to its By-Laws and Rules
designed to enhance the overall resilience of its Stock Loan/Hedge
Program (``Hedge Program'') and Market Loan Program (collectively, the
``Stock Loan Programs''). Specifically, the proposed rule change would
improve risk management in the Stock Loan Programs by, among other
things: (1) Requiring Clearing Members to have robust processes in
place to reconcile open interest in the Stock Loan Programs at least
once per stock loan business day; (2) providing further clarity and
certainty regarding the formal record of stock loan positions being
guaranteed by OCC at any given time (``golden copy'' rules); (3)
further clarifying that stock loan positions at OCC are not terminated
until the records of OCC reflect the termination of such stock loan;
(4) providing a specific timeframe in which Clearing Members in the
Stock Loan Programs must buy-in or sell-out of stock loan positions in
the event of another Hedge or Market Loan Clearing Member suspension as
applicable); (5) providing OCC with the authority to withdraw from a
Clearing Member's account the value of any difference between the price
reported by a Clearing Member instructed to execute a buy-in or sell-
out of loaned stock as a result of another Clearing Member suspension
and the price that OCC determines to be reasonable; and (6) allowing
OCC to close out the Matched-Book Positions of suspended Hedge Clearing
Members through the termination by offset and re-matching of such
positions without requiring the transfer of securities against the
payment of settlement prices as currently required under OCC's rules.
    The proposed amendments to the By-Laws and Rules are discussed in
more detail below.

Background

    OCC currently operates two Stock Loan Programs: The Hedge Program
and the Market Loan Program. In the Hedge Program, OCC acts as the
principal counterparty for stock loans that are executed bilaterally
outside of OCC and sent to OCC for clearance and settlement. In the
case of a Hedge Loan, prospective Lending and Borrowing Clearing
Members identify each other (independent of OCC), agree to bilaterally
negotiated terms of the Hedge Loan, and then send the details of the
stock loan to the Depository with a certain ``reason code,'' \4\ which
designates the stock loan as a Hedge Loan for guaranty and clearance at
OCC. The Lending Clearing Member then instructs the Depository to
transfer a specified number of shares of Eligible Stock to the account
of the Borrowing Clearing Member, and the Borrowing Clearing Member
instructs the Depository to transfer the appropriate amount of cash
collateral to the account of the Lending Clearing Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Unique reason codes were created by the Depository for
Clearing Members to designate stock loan transactions intended to be
sent to OCC for novation and guarantee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Market Loan Program, stock loans are initiated through the
matching of bids and offers that are either agreed upon by the Market
Loan Clearing Members or matched anonymously through a Loan Market. In
order to initiate a Market Loan, the Loan Market sends a matched
transaction to OCC, which in turn sends two separate but linked
settlement instructions to the Depository to effect the movement of
Eligible Stock and cash collateral between the accounts of the Market

Loan Clearing Members through OCC's account at the Depository.
    Regardless of whether a transaction is initiated under the Hedge
Program or Market Loan Program, OCC novates the transaction and becomes
the lender to the Borrowing Clearing Member and the borrower to the
Lending Clearing Member after it accepts an end-of-day report from the
Depository showing completed Stock Loans.\5\ As the principal
counterparty to the Borrowing and Lending Clearing Members, OCC
guarantees the return of the full value of cash collateral to a
Borrowing Clearing Member and guarantees the return of the Loaned Stock
(or value of that Loaned Stock) to the Lending Clearing Member.\6\
After novation, as part of the guaranty, OCC makes Mark-to-Market
Payments for all cleared stock loans on a daily basis to collateralize
all loans to the negotiated levels.\7\ Settlements generally are
combined and netted against other OCC settlement obligations in a
Clearing Member's account, including trade premiums and margin
deficits. Clearing Member open positions in the Stock Loan Programs are
factored into the Clearing Member's overall Margin \8\ and Clearing
Fund contribution requirements.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See OCC Rules 2202(b) and 2202A(b).
    \6\ Under the Market Loan Program, OCC also provides a limited
guaranty of dividend and rebate payments.
    \7\ Mark-to-Market Payments are based on the value of the loaned
securities and made between Clearing Members using OCC's cash
settlement system. In the Hedge Program, the percentage of the value
of the loaned securities, either 100% or 102%, as well as the
preferred Mark-to-Market rounding, are dependent upon the terms of
the Master Securities Loan Agreement (``MSLA'') between the two
Hedge Clearing Member parties to the transaction. In the Market Loan
Program, all Market Loans are collateralized to 102%.
    \8\ See OCC Rules 601 and 2203.
    \9\ See OCC Rule 1001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stock Loan Position Records

    OCC's Rules currently provide that termination of a Hedge Loan is
not complete until either: (1) The Depository makes final entries on
its records reflecting that the stock loan position has been unwound
and OCC receives notice thereof; or (2) the counterparties to the
transaction certify to OCC that the stock loan is terminated and the
settlement price has been transferred between them.\10\ Under this
process, it is possible for a Hedge Clearing Member to close an open
Hedge Loan but fail to submit the necessary reason codes to the
Depository to effect the termination of the stock loan position at OCC,
resulting in conflicting records between OCC and its Clearing Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See OCC Rule 2209(a) which describes the requirements for
the termination of a stock loan transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Market Loans are typically terminated by a Market Loan Clearing
Member providing notice to the relevant Loan Market calling for the
recall or return of a specified quantity of the Loaned Stock. The Loan
Market then sends details of the matched return/recall transaction to
OCC, which validates the transaction and sends a pair of delivery
orders to the Depository in connection with the recall/return. However,
in certain circumstances where a Market Loan Clearing Member fails to
return the specified quantity of Loaned Stock or to pay the applicable
settlement price for a Loaned Stock, the counterparty Clearing Member
may choose to execute a buy-in or sell-out of the Loaned Stock on its
own.\11\ The Market Loan Clearing Member is then required to provide
notice to the Loan Market of the buy-in or sell-out after execution is
complete. This limited scenario could also give rise to the risk that a
Market Loan Clearing Member has terminated a stock loan transaction but
failed to provide the necessary report to the Loan Market for
notification to OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See OCC Rule 2209A(b)-(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When either of the above scenarios occur, the Clearing Member
remains obligated to effect the required settlements, including, for
example, making the associated Mark-to-Market Payments, until the stock
loan position is terminated at OCC. Moreover, in these scenarios, a
Clearing Member may continue to receive margin benefits on the closed
stock loan until the appropriate trade corrections are made at OCC.
Such scenarios could give rise to operational and/or credit risk if a
Clearing Member's expectations of its obligations for certain stock
loan positions are inconsistent with the Clearing Member's formal
obligations for such positions on the records of OCC (e.g.,
requirements to post margin or make mark-to-market settlements for
positions that have already been closed).

Default Management in the Stock Loan Programs

    Currently, in the event a Stock Loan Program Clearing Member is
suspended, the suspended Clearing Member's open stock loan positions
are closed by instructing the respective non-suspended Clearing Member
counterparties (within either the Hedge Program or Market Loan Program,
as applicable) to buy-in or sell-out the Eligible Stock.\12\ The
reported execution price of the buy-in or sell-out is used as the
settlement price to facilitate the final marking price between the non-
suspended Clearing Member and the liquidating settlement account of the
suspended Clearing Member. This process has significant benefits as it
distributes the liquidity demands across multiple counterparties and
aligns the liquidity demands necessary to facilitate an unwind with the
Clearing Member currently in possession of the Collateral. However,
this approach effectively utilizes each counterparty to the suspended
Clearing Member as independent ``liquidating agents,'' making the
process prone to greater execution risk due to the number of
counterparties effecting the buy-in/sell-out transactions, which is
further compounded by the manually-intensive nature of the process. In
the event a large Hedge or Market Loan Clearing Member is suspended,
the process could become more susceptible to errors given the numerous
manual steps and the quantity of positions that must be closed.
Moreover, any delay in the buy-in/sell-out process could result in
increased credit risk to OCC as the close out process for stock loans
could fail to align with OCC's margin and liquidation period
assumptions of a two-day close out process (which is applicable to all
products without differentiation). For example, OCC may be exposed to
credit risk if the price paid or received for the buy-in or sell-out of
the Eligible Stock varies from the price at which OCC last collected a
Mark-to-Market Payment from the defaulter and that price differential
exceeds the amount of margin on deposit for such positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See OCC Rules 2211 and 2211A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, and as described in more detail below, because OCC
maintains inventory in the Hedge Program on a bilateral basis (i.e.,
maintains the borrower and lender to a given transaction) if a
suspended Hedge Clearing Member maintains Matched-Book Positions,\13\
logistically OCC would be required to recall the loan and return the
borrowed shares to unwind the Matched-Book positions. This results in a
potential exposure to OCC,
not accounted for by its margin model,\14\ related to the potential
price dislocation

between the recall and return transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Matched-Book Positions are Hedge Loan positions in which a
single Hedge Clearing Member borrows Eligible Stock from a Lending
Clearing Member and lends an equal or lesser amount of the same
Eligible Stock to a Borrowing Clearing Member. Previously, OCC
adopted a proposed rule change to allow for the voluntary
termination by offset and re-matching of Matched-Book Positions,
outside of the suspension scenario, subject to the agreement of all
affected Hedge Clearing Members. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 34-77415 (March 22, 2016), 81 FR 17231 (March 28, 2016) (SR-OCC-
2016-006).
    \14\ With Matched-Book Positions, a member is simultaneously
borrowing and lending the same securities (and quantity), which are
marked to the same price. OCC's margin process recognizes this and
currently nets loans and borrows in the same security prior to
calculating exposure, resulting in no margin on a perfectly matched
positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Changes to the By-Laws and Rules

    OCC is proposing a number of rule changes to provide more clarity,
transparency, and certainty around the status of stock loan positions
being cleared and guaranteed at OCC. In addition, OCC is proposing
enhancements to its default management process for the Stock Loan
Programs to mitigate the risks associated with the buy-in/sell-out and
recall/return processes as described above. The proposed changes are
discussed in more detail below.
1. Trade Balancing
    A key attribute of managing risk in the Stock Loan Programs is
ensuring that OCC and its Clearing Members have identical records of
open and closed positions to ensure all parties are aware of their
obligations with respect to those positions. As described above, a
stock loan transaction may be terminated by a Hedge Clearing Member
(and, in more limited circumstances, a Market Loan Clearing Member)
without OCC being made aware of the termination if the correct reason
codes are not used in connection with stock loan activity at the
Depository.\15\ Such a discrepancy between the records of OCC and its
Clearing Members could give rise to operational and/or credit risk if a
Clearing Member's expectations of its obligations for certain stock
loan positions are inconsistent with the Clearing Member's formal
obligations for such positions on the records of OCC (see discussion of
the proposed ``golden copy'' rules below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to minimize the potential dislocation between the records
of OCC and its Clearing Members and mitigate the risks that may arise
from such out trades, OCC is proposing to amend Rules 2205 and 2205A to
require that Hedge and Market Loan Clearing Members, respectively, have
adequate policies and procedures in place to perform a reconciliation
of stock loan position balances between the records of the Clearing
Member and any report or reports provided by OCC at least once per
stock loan business day and resolve any discrepancies based on such
report(s) for a given stock loan business day by 9:30 a.m. Central Time
on the following stock loan business day. The proposed rule change
would therefore ensure that OCC and its Clearing Members have an
accurate and consistent understanding of each member's open stock loan
positions at OCC and the obligations associated therewith.
2. Golden Copy Rules
    OCC also proposes clarifying amendments to Articles XXI and XXIA of
its By-Laws to emphasize that the records of OCC are the official
record of open and closed stock loan transactions in the Stock Loan
Programs and that Clearing Members remain liable for all obligations
related to open stock loan positions as reflected in the records of
OCC. In particular, OCC proposes to amend Article XXI, Sections 3 and 4
(relating to the agreements of Borrowing and Lending Clearing Members
in the Hedge Program) and Article XXIA, Sections 3 and 4 (relating to
the agreements of Borrowing and Lending Clearing Members in the Market
Loan Program) to explicitly state that, in the event of a conflict
between the records of OCC and any records generated by Borrowing or
Lending Clearing Members regarding stock borrow or stock loan
positions, the records generated by OCC will prevail and the Borrowing
or Lending Clearing Member shall remain liable for all obligations
associated with such stock borrow or stock loan positions maintained on
the records of OCC. The proposed amendment would provide additional
transparency and certainty to Clearing Members regarding OCC's
treatment of its own records as the formal ``golden copy'' record of
stock loan positions at OCC.
3. Termination Rules
    OCC also proposes amendments to Rules 2209 and 2209A to provide
that the termination of Hedge Loans and Market Loans, respectively,
shall be deemed to be complete when the records of OCC reflect the
termination of such stock loans. The proposed rule change is intended
to clarify and reinforce that OCC's records of stock loan positions,
and in particular, the termination of stock loan positions, are the
formal record of cleared stock loan positions at OCC. OCC believes the
proposed rule change will provide additional clarity and transparency
around the obligations of OCC and its Clearing Members in the Stock
Loan Programs, particularly where discrepancies may arise between the
records of OCC and its Clearing Members concerning terminated stock
loans.
4. Buy-In and Sell-Out Timeframe in Suspension
    In order to mitigate the risks involved in the existing buy-in/
sell-out process, as described in detail above, and enhance the
resiliency of the Stock Loan Programs, OCC proposes to amend Rules 2211
and 2211A to require Lending Clearing Members or Borrowing Clearing
Members that are instructed to buy-in or sell-out in connection with a
Hedge or Market Loan Clearing Member suspension to execute such
transactions by the close of the stock loan business day after the
receipt of such instruction by OCC.\16\ If the instructed Clearing
Member fails to execute the buy-in or sell-out transaction within this
timeframe, OCC would terminate the Stock Loan and effect Settlement
based upon the Marking Price used at the close of business on the stock
loan business day after the original instruction was made by OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ In the situation of a buy-in, the Lending Clearing Member
would be required to use the cash collateral to buy-in the
securities. OCC would not be responsible for funding the buy-in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, OCC proposes a conforming change to Rules 2211 and
2211A to eliminate the requirement that Hedge or Market Loan Clearing
Members executing a buy-in or sell-out must be prepared to defend the
reasonableness of the timing of such transaction as all instructed
Clearing Members would be required to execute the buy-in/sell-out
within the newly specified two business day timeframe or be subject to
automatic termination and settlement under the proposed rule change.
OCC also proposes conforming changes to delete language stating that
OCC, in its discretion and upon notice to the Lending Clearing Member
or the independent broker, may fix a cash settlement value for the
quantity of the Loaned Stock not returned to the Lending Clearing
Member as this rule text would no longer be necessary under the
proposed two-day buy-in/sell-out rules described above.
    OCC believes the proposed changes will help to mitigate potential
credit risks that may be associated with a delay in a Hedge or Market
Loan Clearing Member effecting buy-in or sell-out transactions as it
would ensure that positions are closed out--either through the buy-in/
sell-out of stock loans by the instructed Hedge or Market Loan Clearing
Members or by the automatic termination and settlement of stock loans
by OCC--in a time period consistent with OCC's margin assumptions and
thereby reducing the risk that the price paid or received for

the buy-in or sell-out of the Eligible Stock varies greatly from the
price at which OCC last collected a Mark-to-Market Payment from the
defaulter.
5. Authority To Enforce Reasonable Prices in the Buy-in/Sell-Out
Process
    Under existing Rules 2211 and 2211A, after a buy-in or sell-out
occurs in a Clearing Member suspension scenario, OCC validates the
prices reported by the Clearing Members to determine whether or not the
price utilized to buy-in or sell-out is reasonable given the market
prices during the two stock loan business day window. Clearing Members
executing the buy-in or sell-out must be prepared to defend the
reasonableness of the price, transactional costs, or cash settlement
value of the transaction. OCC is proposing to amend Rules 2211 and
2211A to provide OCC with the authority to withdraw from the Clearing
Member's account the value of any difference between the price reported
by the Clearing Member executing the buy-in or sell-out, as applicable,
and the price that OCC, in its sole discretion, determines to be
reasonable. In addition, OCC proposes to amend Rules 2211 and 2211A to
provide further clarity that a Clearing Member may defend the
reasonableness of a reported price or cash settlement value of a buy-in
or sell-out by demonstrating that it fell within the trading range of
the Eligible Stock on that day. OCC believes this proposed change will
further incentivize Clearing Members to execute a buy-in or sell-out at
a reasonable price in accordance with the newly implemented two-day
close out timeframe.
6. Hedge Program Re-Matching In Suspension
    A significant portion of the activity in OCC's Hedge Program
relates to what is often referred to as matched-book activity where a
Hedge Clearing Member maintains in an account a stock loan position for
a specified number of shares of an Eligible Stock reflecting a stock
lending transaction with one Hedge Clearing Member (the Borrowing
Clearing Member) and also maintains in that same account a stock borrow
position for the same number, or lesser number, of shares of the same
Eligible Stock with another Hedge Clearing Member (the Lending Clearing
Member) (such positions being Matched-Book Positions). From a daily
mark-to-market settlement perspective, there are typically no
obligations related to Matched-Book Positions because the member is
simultaneously borrowing and lending the same securities (and
quantity), which are marked to the same price. OCC's margin process
recognizes this and currently nets loans and borrows in the same
security prior to calculating exposure, resulting in no margin on a
perfectly matched position.
    As discussed above, in the event of a Hedge Clearing Member
suspension, OCC terminates the suspended Hedge Clearing Member's stock
loans in accordance with the buy-in and sell-out process described in
Rule 2211.\17\ Due to the nature of Matched-Book Positions, OCC would
be required to both recall the loan and return the borrowed shares to
completely unwind the Matched-Book Positions. In addition to potential
delays in the buy-in/sell-out process, this process also exposes OCC to
potential price dislocation between the buy-in and sell-out
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Rule 2211 also allows OCC, at its discretion, to instruct
an independent broker, to buy in or sell out, as applicable, the
Loaned Stock. In the case where the Lending Clearing Member or the
independent broker fails to execute a buy-in or if, for any reason,
effecting a buy-in is not permitted, OCC, in its discretion and upon
notice to the Lending Clearing Member or the independent broker, may
fix a cash settlement value for the quantity of the Loaned Stock not
returned to the Lending Clearing Member. See OCC Rule 2211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, to the extent Borrowing and Lending Clearing Member
counterparties to the suspended Hedge Clearing Member's Matched-Book
Positions wish to maintain equivalent stock loan positions at OCC,
those Borrowing and Lending Clearing Members would be required to
initiate new stock loans to replace the closed out positions.
Throughout this process of terminating and reestablishing stock loan
positions, a number of operational steps are required to facilitate and
settle those transactions, which introduce the potential for market
disruption. The successful initiation of new replacement stock loans
for the Borrowing or Lending Clearing Members could be subject to
disruption by operational or execution risks with the result that one
``leg'' of the initiating transaction would fail, resulting in a
temporary imbalance of the previously ``matched-book'' position.
Moreover, the Borrowing and Lending Clearing Members lose the
protections afforded by OCC's guaranty of their stock loan positions
until the newly initiated stock loan transactions have been accepted,
novated, and guaranteed by OCC.
    OCC is proposing new Rule 2212 to allow OCC to perform an orderly
close out of a suspended Hedge Clearing Member's Matched-Book Positions
through the termination by offset and re-matching \18\ of such
positions, without requiring the transfer of securities against the
payment of settlement prices as currently required under OCC Rule 2211.
OCC believes the proposed rule change will strengthen the risk
management processes in place at OCC by mitigating the risks involved
in the buy-in/sell-out of Matched-Book Positions as well as provide the
overall marketplace served by the Hedge Program with more
stability.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ In order to effect the re-matching of stock loan and borrow
positions at OCC, OCC would simultaneously close out the existing
positions of the Matched-Book Lending and Borrowing Clearing Members
and create new stock loan and borrow positions between the re-
matched members and OCC. As a result, the re-matched positions would
maintain the benefits of OCC's guaranty throughout the re-matching
process and would not require the re-matched Hedge Clearing Members
to issue instructions to the Depository to terminate or initiate
Stock Loans and transfer securities against the payment of
Collateral.
    \19\ As further described in Item 5, OCC discussed the re-
matching in suspension proposal with its Clearing Members at
numerous member outreach forums and meetings. While members were
generally supportive of the proposal, some members did raise
concerns over the possibility of being re-matched with a
counterparty with which the Clearing Member does not have an
existing securities lending relationship. Specifically, Clearing
Members noted that the proposal could result in a Hedge Clearing
Member being re-matched with a counterparty with which it does not
have an existing MSLA, which dictates all of the terms of the stock
loan not governed by OCC's By-Laws and Rules (e.g., Mark-to-Market
percentage and rounding preferences), and could require operational
changes in order to make deliveries to their new counterparty in the
event of a termination or buy-in to close out the loan. OCC would
mitigate these concerns by prioritizing the re-matching of Hedge
Clearing Members that maintain between them current executed MSLAs,
as discussed in more detail below. Moreover, even in light of these
concerns, Clearing Members generally agreed that it is preferable to
maintain a stock loan with another counterparty rather than
attempting to close out stock loan positions in the event of a Hedge
Clearing Member suspension as in many cases (and particularly in
stressed market conditions) it could be difficult for the borrower
to return the securities to the lender since the securities would
likely be being used for other purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 2212(a) would provide that, in the event that a
suspended Hedge Clearing Member has Matched-Book Positions within the
Hedge Program, OCC will, upon notice to affected Hedge Clearing
Members, close out the suspended Hedge Clearing Member's Matched-Book
Positions to the greatest extent possible by (i) the termination by
offset of stock loan and stock borrow positions that are Matched-Book
Positions in the suspended Hedge Clearing Member's account(s) and (ii)
OCC's re-matching of stock borrow positions for the same number of
shares in the same Eligible Stock maintained in a designated account of
a Matched-Book Borrowing Clearing Member against a stock lending
position for the same number of shares in the same Eligible Stock
maintained in

a designated account of a Matched-Book Lending Clearing Member.
    Under proposed Rule 2212(b), the Matched-Book Borrowing Clearing
Member and Matched-Book Lending Clearing Member would not be required
to issue instructions to the Depository in accordance with Rules
2202(a) and 2208(a) to terminate the relevant stock loan and stock
borrow positions or to initiate new stock loan transactions to
reestablish such positions, as the affected positions would be re-
matched without requiring the transfer of securities against the
payment of settlement prices.
    Proposed Rule 2212(c) provides that OCC shall make reasonable
efforts to re-match Matched-Book Borrowing Clearing Members with
Matched-Book Lending Clearing Members that maintain between them
current executed Master Securities Lending Agreements (``MSLAs''),\20\
based on information provided by Hedge Clearing Members to the
Corporation on an ongoing basis. In connection with the proposed rule
change, OCC will add functionality to its ENCORE clearing system to
allow Hedge Clearing Members to add and remove records of MSLA
agreements between themselves and other Hedge Clearing Members. OCC
would be entitled to rely on, and would have no responsibility to
verify, the MSLA records provided by Hedge Clearing Members and on
record as of the time of re-matching.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Commission Staff received OCC's consent to insert ``Master
Securities Lending Agreement'' before the acronym ``MSLA'' pursuant
to a telephone conversation on March 6, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under proposed Rule 2212(d), the termination by offset and re-
matching of positions would be done using a matching algorithm in which
the Matched-Book Positions of the suspended Hedge Clearing Member are
first terminated by offset and then affected Matched-Book Borrowing
Clearing Members and Matched-Book Lending Clearing Members are re-
matched in order of priority based first upon whether the re-matched
Clearing Members have an existing MSLA between them. Specifically,
under the re-matching algorithm, OCC would first select the largest
stock loan or stock borrow position in a given Eligible Stock from the
suspended Hedge Clearing Member's Matched-Book Positions. The selected
positions would then be re-matched with the largest available stock
borrow or stock loan positions, as applicable, for the selected
Eligible Stock for which a MSLA exists between a Matched-Book Borrowing
Clearing Member and a Matched-Book Lending Clearing Member. OCC would
repeat this process until all potential re-matching between Matched-
Book Borrowing Clearing Members and Matched-Book Lending Clearing
Members with MSLAs is completed. After re-matching among lenders and
borrowers with existing MSLAs, the re-matching process would then be
repeated for all remaining Matched-Book Positions for which MSLAs do
not exist between the lenders and borrowers. During this stage,
positions would be selected for re-matching in order of priority based
on largest outstanding position size.
    Under proposed Rule 2212(e), in the event Borrowing and Lending
Clearing Members are re-matched through this process, the re-matched
positions would be governed by the pre-defined terms and instructions
established by the Lending Clearing Member pursuant to Rule 2201. In
this case, the re-matched Hedge Clearing Members may choose to execute
an MSLA or close-out the re-matched positions in accordance with
existing Rule 2208. Any change in Collateral requirements arising from
a change in the terms of stock loan or stock borrow positions between a
Lending Clearing Member and Borrowing Clearing Member with re-matched
positions would be included in the calculation of the Mark-to-Market
Payment obligations as provided in Rule 2204 on the stock loan business
day following the completion of the positions adjustments as set forth
in proposed Rule 2212(f).
    Under proposed Rule 2212(f), the termination by offset and re-
matching of positions would be complete upon OCC completing all
position adjustments in the accounts of the suspended Hedge Clearing
Member and the Borrowing Clearing Members and Lending Clearing Members
with re-matched positions and the applicable systems reports are
produced and provided to the Clearing Members reflecting the
transaction.
    Under proposed Rules 2212(g)-(i), from and after the time OCC has
completed the position adjustments as set forth in OCC Rule 2212(f),
the suspended Hedge Clearing Member would have no further obligations
under the By-Laws and Rules with respect to such positions; however, a
Borrowing Clearing Member with re-matched stock borrow positions would
remain obligated as a Borrowing Clearing Member and a Lending Clearing
Member with re-matched stock loan positions would remain obligated as a
Lending Clearing Member as specified in the By-Laws and Rules
applicable to the Hedge Program. Moreover, upon notification that OCC
has completed the termination by offset and re-matching of stock loan
and borrow positions, the suspended Hedge Clearing Member and Borrowing
Clearing Members and Lending Clearing Members with re-matched positions
would be required to promptly make any necessary bookkeeping entries at
the Depository necessitated by the re-matching to ensure the accuracy
and efficacy of those stock loan terms not governed by OCC's By-Laws
and Rules.
    Finally, under proposed Rule 2212(j), Borrowing Clearing Members
and Lending Clearing Members that have been re-matched would be
required to work in good faith to either (i) reestablish any terms,
representations, warranties and covenants not governed by the By-Laws
and Rules (e.g., establish an MSLA) or (ii) terminate the re-matched
stock loan or borrow positions in the ordinary course pursuant to Rule
2208, as soon as reasonably practicable.
    OCC also proposes a number of conforming changes to Article XXI,
Sections 2-4 of the By-Laws and to Rule 2210 to reflect the proposed
adoption of new Rule 2212. In particular, OCC would amend Rule 2210(b),
which concerns the treatment of open stock loan and borrow positions
resulting from Stock Loans of a suspended Hedge Clearing Member, to
provide that such positions may now also be closed out using the re-
match in suspension authority under proposed Rule 2212. Under the
default management rules and procedures for stock loan positions in the
Hedge Program, OCC would first attempt to close out any Matched-Book
Positions of the suspended Hedge Clearing Member to the greatest extent
possible using the re-match in suspension authority under proposed Rule
2212. After executing the re-matching process, OCC would generally look
to close out the remaining stock loan positions of the suspended
Clearing Member, to the extent that the defaulting member was the
borrower of loans that were not matched, by using any stock pledged to
OCC as margin collateral that is the same as the Eligible Stock in
question to deliver to its counterparty lenders via the Depository.
Finally, all remaining open stock loan positions would be closed out
pursuant to the buy-in/sell-out process under Rule 2211, and in
accordance with the proposed enhancements to that process as described
herein.

2. Statutory Basis

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act,\21\ requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed (i)

to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions; (ii) to assure the safeguarding of securities
and funds which are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or
for which it is responsible; (iii) in general, to protect investors and
the public interest; and (iv) not to permit unfair discrimination among
participants in the use of the clearing agency. Rule 17Ad-22(d)(11)
\22\ further requires registered clearing agencies to establish,
implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to make key aspects of the clearing agency's
default procedures publicly available and establish default procedures
that ensure that the clearing agency can take timely action to contain
losses and liquidity pressures and to continue meeting its obligations
in the event of a participant default.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, recently adopted Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13) \23\ requires
covered clearing agencies to establish, implement, maintain and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to, in part, ensure
the covered clearing agency has the authority and operational capacity
to take timely action to contain losses and liquidity demands and
continue to meet its obligations in the event of a Clearing Member
default. Moreover, recently adopted Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23) \24\ requires
covered clearing agencies to maintain written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to, among other things, provide for publicly
disclosing all relevant rules and material procedures, including key
aspects of its default rules and procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(13). See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 78961 (September 28, 2016), 81 FR 70786 (October 13,
2016) (S7-03-14) (``Standards for Covered Clearing Agencies''). The
Standards for Covered Clearing Agencies became effective on December
12, 2016. OCC is a ``covered clearing agency'' as defined in Rule
17Ad-22(a)(5) and therefore OCC must comply with new section (e) of
Rule 17Ad-22 by April 11, 2017.
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \25\ and Rules 17Ad 22(d)(11), (e)(13),
and (e)(23) \26\ thereunder for the reasons set forth below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11), (e)(13), and (e)(23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trade Balancing, Golden Copy, and Termination Rules
    As described in detail above, OCC is proposing a number of
improvements in the area of trade balancing and recordkeeping of stock
loan positions at OCC. Specifically, the proposed rule change would
require Clearing Members in the Stock Loan Programs to have adequate
policies and procedures in place to perform reconciliations of open and
closed stock loan and stock borrow positions to OCC's records at least
once each stock loan business day and resolve any discrepancies based
on such report(s) for a given stock loan business day by 9:30 a.m.
Central Time on the following stock loan business day to minimize the
risk inaccurate records may present. OCC is also proposing a number of
clarifying amendments to its By-Laws and Rules to emphasize that the
records of OCC are the official record of open and closed stock loan
transactions in the Stock Loan Programs, including for terminations of
stock loan positions, and that Clearing Members remain liable for all
obligations related to open stock loan positions as reflected in the
records of OCC.
    The proposed rule change is designed to provide more certainty
regarding the formal record of the open stock loan positions guaranteed
by OCC and provide additional clarity and transparency around the
obligations of OCC and its Clearing Members in the Stock Loan Programs,
particularly where differences may arise between the records of OCC and
its Clearing Members. OCC believes the proposed rule change would
therefore reduce the likelihood of credit or operational risks arising
due to discrepancies between the records of OCC and its Clearing
Members. As a result, OCC believes the proposed rule change is designed
to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions and to assure the safeguarding of securities
and funds in the custody or control of OCC or for which it is
responsible in accordance with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timeframe for Buy-In and Sell-Out in Suspension
    OCC Rules 2211 and 2211A describe the buy-in and sell-out process
in the event of a Hedge Clearing Member and Market Loan Clearing Member
suspension, respectively, but the rules do not currently require that
such actions be taken within a specified period of time. As described
in detail above, OCC's margin and liquidation period assumptions
contemplate a two-day close out process, which is applicable to all
products without differentiation. Any delay in the buy-in/sell-out
process could result in increased credit risk to OCC as the close out
process for stock loans could fail to align with such margin and
liquidation period assumptions. As a result, OCC may be exposed to
credit risk if the price paid or received for the buy-in or sell-out of
the Eligible Stock varies from the price at which OCC last collected a
Mark-to-Market Payment from the defaulter and that price differential
exceeds the amount of margin on deposit for such positions.
    OCC proposes to amend Rules 2211 and 2211A to require Lending
Clearing Members or Borrowing Clearing Members that are instructed to
buy-in or sell-out in connection with a Hedge or Market Loan Clearing
Member suspension to execute such transactions by the close of the
stock loan business day after the receipt of such instruction by
OCC.\28\ If the instructed Clearing Member fails to execute the buy-in
or sell-out transaction within this timeframe, OCC would terminate the
Stock Loan and effect Settlement based upon the Marking Price used at
the close of business on the stock loan business day after the original
instruction was made by OCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ In the situation of a buy-in, the Lending Clearing Member
would be required to use the cash collateral to buy-in the
securities. OCC would not be responsible for funding the buy-in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC believes the proposed rule change will help to mitigate the
potential credit risk that may be associated with a delay in a Hedge or
Market Loan Clearing Member effecting buy-in or sell-out transactions
by ensuring that positions are closed out--either through the buy-in/
sell-out of stock loans by the Hedge Clearing Members or by the
automatic termination and settlement of stock loans by OCC--in a time
period consistent with OCC's margin assumptions. Accordingly, OCC
believes the proposed rule change is designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, to assure
the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or
control of OCC or for which it is responsible, and in general, to
protect investors and the public interest in accordance with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\29\ Furthermore, the proposed rule change
would make key aspects of OCC's default procedures for the Stock Loan
Programs publicly available (particularly with respect to the buy-in/
sell-out process) and would establish default procedures for the Stock
Loan Programs that ensure that OCC can take timely action to contain
losses and liquidity pressures and continue meeting its obligations in
the event of a

participant default in accordance with Rules 17Ad-22(d)(11), (e)(13),
and (e)(23).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \30\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11), (e)(13), and (e)(23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority To Enforce Reasonable Prices in Buy-In/Sell-Out Process
    The proposed rule change would also provide OCC with the authority
to withdraw from a Clearing Member's account the value of any
difference between the price reported by the Clearing Member for a buy-
in or sell-out under Rule 2211 and Rule 2211A, as applicable, and the
price that OCC, in its sole discretion, determines to be reasonable (if
OCC determines that the Clearing Member's reported price was
unreasonable based on whether the reported price fell within the
trading range of the Eligible Stock on that day). The proposed rule
change is designed to incentivize Clearing Members to execute a buy-in
or sell-out at a reasonable price in accordance with the newly
implemented two-day close out timeframe, and would allow OCC to
withdraw the difference for any buy-in or sell-out reported outside of
the trading range of the Eligible Stock, thereby helping to ensure that
the buy-in/sell-out is executed at a price that falls within OCC's
margin and liquidation assumptions. As a result, OCC believes the
proposed rule change is designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or
control of OCC or for which it is responsible, in accordance with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\31\ Moreover, OCC believes the
proposed change would make key aspects of OCC's default procedures for
the Stock Loan Program publicly available (particularly with respect to
the buy-in/sell-out process) and would establish default procedures for
the Stock Loan Programs that ensure that OCC can take timely action to
contain losses and liquidity pressures and continue meeting its
obligations in the event of a participant default in accordance with
Rules 17Ad-22(d)(11), (e)(13), and (e)(23).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \32\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11), (e)(13), and (e)(23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re-Matching In Suspension
    As noted above, a significant portion of the activity in OCC's
Hedge Program relates to matched-book activity. Under OCC's existing
rules, OCC would terminate a suspended Hedge Clearing Member's Matched-
Book Positions in accordance with the buy-in and sell-out process
contained in Rule 2211. Logistically, this requires OCC to both recall
the loan and return the borrowed shares to completely unwind the
Matched-Book positions, which exposes OCC to potential price
dislocation between the buy-in and sell-out transactions. Moreover, as
noted above, the buy-in/sell-out process effectively utilizes each
counterparty to the suspended Hedge Clearing Member's Matched-Book
Positions as independent ``liquidating agents,'' making the process
prone to greater operational and execution risk due to the number of
counterparties effecting the buy-in/sell-out transactions, and thereby
posing risks to the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions and the safeguarding of securities and funds
associated therewith. In addition, to the extent Borrowing and Lending
Clearing Member counterparties to the Matched-Book Positions wish to
maintain equivalent stock loan positions at OCC, those Clearing Members
would be required to initiate new stock loans to replace the closed out
positions and would lose the protections afforded by OCC's guaranty of
their stock loan positions until the newly initiated stock loan
positions have been accepted, novated, and guaranteed by OCC.
    Proposed Rule 2212 would allow OCC to perform an orderly close out
of a suspended Hedge Clearing Member's Matched-Book Positions through
the termination by offset and re-matching of such positions without
requiring the transfer of securities against the payment of settlement
prices as currently required under OCC Rule 2211. As a result, the
proposed rule change would minimize the potential for operational and
execution risks and eliminate any risk resulting from potential price
dislocation between recall and return transactions. OCC believes the
proposed rule change will strengthen the risk management processes in
place at OCC by mitigating the risks involved in the buy-in/sell-out of
Matched-Book Positions as well as provide the overall marketplace with
more stability with respect to the Hedge Program. OCC therefore
believes the proposed rule change is designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, the
safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody or control of OCC
or for which it is responsible and, in general, to protect investors
and the public interest in accordance with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, OCC would use a matching algorithm to re-match stock
loan and stock borrow positions in order of priority based on the
largest available stock borrow or stock loan positions, as applicable,
for the selected Eligible Stock for which a MSLA exists between the
Borrowing and Lending Clearing Members. In the event Hedge Clearing
Members are re-matched that do not have existing securities lending
relationships, those members may choose to either work in good faith to
reestablish any terms, representations, warranties and covenants not
governed by the By-Laws and Rules (e.g., MSLA) or to terminate the re-
matched stock loan or borrow positions in the ordinary course pursuant
to Rule 2208, as soon as reasonably practicable. The proposed rule
change therefore provides for an objective process for re-matching
stock loan and borrow positions and ensures that members with existing
securities lending relationships are re-matched to the greatest extent
possible and would still allow for Hedge Clearing Members that are re-
matched but that do not have existing securities lending relationships
to terminate such positions in the ordinary course pursuant to Rule
2208. As a result, OCC believes that the proposed rule change is
designed not to permit unfair discrimination among participants in the
use of the clearing agency in accordance with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of
the Act.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, OCC believes the proposed rule change would make key
aspects of OCC's default procedures for the Hedge Program publicly
available (particularly with respect to the close out of Matched-Book
Positions) and would establish default procedures for the Hedge Program
that ensure that OCC can take timely action to contain losses and
liquidity pressures and continue meeting its obligations in the event
of a participant default in accordance with Rules 17Ad-22(d)(11),
(e)(13), and (e)(23).\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11), (e)(13), and (e)(23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act \36\ requires that the rules of a
clearing agency not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. OCC does not
believe that the proposed rule change would have any impact or impose
any burden on competition. The proposed rules are generally designed
to: (1)

Require Clearing Members to have robust processes in place to reconcile
open interest in the Stock Loan Programs at least once per stock loan
business day; (2) further clarify that stock loan positions at OCC are
not terminated until the records of OCC reflect the termination of such
stock loan; (3) provide further clarity and certainty around the formal
records for stock loan positions being guaranteed by OCC at any given
time; (4) provide a specific timeframe in which Clearing Members in the
Stock Loan Programs must buy-in or sell-out of stock loan positions in
the event of another Hedge or Market Loan Clearing Member suspension,
as applicable; (5) provide OCC with the authority to withdraw from a
Clearing Member's account the value of any difference between the price
reported by a Clearing Member instructed to execute a buy-in or sell-
out of loaned stock as a result of another Clearing Member suspension,
and the price that OCC determines to be reasonable; and (6) allow OCC
to close out the Matched-Book Positions of suspended Hedge Clearing
Members through the termination by offset and re-matching of such
positions without requiring the transfer of securities against the
payment of settlement prices as currently required under OCC's rules.
The proposed rules would be equally applicable to all Clearing Members
in OCC's Stock Loan Programs and are intended to strengthen the risk
management processes in place at OCC and provide the overall
marketplace with more stability with respect to the Hedge Program in
the event of a Hedge Clearing Member suspension. Accordingly, OCC does
not believe that the proposed rule change would have any impact or
impose a burden on competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the proposed rule change and none have been received. OCC
has, however, discussed the re-matching in suspension proposal with its
Clearing Members at numerous member outreach forums and meetings. While
members were generally supportive of the proposal, some members did
raise concerns over the possibility of being re-matched with a
counterparty with which the Clearing Member does not have an existing
securities lending relationship. For example, some Clearing Members
noted that they could be re-matched with counterparties with which they
do not have an existing MSLA, which dictates all of the terms of the
stock loan not governed by OCC's By-Laws and Rules (e.g., Mark-to-
Market percentage and rounding preferences). In addition, re-matched
counterparties that do not have an existing securities lending
relationship would need to make operational changes in order to make
deliveries to their new counterparty in the event of a termination or
buy-in to close out the loan.
    OCC carefully considered this member feedback in the development of
its proposal, and in order to mitigate these concerns, the proposed re-
matching in suspension rules would require OCC to make reasonable
efforts to re-match Hedge Clearing Members that maintain between them
current executed MSLAs. Specifically, under the proposed rule change,
OCC would use a matching algorithm to re-match stock loan and stock
borrow positions in order of priority based on the largest available
stock borrow or stock loan positions, as applicable, for the selected
Eligible Stock for which a MSLA exists between the Borrowing and
Lending Clearing Members to ensure that members with existing
securities lending relationships are re-matched to the greatest extent
possible. Even in light of these concerns, however, Clearing Members
generally agreed that it is preferable to maintain a stock loan with
another counterparty rather than attempting to close out stock loan
positions in the event of a Hedge Clearing Member suspension as in many
cases (and particularly in stressed market conditions) it could be
difficult for the borrower to return the securities to the lender since
the securities would likely be being used for other purposes.

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 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-OCC-2017-004 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2017-004. 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 filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's
Web site at http://www.theocc.com/components/docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/sr_occ_17_004.pdf.
    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-OCC-2017-004 and
should be submitted on or before April 4, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated Authority.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-04921 Filed 3-13-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 86 (Friday, May 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26102-26103]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10511]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Termination of Environmental Impact Statement for the
Friedman Memorial Replacement Airport, Hailey, ID

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
decision to terminate the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the
Friedman Memorial Replacement Airport.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Stelling, by mail at Federal
Aviation Administration, Airports Division, Attn: Dave Stelling, Helena
Airports District Office, FAA Building Suite 2, 2725 Skyway Drive,
Helena, MT 59602-1213, email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by telephone
(406) 449-5271.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 1, 2007, the FAA issued a Notice
of Intent in the Federal Register [72 FR 61945] to prepare an EIS for a
replacement airport for Friedman Memorial Airport, Hailey, ID. The FAA
proceeded with the EIS process in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. On August 23, 2011, FAA
suspended the EIS process due to issues related to wildlife impacts and
increased development costs associated with the identified potential
sites for the proposed replacement airport. For these same reasons, FAA
is announcing its decision today to terminate the EIS. The FAA will
continue working with the Friedman Memorial Airport Authority to
identify and evaluate alternative means of addressing the issues
associated with the existing Friedman Memorial Airport.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 26, 2013.
Carolyn T. Read,
Acting Airports Division Manager--Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-600.
[FR Doc. 2013-10511 Filed 5-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.1

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	Center for Native Ecosystems, et al., Petition to List the Western United States Population of Northern Leopard Frog as Threatened (2006). A portion of this document is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder.

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation

	Authors

	Author Date  	06/15/2006

Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	200

Start/End Page  	1/200

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006

Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.10

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	Flager, R.B., Recognition of Air Pollution Injury to Vegetation: A Pictorial Atlas, Second Edition, 1998. 3-1 to 3-42. This document is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder.

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation  	1998. 3-1 to 3-42

Authors

	Author Date

	Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	18

Start/End Page  	1/18

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006

Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.11

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	McClenahen, J.R., "Community Changes in a Deciduous Forest Exposed to Air Pollution." Canadian Journal of Forestry Research 8 (1978): 432-438. This document is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder.

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation  	Volume 8 (1978): 432-438.

Authors

	Author Date

	Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	7

Start/End Page  	1/7

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006

Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.12

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	Ashenden, T.W. and T.A. Mansfield, "Extreme Pollution Sensitivity of Grasses when SO2 and NO2 are Present in the Atmosphere Together." Nature 273 (1978): 142-143. This document is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder.

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation  	Nature, Volume 273 (1978): 142-143

Authors

	Author Date  	05/11/1978

Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	3

Start/End Page  	1/3

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006

Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.13

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	Jacobson, J.S. and R.E. Showman. "Field Surveys of Vegetation during a Period of Rising Electric Power Generation in the Ohio River Valley." Air Pollution Control Association Note-Book 34 (1984): 48-51. This document is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder.

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation  	Volume 34 (1984): 48-51

Authors

	Author Date

	Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	4

Start/End Page  	1/4

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006

Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.20

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	Chestnut, L.G. and D.M. Mills, "A Fresh Look at the Benefits and Costs of the US Acid Rain Program" Journal of Environmental Management 77 (2005). This document is copyrighted and cannot be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder.

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation  	Volume 77 (2005)

Authors

	Author Date

	Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	1

Start/End Page  	1/1

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006

Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.8

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	Nriagu, J.O., "Sulfur in the Environment." John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Toronto, 1978. This document is copyright and may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation  	Toronto, 1978

Authors

	Author Date

	Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	23

Start/End Page  	1/23

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006

Docket Title 	Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides

Docket Type 	Nonrulemaking

Document ID 	EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260-0005.9

Views

Add Comments

How To Comment

Document Title  	Comment submitted by Jeremy Nichols, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action

Other Identifier

	Abstract  	Smith, W.H., "Air Pollution and Firests: Interactions Between Air Contaminants and Forest Ecosystems." Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990. 399-435. This document is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without consent of the copyright holder.

Document Type  	PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

Document Sub-Type  	Public Comment Attachment

CFR Citation

	Source Citation  	Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990. 399-435

Authors

	Author Date

	Postmark Date  	06/15/2006

Media  	Electronic File

Page Count  	21

Start/End Page  	1/21

Effective Date

	OMB Control# (ICR)

	Receipt Date  	06/15/2006

Document Legacy ID

	RIN

	FR Volume Number

	FR Document Number

	FR Publish Date  	06/27/2006

Comment Start Date  	05/15/2006

Comment End Date  	06/15/2006