[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 231 (Tuesday, December 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71409-71410]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28283]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1273-018]

Parowan City Corporation; Notice of Application To Amend License
and Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Amendment to License.
    b. Project No: 1273-018.
    c. Date Filed: October 9, 2014.
    d. Applicant: Parowan City Corporation.
    e. Name of Project: Center Creek Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On Center Creek in Iron County, Utah. The project
occupies federal lands administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land
Management.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Derek Anderson, P.E., Environmental Division
Manager, Sunrise Engineering, Inc. 12227 South Business Park Drive,
Suite 220, Draper, UT 84020,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Steven Sachs at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is 30

days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file any
motion to intervene, protest, comments, and/or recommendations using
the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-1273-018.
    k. Description of Request: The Center Creek Hydroelectric Project
currently includes a diversion dam which delivers water from Center
Creek to a forebay, which then feeds the applicant's hydropower and
irrigation systems. The applicant proposes to separate its hydropower
and irrigation projects by installing a diversion wall/penstock intake
directly on the diversion dam and adding approximately 460 feet of 20-
inch-diameter steel and high density polyethylene penstock between the
diversion dam and the existing penstock, bypassing the forebay.
    l. Locations of the Application: This filing may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number P-2058 in the docket number field to access the
document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
call 1-866-208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item (h) above and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the license amendment.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: November 24, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28283 Filed 12-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47325-47327]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19356]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2009-0028]

Personal Protective Equipment for General Industry; Extension for
the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of the Information
Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits comments concerning this proposal to extend the
Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the Personal Protective Equipment
Standard for General Industry.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
November 8, 2019.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.

    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments
and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2009-0028,
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, Room N-3653, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service)
are accepted during the OSHA Docket Office's normal business hours,
10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., ET.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and OSHA
docket number for the ICR (OSHA-2009-0028) for the Information
Collection Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal
information you provide, are placed in the public docket without
change, and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov.
For further information on submitting comments, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the section of this notice titled
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the above address. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download through the website. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may contact Theda Kenney at the
phone number below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seleda Perryman, Directorate of
Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC
20210; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of a continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
    This program ensures that information is in the desired format,
reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, collection instruments
are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the information
collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 (the Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) authorizes information
collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of
the Act or for developing information regarding the causes and
prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29
U.S.C. 657).
    Subpart I specifies several paperwork requirements. The following
describes the information collection requirements in subpart I and
addresses who will use the information.

Hazard Assessment and Verification (Sec.  1910.132(d) & (g))

    Paragraph 1910.132(d)(1) and the Personal Fall Protection standard
require that employers perform a hazard assessment of the workplace to
determine whether hazards are present, or likely to be present, that
make the use of PPE necessary.\1\ Where such hazards are present,
employers must select and have each affected worker use PPE that
protects them from the identified hazards (Sec.  1910.132(d)(1)(i)),
and communicate PPE selection decisions to each affected worker (Sec.
1910.132(d)(1)(ii)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 1910.132(g) specifies that the hazard assessment
(Sec.  1910.132(d)) requirements only apply to PPE for the eyes,
face, head, feet, and hands. The final rule revised Sec.
1910.132(g) to also apply the hazard assessment requirement to
personal fall protection systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph 1910.132(d)(2) requires that employers certify in writing
they have performed the required hazard assessment. The certification
must include the date, the name of the person certifying that the
hazard assessment was conducted, and identification of the workplace
evaluated (area or location). The Personal Fall Protection standard
expands the hazard assessment requirement to personal fall protection
systems (Sec.  1910.132(g)).
    Conducting a PPE hazard assessment ensures that potential workplace
hazards necessitating PPE use have been identified and that the PPE
selected is appropriate for those hazards and the affected workers.
Communicating information on PPE selection decisions to affected
workers ensures they are aware that the PPE selected will protect them
from the hazards that the assessment identified. The certification of
the hazard assessment verifies that employers have conducted the
required assessment.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the Personal Protective Equipment
Standard for General Industry (29 CFR part 1910, subpart I). OSHA is
proposing to decrease the burden hours in the currently approved
information collection request from 3,745,218 hours to 3,673,168, a
total adjustment decrease of 72,050 hours. This decrease is due to
updated data showing a decrease in the number of establishments using
fall protection systems by the standard. The agency will summarize the
comments submitted in response to this notice and will include this
summary in the request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Personal Protective Equipment for General Industry (PPE) (29
CFR part 1910, subpart I).
    OMB Number: 1218-0205.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits; Federal Government;
State, Local, or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 3,039,775.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Various.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 3,673,168.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (FAX); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2009-0028). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document

files electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in
reference to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit
them to the OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled
ADDRESSES). The additional materials must clearly identify your
electronic comments by your name, date, and the docket number so the
agency can attach them to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the website's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not
available through the website, and for assistance in using the internet
to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on September 3, 2019.
Loren Sweatt,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety
and Health.
[FR Doc. 2019-19356 Filed 9-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


                 Summary of Region 6 Public Listening Session                            on 111(d) for Power Plants                                                                 November 7, 2013  -  Dallas, TX

On November 7, 2013, EPA Region 6 held a public listening session to obtain public input on how EPA can craft carbon pollution standards from existing power plants.  Approximately 400 people attended the meeting, and of those attendees, 222 people spoke.

A high-level summary of the meeting is provided below.

Overview

Regional Administrator Ron Curry and Deputy Regional Administrator Sam Coleman welcomed participants and offered opening remarks.  There were two, concurrent sessions.  Wren Stenger, Director of the Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, and Tom Diggs, Chief of the Air Programs Branch, offered an overview of Clean Air Act section 111(d).  Trained facilitators moderated the sessions.

Of the total participants at the listening session, approximately 42% represented themselves or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) other than specifically environmental, 38% represented business and industry, 12% represented environmental NGOs, 6% represented government, and 2% represented unions.

Participants included Texas House representatives, companies, industries, local officials, municipalities, small businesses, churches, environmental groups, NGOs, citizens, and college students.  We heard from local governments and citizens that they support power plants in their communities for the economy, jobs, emergency services, fire departments, and schools.  Solar and wind companies and specialists advised that energy portfolios should continue to expand to include renewables at paces from immediately and exclusively to a moderate incorporation time frame.  The Dallas County Medical Society supported EPA creating stringent carbon emission standards due to asthma, cancer, and sensitive populations.  (In October, the DCMS petitioned the TCEQ for more stringent air emission controls for three coal-fired power plants.)

Many electric cooperatives stated that doing anything that impacts electric costs, reliability, and capacity would devastate towns and communities across Texas.  Some college students and youth organizations stated that EPA needs to shut down coal power plants now or implement very strict limits. Some churches, ministries, and preachers said that EPA must take care of the earth and the health of people.  People with sick spouses, children, and friends implored EPA to control air emissions.  Suggested approaches for future guidelines included market-based, carbon tax or fee with the tax/fee returned to consumers, state-by-state plans not one-size-fits-all, and enforcement that would actually reduce emissions.

Naturally, there were positions on the both ends of the discussion.  First, the environmental groups asked that EPA proceed without delay to implement strict emission standards or to shut down all coal power plants.  A few speakers suggested that paying more for electricity would be acceptable to them.  Second, some electric cooperatives and industry representatives discussed the importance of keeping electric costs low, considering the extreme differences in Texas weather and rural areas than in other parts of the country, and keeping the economy healthy and growing. Most of the speakers that were citizens or had small businesses near coal power plants encouraged EPA to proceed carefully so as not to impact jobs, towns, and people's livelihoods. Third, speakers expressed the importance of balance between the environment and the economy as EPA develops its position. The importance of affordable electricity, capacity, and reliability for now and into the future must be maintained for states to grow and prosper.  Most speakers wanted good air quality, but cautioned that a rash approach would be more harmful to people than a more flexible, long term plan.  Some speakers wanted to shut down all use of coal and fossil fuels.  Some recognized that facilities were old and should be shuttered, while others offered that older facilities should be allowed to continue for their design life.  Speakers questioned both the "junk" and "good" science as the foundation for climate change.

Speakers generally thanked EPA for the opportunity to provide input at this early stage and asked that EPA keep the public involved. It was suggested that public stakeholders be included in a workgroup or team that will draft the guidelines.

The following summary is divided into two parts:  a summary of comments generally supportive of the proposed carbon standard and a summary of comments generally in opposition to the proposed carbon standard.  In each part, the comments are included under general category topics.  Language of the commenters is frequently included In order to capture the essence of their concerns.        Comments generally in support of EPA's proposed carbon standard for existing power plants

					 Health concerns

   * Human health is more important than jobs or economics, and global warming is a human health threat.  Climate change is happening and will get worse.  Asthma and lung cancer are related concerns.  Coal is not a fuel the U.S. should be investing in for the future; coal plants will adapt, but children and grandchildren will not.

   * Diseases are likely to increase due to increased heat from climate change.

   * Emissions from power plants particularly impact poor, minority neighborhoods.  Consider environmental justice in decision-making for the carbon standard.

		    Other implications of climate change; climate change science

   * Climate change is causing drought and raising costs in health care and food.

   * Extreme weather is being caused by climate change, including tornadoes and flooding; climate change is causing at least a 33% increase in weather damage.  Summer 2011 drought and wildfires in Texas and 2013 floods are examples.

   * EPA should follow the science and make strong rules for existing power plants.  Science findings are definite.  If we can keep CO2-e concentrations under 450 parts per million, then we may have a 50-50 chance of avoiding the worst climate change impacts.  Invest in clean air.  Gas-fired power plants are better. Support the President's Climate Plan.

   * We are facing a human civilization crisis due to climate change.  Small towns will be without water in 3-5 years, 50% of reservoirs are less than 50% full, NOAA in 2009 said current climate changes are reversible only in 1000 years, and 2060 temperatures will be 4 degrees C above pre-industrial baseline.  Climate change has created refugees, with 600 million expected by 2050.  Do something now.  EPA must be true to its mission.  This is a national problem, not just a local problem.

		 Proposed carbon standard and other regulatory actions

   * EPA regulations should aggressively reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Export of coal to other nations is not desirable as it only transfers the problem of coal elsewhere.  However, carbon standard application should not be done arbitrarily and should minimize financial harm and electricity rate increases.  Incentivizing power plants to reduce emissions is good.  Also, EPA should allow for regional flexibility.

   * Regarding the proposed carbon standard, speakers mentioned that EPA should give States emissions credit for work their Public Utility Commissions and Departments of Environmental Quality have already done to encourage lower-emitting and renewable energy sources.  They also suggested EPA use a 2005 baseline for carbon reduction calculations.

   * We need to be entirely rid of fossil fuels.  Set a shutdown date for coal plants.  Coal plants have an efficiency of 32% and similar to that of the 1970s.  Recent air pollution episodes in China demonstrate the importance of dealing with emissions from coal plants.

   * A carbon tax is a good idea; stop subsidies to coal, oil and gas industries.  Clean air is actually good for business.

   * Texas leads the nation in carbon emissions; action needs to be taken in Texas in particular. 			 Alternative energy 	    * Alternative energy, such as solar and wind, and hydrogen and energy efficiency should be encouraged and are allies to EPA in this carbon standard process; no nuclear plants.  Decentralized energy production would be more beneficial.  Transitioning to clean energy will create jobs. 					 Jobs

   * Loss of jobs is not as big an issue as some industries are touting; also, such losses are not necessarily related to a carbon standard.  Texas' biggest power company already is getting ready to file for bankruptcy and is worried it won't be able to take care of its workers. 				 Other pollution and sources

   * Other sources, such as fracking, also contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.

   * Other pollutants besides carbon dioxide are important and should also be addressed  -  such as methane, mercury, ozone, particulate matter.  Dallas-Fort Worth area ozone is worsened by coal plants.  Many people are affected by those health effects.  Also EPA needs to be concerned about clean water. 				 Overall concern

   *  Our moral responsibility is not to exploit the Earth but to care for it.

Comments generally in opposition to EPA's proposed carbon standard for existing power plants 				 Impacts on the economy and jobs

   * Carbon standards for existing coal-fired plants will bring severe economic hardship to towns that depend on them for property tax (37% of one county's taxes is paid by the local coal-fired power plant), direct employment in power plants and coal mines (these are high-paying jobs in rural areas), sales taxes, and ancillary employment in smaller companies.  Housing prices are directly associated with availability of these jobs.  Local public schools and hospitals are supported by these taxes as well. Many of these areas are just now emerging from the 2008-2010 economic recession.

   * The rule should find ways to save jobs that are imperiled by the new standard, and Texas will need more time to comply.

   * Municipal power agency in Texas is voluntarily reducing carbon emissions without regulation; coal-fired electricity is cheap power, and this agency has been operating for 30 years but is still paying off debt and the other air pollution control equipment.  Rush to a carbon standard may well imperil financial status of this municipal power agency.

Technology required under the proposed standard and practicality

   * Carbon capture and storage (CCS) will be necessary for coal plants, and this is not commercially practical.  No coal-fired plants will ever meet a CCS requirement.

   * New carbon standard will not be achievable or sensible.  EPA should carefully consider the liabilities of this rulemaking.  There could be considerable, unintended consequences.

   * EPA's role is to control pollutants, not to force specific technologies.  Any proposal should be subject to strict cost/benefit analyses.

   * The U.S. needs China and India to join in on a carbon pollution solution.  While energy efficiency is a good idea, imprudent solutions that result in tens of thousands of megawatts in coal-fired electricity generation being lost in the U.S. are not the answer.  Rule should encompass all environmental impacts, and EPA should not rush the rule-making. 					 Electricity prices

   * Cost of electricity for all consumers will increase (including economically impoverished families), as well as on other industries that produce goods for people, thereby raising prices on those goods.  The standards will also negatively impact reliability and safe, cheap generation in the entire grid.

   * Rural consumers of electricity, who are typically less prosperous than urban dwellers, will bear much of the economic burden for this standard.  70% of electricity from rural electric cooperatives comes from coal. Fuel-switching is not a practical alternative for many of these rural cooperatives.  EPA should particularly focus on impacts on rural electric cooperative operators.  There may be a 40% increase in annual consumer electricity prices for rural electric cooperative customers with this standard. 		 Need for electricity reliability and balanced energy portfolio

   * EPA should promote diversity in electricity production and not create one law for all the States that does not distinguish among differences in the states.  Coal and nuclear should be parts of that portfolio. Coal should remain the major way to generate electricity.

   * Texas needs a balanced energy portfolio, as it is growing very rapidly.  For example, shale gas production, which is a State-wide economic driver, relies on availability of cheap electricity.  Reliability is a big concern, and blackouts may result with closing coal-fired plants.  By 2018, Texas will fall below its reserve margin target under a moderate growth scenario, so a balanced energy portfolio is essential. 		 Need for flexibility and market-based alternatives

   * States need to be given the maximum amount of flexibility in complying with any such carbon standard.  For example, states should be allowed to take credit for renewable energy resources.  Perhaps EPA should allow states to develop their own guidelines and be allowed deviations from these.

   * Employing market-based alternatives in any rule is very important.  Carbon should be controlled more thoroughly where the costs are less expensive rather than at facilities where it would be more expensive.

   * If this rulemaking goes forward, EPA should use accurate baselines and ensure states receive credit for early actions.

   *  The Clean Air Act is not the appropriate means with which to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  EPA should set emission targets on what is reasonably defensible.  Consider grandfathering too.

	 Climate science and the role of greenhouse gases

   * State of the science:  Recent paper in Climate Dynamics by Wyatt (University of Colorado) and Curry (Georgia Tech) shows that the dynamics of global climate is such that there are 300-year natural cycles and much of climate variability is due to this, not greenhouse gas emissions.  The Wyatt-Curry paper accounts for the current 17-year "lack of global warming."  Don't rush into rule changes, but focus on knowing science better.  The current models EPA relies on don't seem to reflect reality.

   *  Greenhouse gases are beneficial to the Earth and are not problem-causers.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 227 (Wednesday, November 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73858-73865]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29931]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76484; File No. SR-FINRA-2015-048]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt
FINRA Rule 6191(b) and Amend FINRA Rule 7440 To Implement the Data
Collection Requirements of the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick
Size Pilot Program

November 19, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 13, 2015, Financial Industry Regulatory

Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
by FINRA. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to adopt FINRA Rule 6191 and amend Rule 7440 to
implement the Regulation NMS Plan to Implement a Tick Size Pilot
Program (Plan).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On August 25, 2014, NYSE Group, Inc., on behalf of BATS Exchange,
Inc., BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA
Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''), NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC,
the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''),
NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc. (collectively ``Participants''),
filed with the Commission, pursuant to Section 11A of the Act \3\ and
Rule 608 of Regulation NMS thereunder,\4\ the Plan to Implement a Tick
Size Pilot Program (``Pilot'').\5\ The Participants filed the Plan to
comply with an order issued by the Commission on June 24, 2014.\6\ The
Plan\7\ was published for comment in the Federal Register on November
7, 2014, and approved by the Commission, as modified, on May 6,
2015.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \4\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \5\ See Letter from Brendon J. Weiss, Vice President,
Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., to Secretary, Commission, dated
August 25, 2014.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72460 (June 24,
2014), 79 FR 36840 (June 30, 2014).
    \7\ Unless otherwise specified, capitalized terms used in this
rule filing are based on the defined terms of the Plan.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74892 (May 6, 2015),
80 FR 27513 (May 13, 2015) (``Approval Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Plan is designed to allow the Commission, market participants,
and the public to study and assess the impact of increment conventions
on the liquidity and trading of the common stocks of small-
capitalization companies. Each Participant is required to comply, and
to enforce compliance by its member organizations, as applicable, with
the provisions of the Plan. As is described more fully below, the
proposed rules would require member organizations to comply with the
applicable data collection requirements of the Plan.
    The Pilot will include stocks of companies with $3 billion or less
in market capitalization, an average daily trading volume of one
million shares or less, and a volume weighted average price of at least
$2.00 for every trading day. The Pilot will consist of a control group
of approximately 1400 Pilot Securities and three test groups with 400
Pilot Securities in each (selected by a stratified random sampling
process).\9\ During the pilot, Pilot Securities in the control group
will be quoted at the current tick size increment of $0.01 per share
and will trade at the currently permitted increments. Pilot Securities
in the first test group (``Test Group One'') will be quoted in $0.05
minimum increments but will continue to trade at any price increment
that is currently permitted.\10\ Pilot Securities in the second test
group (``Test Group Two'') will be quoted in $0.05 minimum increments
and will trade at $0.05 minimum increments subject to a midpoint
exception, a retail investor order exception, and a negotiated trade
exception.\11\ Pilot Securities in the third test group (``Test Group
Three'') will be subject to the same quoting and trading increments as
Test Group Two and also will be subject to the ``Trade-at'' requirement
to prevent price matching by a market participant that is not
displaying at a Trading Center's ``Best Protected Bid'' or ``Best
Protected Offer,'' unless an enumerated exception applies.\12\ In
addition to the exceptions provided under Test Group Two, an exception
for Block Size orders and exceptions that mirror those under Rule 611
of Regulation NMS \13\ will apply to the Trade-at requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Section V of the Plan for identification of Pilot
Securities, including criteria for selection and grouping.
    \10\ See Section VI(B) of the Plan.
    \11\ See Section VI(C) of the Plan.
    \12\ See Section VI(D) of the Plan.
    \13\ 17 CFR 242.611.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In approving the Plan, the Commission noted that the Trading Center
data reporting requirements would facilitate an analysis of the effects
of the Pilot on liquidity (e.g., transaction costs by order size),
execution quality (e.g., speed of order executions), market maker
activity, competition between trading venues (e.g., routing frequency
of market orders), transparency (e.g., choice between displayed and
hidden orders), and market dynamics (e.g., rates and speed of order
cancellations).\14\ The Commission noted that Market Maker
profitability data would assist the Commission in evaluating the
effect, if any, of a widened tick increment on market marker profits
and any corresponding changes in the liquidity of small-capitalization
securities.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Approval Order, 80 FR at 27543.
    \15\ See Approval Order, 80 FR at 27543.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compliance With the Data Collection Requirements of the Plan
    The Plan contains requirements for collecting and transmitting data
to the Commission and to the public. Specifically, Appendix B.I to the
Plan (Market Quality Statistics) requires Trading Centers \16\ to
submit variety of market quality statistics, including information
about an order's original size, whether the order was displayable or
not, the cumulative number of orders, the cumulative number of shares
of orders, and the cumulative number of shares executed within specific
time increments, e.g., from 30 seconds to less than 60 seconds after
the time of order receipt. This information shall be categorized by
security, order type, original order size, hidden status, and coverage
under Rule 605.\17\ Appendix B.I to the Plan also contains additional
requirements for market orders and marketable limit orders, including
the share-weighted average effective spread for executions of orders;
the cumulative number of shares of orders executed

with price improvement; and, for shares executed with price
improvement, the share-weighted average amount per share that prices
were improved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Plan incorporates the definition of a ``Trading
Center'' from Rule 600(b)(78) of Regulation NMS. Regulation NMS
defines a ``Trading Center'' as ``a national securities exchange or
national securities association that operates an SRO trading
facility, an alternative trading system, an exchange market maker,
an OTC market maker, or any other broker or dealer that executes
orders internally by trading as principal or crossing orders as
agent.'' See 17 CFR 242.600(b)(78).
    \17\ 17 CFR 242.605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Appendix B.II to the Plan (Market and Marketable Limit Order Data)
requires Trading Centers to submit information relating to market
orders and marketable limit orders, including the time of order
receipt, order type, the order size, the National Best Bid and National
Best Offer (``NBBO'') quoted price, the NBBO quoted depth, the average
execution price-share-weighted average, and the average execution time-
share-weighted average.
    The Plan requires Appendix B.I and B.II data to be submitted by
Participants that operate a Trading Center, and by members of the
Participants that operate Trading Centers. The Plan provides that each
Participant that is the Designated Examining Authority (``DEA'') for a
member of Participant that operates a Trading Center shall collect such
data in a pipe delimited format, beginning six months prior to the
Pilot Period and ending six months after the end of the Pilot Period.
The Plan also requires the Participant, operating as DEA, to transmit
this information to the SEC within 30 calendar days following month
end.
    FINRA is therefore proposing Rule 6191(b) to set forth the
requirements for the collection and transmission of data pursuant to
Appendix B.I and B.II of the Plan. Proposed Rule 6191(b)(1) requires
that a member that operates a Trading Center shall establish, maintain
and enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably
designed to comply with the data collection and transmission
requirements of Items I and II to Appendix B of the Plan, and a member
that is a Market Maker shall establish, maintain and enforce written
policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to comply with the
data collection and transmission requirements of Item IV of Appendix B
to the Plan and Item I of Appendix C of the Plan.
    Rule 6191(b)(2) requires that a member that operates a Trading
Center subject to the Plan and for which FINRA is the DEA shall collect
and transmit to FINRA the data described in Items I and II of Appendix
B of the Plan with respect to each Pre-Pilot Data Collection Security
for the period beginning six months prior to the Pilot Period through
the trading day immediately preceding the Pilot Period; and each Pilot
Security for the period beginning on the first day of the Pilot Period
through six months after the end of the Pilot Period.
    Section IV of the Plan (Policies and Procedures) provides that each
Participant that is the DEA of a member of a Participant operating a
Trading Center is required to develop appropriate policies and
procedures for collecting and reporting the data described in Items I
and II of Appendix B, as applicable, to the DEA Participant. FINRA has
determined that much of the data required by Appendix B.I and B.II to
the Plan currently is reported to FINRA through the Order Audit Trail
System (``OATS''). In the interest of increasing the efficiency of the
data collection process and the consistency of that data to be
collected under the Plan, FINRA proposes to use OATS as the vehicle
through which Trading Centers must comply with their reporting
obligations pursuant to Appendix B.I and B.II.
    Accordingly, proposed Rule 6191(b)(2) provides that members that
operate Trading Centers that are subject to the Plan, and for which
FINRA serves as the DEA, shall meet the data collection and reporting
requirements in Items I and II of Appendix B by reporting the necessary
order information in Pilot Securities and Pre-Pilot Data Collection
Securities to OATS; however, because the current OATS reports do not
contain all of the information required by Appendix B to the Plan, the
proposed rule change adds four new fields to OATS to capture the
necessary information for Pilot Securities and Pre-Pilot Data
Collection Securities.\18\ Specifically, the proposed rule change would
require OATS Reporting Members \19\ that operate a Trading Center to
record and report the following information for orders involving Pilot
Securities and Pre-Pilot Data Collection Securities if FINRA serves as
the member's DEA:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ In addition to adding the new fields in the proposed rule
change, FINRA will add additional values to existing fields that are
necessitated by the Tick Size Pilot. These new values will be
described fully in the OATS Reporting Technical Specifications.
FINRA anticipates that, for order receipt or origination as well as
on Desk Reports, there would be new Special Handling Codes,
including one for slides and for counterparty restrictions. FINRA
also will provide additional guidance in the OATS Reporting
Technical Specifications regarding the use of existing values that
may be affected by members participating in the Tick Size Pilot.
    \19\ Rule 7410(o) generally defines ``Reporting Member'' as a
member that receives or originates an order and has an obligation to
record and report information under Rules 7440 and 7450.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Whether the member is a Trading Center in either a Pilot
Security or a Pre-Pilot Data Collection Security and, if the member is
a participant on the Alternative Display Facility (``ADF''), the
display size of the order;
     Whether the order is routable; and
     Whether the member is relying on the retail investor order
exception with respect to the order.
    As an initial matter, only those OATS Reporting Members that
operate a Trading Center and for which FINRA is the DEA are required to
make any changes to their OATS reporting. OATS Reporting Members that
do not operate Trading Centers or that have another self-regulatory
organization as DEA will be permitted to leave the new fields blank
(i.e., they are not required to populate the new Trading Center field
to affirmatively indicate that they are not a Trading Center). OATS
Reporting Members that operate Trading Centers will be required to
indicate their status as a Trading Center on all OATS reports for new
orders involving Pre-Pilot Data Collection Securities and Pilot
Securities, including new order reports, combined order/route reports,
combined order execution reports, and cancel/replace reports. In
addition, OATS Reporting Members that operate Trading Centers and that
also are ADF Market Participants \20\ will be required to indicate
their status as an ADF Market Participant and must indicate the display
size of the order so that OATS can capture the information required by
Appendix B regarding hidden and displayed size.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Rule 6220(a)(3) defines ``ADF Market Participant'' or
``Market Participant'' as a Registered Reporting ADF Market Maker,
as defined in Rule 6220(a)(13), or a Registered Reporting ADF ECN,
as defined in Rule 6220(a)(12).
    \21\ Sections I(a)(5), (29), and (30) of Appendix B to the Plan
all require that hidden (i.e., non-displayed) order information be
provided to the SEC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described above, the proposed rule change adds new OATS fields
to capture whether an order in a Pre-Pilot Data Collection Security or
a Pilot Security received by an OATS Reporting Member that operates a
Trading Center is routable and whether the member is relying on the
retail investor order exception in the Plan with respect to the order.
These additional fields are necessary so that OATS can capture the
information required by Item II(n) and II(o) of Appendix B to the Plan.
This information will be required on all OATS reports for new orders,
including New Order Reports, Combined Order/Route Reports, Combined
Order/Execution Reports, and Cancel/Replace Reports.
    In addition to information on new orders, the proposed rule change
requires OATS Reporting Members that operate Trading Centers and for
which FINRA is the DEA to report executions in Pre-Pilot Data
Collection Securities and Pilot Securities when the order, or

any part of the order, is executed on a venue that does not provide
execution information to FINRA. Currently, OATS Reporting Members
report to OATS the routing of any order to a non-FINRA member, which
includes orders routed to a national securities exchange.\22\ For those
exchanges that provide FINRA with execution information, FINRA is able
to link the route to any executions occurring on the exchange. OATS
data, however, does not currently link to executions occurring on
venues that do not provide this information to FINRA (e.g., foreign
exchanges). To provide the execution information required by Items I
and II of Appendix B to the Plan, FINRA must collect the execution
information, either from the venue to which the order was routed, or
from the firm routing the order to the venue, to match the routed order
to the execution. Because some venues do not provide execution data to
FINRA, the proposed rule change would require members that route orders
in a Pre-Pilot Data Collection Security or a Pilot Security to a venue
that does not provide execution information to FINRA to report any
execution on such venue through an OATS Execution Report or Combined
Order/Execution Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Rule 7440(c)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To facilitate compliance with this provision, FINRA will identify
in the OATS Reporting Technical Specifications those exchanges for
which these reports are not necessary; thus, for orders routed to those
identified exchanges, OATS Reporting Members would continue to report
only routes to those exchanges rather than any executions occurring on
those exchanges. For orders routed to a venue that is not identified,
OATS Reporting Members would be required to report any executions on
that venue in an OATS Execution Report or Combined Order/Execution
Report.
    As set forth in Section VII of the Plan (Collection of Pilot Data),
proposed Rule 6191(b)(2)(B) provides that FINRA shall transmit this
data collected by Trading Centers required by Items I and II of
Appendix B to the Plan, and collected pursuant to paragraph (b)(2)(A),
to the SEC in a pipe delimited format on a disaggregated basis by
Trading Center within 30 calendar days following month end. FINRA also
shall make such data publicly available on the FINRA Web site on a
monthly basis at no charge and will not identify the Trading Center
that generated the data.
    Appendix B.IV (Daily Market Maker Participation Statistics)
requires a Participant to collect data related to Market Maker
participation from each Market Maker \23\ engaging in trading activity
on a Trading Center operated by the Participant. FINRA is therefore
proposing Rule 6191(b)(3) to gather data about a Market Maker's
participation in Pilot Securities and Pre-Pilot Data Collection
Securities. Proposed Rule 6191(b)(3)(A) provides that a member that is
a Market Maker for which FINRA is the DEA shall collect and transmit to
FINRA data relating to Item IV of Appendix B to the Plan with respect
to activity conducted on any Trading Center in Pilot Securities and
Pre-Pilot Data Collection Securities in furtherance of its status as a
registered Market Maker, including a Trading Center that executes
trades otherwise than on a national securities exchange, for
transactions that have settled or reached settlement date. The proposed
rule requires Market Makers to transmit such data in a pipe delimited
format, by 12 p.m. EST on T+4 for (1) transactions in each Pre-Pilot
Data Collection Security for the period beginning six months prior to
the Pilot Period through the trading day immediately preceding the
Pilot Period; and (2) for transactions in each Pilot Security for the
period beginning on the first day of the Pilot Period through six
months after the end of the Pilot Period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The Plan defines a Market Maker as ``a dealer registered
with any self-regulatory organization, in accordance with the rules
thereof, as (i) a market maker or (ii) a liquidity provider with an
obligation to maintain continuous, two-sided trading interest.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 6191(b)(3)(B) provides that FINRA shall transmit the
data relating to Market Maker activity required by Item IV of Appendix
B to the Plan, and collected pursuant to paragraph (b)(3)(A) above, to
the Participant operating the Trading Center on which such activity
occurred in a pipe delimited format on a disaggregated basis by Market
Maker during the Pre-Pilot and within 15 calendar days following month
end during the Pilot Period.
    As required by the Plan, proposed Rule 6191(b)(3)(C) provides that
FINRA shall transmit the data relating to Market Maker activity
conducted otherwise than on a national securities exchange required by
Item IV of Appendix B to the Plan, and collected pursuant to paragraph
(b)(3)(A), to the SEC in a pipe delimited format, on a disaggregated
basis by Trading Center, within 30 calendar days following month end.
FINRA shall also make such data publicly available on the FINRA Web
site on a monthly basis at no charge and will not identify the Trading
Center that generated the data.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ FINRA notes that Appendix B.III, which requires a
Participant that is a national securities exchange to collect daily
Market Maker registration statistics, does not apply to FINRA.
Accordingly, FINRA is not proposing a rule to implement this aspect
of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Appendix C.I (Market Maker Profitability) requires a Participant to
collect data related to Market Maker profitability from each Market
Maker for which it is the DEA. Specifically, the Participant is
required to collect the total number of shares of orders executed by
the Market Maker, the raw Market Maker realized trading profits, and
the raw Market Maker unrealized trading profits. Data shall be
collected for dates starting six months prior to the Pilot Period
through six months after the end of the Pilot Period. This data shall
be collected on a monthly basis, to be provided in a pipe delimited
format to the Participant, as DEA, within 30 calendar days following
month end. Appendix C.II (Aggregated Market Maker Profitability)
requires the Participant, as DEA, to aggregate the Appendix C.I data,
and to categorize this data by security as well as by the control group
and each Test Group. That aggregated data shall contain information
relating to total raw Market Maker realized trading profits, volume-
weighted average of raw Market Maker realized trading profits, the
total raw Market Maker unrealized trading profits, and the volume-
weighted average of Market Maker unrealized trading profits.
    FINRA is therefore proposing Rule 6191(b)(4) to set forth the
requirements for the collection and transmission of data pursuant to
Appendix C.I and of the Plan. Proposed Rule 6191(b)(4)(A) requires that
a member that is a Market Maker, and for which FINRA is the DEA, shall
collect and transmit to FINRA the data described in Item I of Appendix
C to the Plan, as modified by Paragraph (b)(5) with respect to
executions in Pilot Securities that have settled or reached settlement
date that were executed on any Trading Center. The proposed rule also
requires members to provide such data in a pipe delimited format by 12
p.m. EST on T+4 for (1) for executions during and outside of Regular
Trading Hours in each Pre-Pilot Data Collection Security for the period
beginning six months prior to the Pilot Period through the trading day
immediately preceding the Pilot Period; and (2) for executions during
and outside of Regular Trading Hours in each Pilot Security for the
period beginning on the first day of the Pilot Period through six
months after the end of the Pilot Period.
    Proposed Rule 6191(b)(4)(B) provides that FINRA shall collect this
data and, on a monthly basis, transmit such data,

categorized by the control group and each Test Group, to the SEC in a
pipe delimited format; provided, however, that the data transmitted to
the SEC shall include the profitability statistics categorized by
Market Maker and by security. In calculating unrealized trading
profits, FINRA shall also report the number of excess (deficit) shares
held by the Market Maker, the volume weighted average price of that
excess (deficit) and the closing price of the security as reported by
the primary listing exchange used in reporting unrealized profit. The
proposed rule also provides that FINRA shall make this aggregated data,
categorized by the control group and each Test Group, publicly
available on the FINRA Web site on a monthly basis at no charge and
will not identify the Market Makers that generated the data or the
individual securities.
    FINRA also is proposing a rule setting forth the manner in which
Market Maker participation and profitability will be calculated.
Proposed Rule 6191(b)(5) provides that a member that is a Market Maker
subject to the requirements of proposed Rule 6191(b)(3)(A) and
(b)(4)(A) in a Pre-Pilot Data Collection Security or a Pilot Security,
and for which FINRA is the DEA, shall be deemed to have satisfied the
requirements of proposed Rule 6191(b)(3)(A) and (b)(4)(A), in addition
to the requirements of Appendix B.IV and Item I of Appendix C, if such
Market Maker submits to FINRA the specified data for any principal
trade, not including riskless principal, in a Pre-Pilot Data Collection
Security or a Pilot Security executed in furtherance of its status as a
Market Maker on any Trading Center. The proposed rule requires Market
Makers to submit (1) Ticker Symbol; (2) Trading Center where the trade
was executed, or if not known, the destination where the order
originally was routed for further handling and execution; (3) Time of
execution; (4) Price; (5) Size; (6) Buy/sell; (7) for trades executed
away from the Market Maker, a unique identifier, as specified by the
Market Maker's DEA, that will allow the trade to be associated with the
Trading Center where the trade was executed; and (8) for trades
cancelled or corrected beyond T+3, whether the trade represents a
cancellation or correction.
    FINRA is also proposing, through Supplementary Material, to clarify
other aspects of the data collection requirements.\25\ Proposed
Supplementary Material .02 relates to the use of the retail investor
order flag for purposes of Appendix B.II(n) reporting. The Plan
currently states that market and marketable limit orders shall include
a ``yes/no'' field relating to the Retail Investor Order flag. FINRA is
proposing Supplementary Material .02 to clarify that, for purposes of
the reporting requirement in Appendix B.II(n), a Trading Center shall
report ``y'' where it is relying upon the Retail Investor Order
exception to Test Groups Two and Three, and ``n'' for all other
instances. FINRA believes that requiring the identification of a Retail
Investor Orders only where the exception may apply (i.e., Pilot
Securities in Test Groups Two and Three) is consistent with Appendix
B.II(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ FINRA is also proposing Supplementary Material .01 to Rule
6191 to clarify that certain enumerated terms used throughout Rule
6191 shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Supplementary Material .03 requires that members populate a field
to identify whether an order is affected by the bands in place pursuant
to the National Market System Plan to Address Extraordinary Market
Volatility.\26\ Pursuant to the Limit-Up Limit-Down Plan, between 9:30
a.m. and 4:00 p.m., the Securities Information Processor (``SIP'')
calculates a lower price band and an upper price band for each NMS
stock. These price bands represent a specified percentage above or
below the stock's reference price, which generally is calculated based
on reported transactions in that stock over the preceding five minutes.
When one side of the market for an individual security is outside the
applicable price band, the SIP identifies that quotation as non-
executable. When the other side of the market reaches the applicable
price band (e.g., the offer reaches the lower price band), the security
enters a Limit State. The stock would exit a Limit State if, within 15
seconds of entering the Limit State, all Limit State Quotations were
executed or canceled in their entirety. If the security does not exit a
Limit State within 15 seconds, then the primary listing exchange
declares a five-minute trading pause, which would be applicable to all
markets trading the security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See National Market System Plan to Address Extraordinary
Market Volatility, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May
31, 2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (File No. 4-631) (``Limit-Up
Limit-Down Plan'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA and the other Participants have determined that it is
appropriate to create a new flag for reporting orders that are affected
by the Limit-Up Limit-Down bands. Accordingly, a Trading Center shall
report a value of ``Y'' when the ability of an order to execute has
been affected by the Limit-Up Limit-Down bands in effect at the time of
order receipt. A Trading Center shall report a value of ``N'' when the
ability of an order to execute has not been affected by the Limit-Up
Limit-Down bands in effect at the time of order receipt.
    Supplementary Material .03 also requires, for dually-listed
securities, that the Participant indicate whether the order was handled
domestically, or routed to a foreign venue. Accordingly, the
Participant will indicate, for purposes of Appendix B.I, whether the
order was: (1) Fully executed domestically, or (2) fully or partially
executed on a foreign market. For purposes of Appendix B.II, the
Participant will classify all orders in dually-listed Pilot and Pre-
Pilot Securities as: (1) Directed to a domestic venue for execution;
(2) may only be directed to a foreign venue for execution; or (3) was
fully or partially directed to a foreign venue at the discretion of the
member. FINRA believes that this proposed flag will better identify
orders in dually-listed securities, as such orders that were executed
in foreign venues would not be subject to the Plan's quoting and
trading requirements, and could otherwise compromise the integrity of
the data.
    Supplementary Material .04 relates to the time ranges specified in
Appendix B.I.a(14), B.I.a(15), B.I.a(21) and B.I.a(22).\27\ FINRA and
the other Participants have determined that it is appropriate to change
the reporting times in these provisions to require more granular
reporting for these categories. Accordingly, FINRA proposes to add
Appendix B.I.a(14A), which will require Trading Centers to report the
cumulative number of shares of orders executed from 100 microseconds to
less than 1 millisecond after the time of order receipt. Appendix
B.I.a(15) will be changed to require the cumulative number of shares of
orders executed from 1 millisecond to less than 100 milliseconds after
the time of order receipt. FINRA also proposes to add Appendix
B.I.a(21A), which will require Trading Centers to report the

cumulative number of shares of orders canceled from 100 microseconds to
less than 1 millisecond after the time of order receipt. Appendix
B.I.a(22) will be changed to require the cumulative number of shares of
orders canceled from 1 millisecond to less than 100 milliseconds after
the time of order receipt. FINRA believes that these new reporting
requirements will contribute to a meaningful analysis of the Pilot by
producing more granular data on these points.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Specifically, Appendix B.I.a(14) requires reporting of the
cumulative number of shares of orders executed from 0 to less than
100 microseconds after the time of order receipt; Appendix B.I.a(15)
requires reporting of the cumulative number of shares of orders
executed from 100 microseconds to less than 100 milliseconds after
the time of order receipt; Appendix B.I.a(21) requires reporting of
the cumulative number of shares of orders cancelled from 0 to less
than 100 microseconds after the time of order receipt; and Appendix
B.I.a(22) requires reporting of the cumulative number of shares of
orders cancelled from 100 microseconds to less than 100 milliseconds
after the time of order receipt.
    \28\ FINRA notes that it intends to file an exemptive request
seeking relief from certain of the Plan's data collection
requirements, including the requirements that Trading Centers report
information in either microseconds or milliseconds, as not all
Trading Centers currently capture and report orders in either
microseconds or milliseconds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Supplementary Material .05 relates to the requirement in Appendix
B.I.a(33) requiring the share-weighted average BBO Spread of the
reporting exchange as part of the market quality statistics to be
reported. FINRA and the other Participants have determined that this
requirement should apply to both the reporting exchange and to a
Trading Center that displays such quote on the ADF, and is proposing to
make this clarification through Supplementary Material .05.
    Supplementary Material .06 relates to the relevant measurement for
purposes of Appendix B.I.a(31)-(33) reporting. Currently, the Plan
states that this data shall be reported as of the time of order
execution. FINRA and the other Participants believe that this
information should more properly be captured at the time of order
receipt, as evaluating share-weighted average prices at the time of
order receipt is more consistent with the goal of observing the effect
of the Pilot on the liquidity of Pilot Securities. FINRA is therefore
proposing to make this change through Supplementary Material .06.\29\
This change will make these provisions consistent with the remainder of
the statistics in Appendix B.I.a, which are all based on order receipt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ This proposed change is also part of an exemptive request
that FINRA and the other Participants will be submitting to the SEC
pursuant to Rule 608(e) of Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Supplementary Material .07 clarifies that, for purposes of Appendix
B.I.a(33), only a Trading Center that is displaying in its own name as
a Trading Center when executing an order shall enter a value in this
field. FINRA believes that the Appendix B.I.a(33) reporting requirement
is only relevant for a Trading Center that is a display venue and not
Trading Centers that may display through other Trading Centers (such as
a market maker displaying a quote on a national securities exchange).
    Supplementary Material .08 addresses the status of not-held and
auction orders for purposes of Appendix B.I reporting. Currently,
Appendix B.I sets forth eight categories of orders, including market
orders, marketable limit orders, and inside-the-quote resting limit
orders, for which daily market quality statistics must be reported.
Currently, Appendix B.I does not provide a category for not held
orders, clean cross orders, auction orders, or orders received when the
NBBO is crossed. FINRA and the other Participants have determined that
it is appropriate to include separate categories both not held orders
and auction orders for purposes of Appendix B reporting. FINRA is
therefore proposing Supplementary Material .07 to provide that not held
orders shall be included as an order type for purposes of Appendix B
reporting, and shall be assigned the number (18). Clean cross orders
shall be included as an order type for purposes of Appendix B
reporting, and shall be assigned the number (19); auction orders shall
be included an as order type for purposes of Appendix B reporting, and
shall be assigned the number (20); and orders that cannot be otherwise
be classified, including, for example, orders received when the NBBO is
crossed shall be included as an order type for purposes of Appendix B
reporting, and shall be assigned the number (21). All of these orders
already are included in the scope of Appendix B; however, without this
proposed change, these order types would be categorized with other
orders, such as regular held orders, that should be able to be fully
executed upon receipt, which would compromise the value of this data.
    FINRA is proposing Supplementary Material .09 to clarify the scope
of the Plan as it relates to members that only execute orders for
limited purposes. Specifically, FINRA and the other Participants
believe that a member that only executes orders otherwise than on a
national securities exchange for the purpose of (1) correcting a bona
fide error related to the execution of a customer order; (2) purchasing
a security from a customer at a nominal price solely for purposes of
liquidating the customer's position; or (3) completing the fractional
share portion of an order \30\ shall not be deemed a Trading Center for
purposes of Appendix B to the Plan. FINRA is therefore proposing
Supplementary Material .09 to make this clarification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ FINRA notes that where a member purchases a fractional
share from a customer, the Trading Center that executes the
remaining whole shares of that customer order would be subject to
Appendix B of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing Supplementary Material .10 to clarify that, for
purposes of the Plan, Trading Centers must begin the data collection
required pursuant to Appendix B.I.a(1) through B.II.(y) to the Plan and
Item I of Appendix C to the Plan on April 4, 2016. While FINRA will
provide the information required by Appendix B and C to the Plan to the
SEC during the Pre-Pilot period, the requirement that FINRA, as DEA,
provide information to the SEC within 30 calendar days following month
end and make such data publicly available on its Web site pursuant to
Appendix B and C to the Plan shall commence as of the beginning of the
Pilot Period.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ In its order approving the Plan, the SEC noted that the
Pilot shall be implemented within one year of the date of
publication of its order, e.g., by May 6, 2016. See Approval Order,
80 FR at 27545. However, on November 6, 2015, the SEC extended the
implementation date approximately five months to October 3, 2016.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76382 (November 6, 2015), 80
FR 70284 (November 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing Supplementary Material .11 to address the
requirement in Appendix C.I(b) to the Plan that the calculation of raw
Market Maker realized trading profits utilize a last in, first out
(``LIFO'')-like method to determine which share prices shall be used in
that calculation. FINRA and the other Participants believe that is more
appropriate to utilize a methodology that yields LIFO-like results,
rather than utilizing a LIFO-like method, and FINRA is therefore
proposing Supplementary Material .11 to make this change.\32\ FINRA is
proposing that, for purposes of Item I of Appendix C, the Participants
shall calculate daily Market Maker realized profitability statistics
for each trading day on a daily LIFO basis using reported trade price
and shall include only trades executed on the subject trading day. The
daily LIFO calculation shall not include any positions carried over
from previous trading days. For purposes of Item I.c of Appendix C, the
Participants shall calculate daily Market Maker unrealized
profitability statistics for each trading day on an average price
basis.

Specifically, the Participants must calculate the volume weighted
average price of the excess (deficit) of buy volume over sell volume
for the current trading day using reported trade price. The gain (loss)
of the excess (deficit) of buy volume over sell volume shall be
determined by using the volume weighted average price compared to the
closing price of the security as reported by the primary listing
exchange. In reporting unrealized trading profits, the Participant
shall also report the number of excess (deficit) shares held by the
Market Maker, the volume weighted average price of that excess
(deficit) and the closing price of the security as reported by the
primary listing exchange used in reporting unrealized profit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Appendix C.I currently requires Market Maker profitability
statistics to include (1) the total number of shares of orders
executed by the Market Maker; (2) raw Market Maker realized trading
profits, which is the difference between the market value of Market
Maker shares and the market value of Market Maker purchases, using a
LIFO-like method; and (3) raw Market Maker unrealized trading
profits, which is the difference between the purchase or sale price
of the end-of-day inventory position of the Market Maker and the
Closing Price. In the case of a short position, the Closing Price
from the sale will be subtracted; in the case of a long position,
the purchase price will be subtracted from the Closing Price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing Supplementary Material .12 to address the
securities that will be used for data collection purposes prior to the
commencement of the Pilot. FINRA and the other Participants have
determined that it is appropriate to collect data for a group of
securities that is larger, and using different quantitative thresholds,
than the group of securities that will Pilot Securities. FINRA is
therefore proposing Supplementary Material .12 to define ``Pre-Pilot
Data Collection Securities'' as the securities designated by the
Participants for purposes of the data collection requirements described
in Items I, II and IV of Appendix B and Item I of Appendix C to the
Plan for the period beginning six months prior to the Pilot Period and
ending on the trading day immediately preceding the Pilot Period. The
Participants shall compile the list of Pre-Pilot Data Collection
Securities by selecting all NMS stocks with a market capitalization of
$5 billion or less, a Consolidated Average Daily Volume (CADV) of 2
million shares or less and a closing price of $1 per share or more. The
market capitalization and the closing price thresholds shall be applied
to the last day of the Pre-Pilot measurement period, and the CADV
threshold shall be applied to the duration of the Pre-Pilot measurement
period. The Pre-Pilot measurement period shall be the three calendar
months ending on the day when the Pre-Pilot Data Collection Securities
are selected. The Pre-Pilot Data Collection Securities shall be
selected thirty days prior to the commencement of the six-month Pre-
Pilot Period. On the trading day that is the first trading day of the
Pilot Period through six months after the end of the Pilot Period, the
data collection requirements will become applicable to the Pilot
Securities only. A Pilot Security will only be eligible to be included
in a Test Group if it was a Pre-Pilot Security.
    Finally, FINRA is proposing Supplementary Material .13, which
states that the Rule shall be in effect during a pilot period to
coincide with the pilot period for the Plan (including any extensions
to the pilot period for the Plan).
    If the Commission approves the proposed rule change, the proposed
rule change will be effective upon Commission approval. The
implementation date will be April 4, 2016.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\33\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest, and Section 15A(b)(9) of the Act,\34\ which requires
that FINRA rules not impose any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that this proposal is consistent with the Act
because it implements and clarifies the provisions of the Plan, and is
designed to assist FINRA in meeting its regulatory obligations pursuant
to the Plan. In approving the Plan, the SEC noted that the Pilot was an
appropriate, data-driven test that was designed to evaluate the impact
of a wider tick size on trading, liquidity, and the market quality of
securities of smaller capitalization companies, and was therefore in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. FINRA believes that this
proposal is in furtherance of the objectives of the Plan, as identified
by the SEC, and is therefore consistent with the Act because the
proposal implements and clarifies the requirements of the Plan and
applies specific obligations to members in furtherance of compliance
with the Plan.

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. FINRA notes that the proposed
rule change implements the provisions of the Plan, and is designed to
assist FINRA in meeting its regulatory obligations pursuant to the
Plan. FINRA notes that the data collection requirements for members
that operate Trading Centers will apply equally to all such members, as
will the data collection requirements for Market Makers.
    FINRA estimates that there are approximately 250 members that
operate Trading Centers, and for which FINRA is the DEA, that would be
required to submit data pursuant to Appendix B.I and B.II. While the
Plan imposes comprehensive data collection requirements on members that
operate Trading Centers, FINRA notes that some of the data requirements
are modeled upon Rule 605 data, and that it is leveraging existing OATS
data and systems to assist firms in complying with their Appendix B.I
and B.II reporting obligations. FINRA also estimates that there are
approximately 100 members that qualify as Market Makers for which FINRA
is the DEA. While the Plan imposes new reporting obligations on Market
Makers, FINRA notes that some of the requested Market Maker
profitability data may already be captured by members for internal
purposes.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2015-048 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2015-048. 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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2015-048 and should be
submitted on or before December 16, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-29931 Filed 11-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P