[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 24, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64908-64911]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26089]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2010-0846; FRL-9743-8]

Extension of Administrative Stay; Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Federal Implementation Plan for
Interstate Transport of Pollution Affecting Visibility and Best
Available Retrofit Technology Determination

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is extending for an additional 45 days the existing
administrative stay of the final rule titled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Federal
Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport of Pollution Affecting
Visibility and Best Available Retrofit Technology Determination'' under
the authority of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). EPA previously
stayed this rule for 90 days, from July 16, 2012 until October 15,
2012. This action extends the existing administrative stay by an
additional 45 days to allow for additional time for further discussions
of alternatives to EPA's Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). Today's
action reflects this stay in the Code of Federal Regulations.

DATES: 40 CFR 52.1628 is stayed from October 15, 2012 until November
29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R06-OAR-2010-0846. All documents in the docket are listed in
the Federal eRulemaking portal index at http://www.regulations.gov and
are available either electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave.,
Dallas, TX, 75202-2733. To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. A reasonable fee
may be charged for copies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Agustin Carbo-Lugo, EPA Region 6,
(214) 665-8037<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' ``our,'' or ``the Agency'' is used, we mean the EPA. Unless
otherwise specified, when we say the ``San Juan Generating Station,''
or ``SJGS,'' we mean units 1, 2, 3, and 4, inclusive.

I. Background

    On August 22, 2011, the EPA published a final rule disapproving a
portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision received from
the State of New Mexico on September 17, 2007, for the purpose of
addressing the ``good neighbor'' requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standards) and the 1997 fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS (the ``NM FIP Rule''). 76
FR 52388. In that action, EPA disapproved the New Mexico Interstate
Transport SIP provisions that address the requirement of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) that emissions from New Mexico sources do not
interfere with measures required in the SIP of any other state under
part C of the CAA to protect visibility. We found that New Mexico
sources, except the San Juan Generating Station (SJGS), were
sufficiently controlled to eliminate interference from those sources
with the visibility programs of other states. EPA promulgated a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) requiring the implementation of nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission
limits necessary at the San Juan Generating Station to prevent such
interference. This FIP also addresses the Regional Haze (RH) Best
Available Retrofit Technology (BART) requirement for NOX for
SJGS. In addition, EPA implemented sulfuric acid
(H2SO4) hourly emission limits at the SJGS, to
minimize the contribution of this compound to visibility impairment.
Finally, we found that compliance with the NOX,
SO2, and H2SO4 emission limits must be
within 5 years of the effective date of our final rule consistent with
the requirements of the regional haze regulations.
    Petitions for judicial review of the final rule were subsequently
filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The
petitioners bringing those challenges are WildEarth Guardians, Public
Service of New Mexico (PNM), and New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez
with the New Mexico Environment Department.
    By a letter to the EPA Administrator, dated April 26, 2012, the
Governor of New Mexico requested ``a short term (90-day) stay'' of the
federal implementation plan to evaluate the potential for alternatives
to the rule requirements. She presents a stay as being necessary for
``meaningful, productive negotiations'' that may lead to an avoidance
of litigation. By a letter to the acting Regional Administrator of EPA
Region 6, dated May 8, 2012, PNM also requested ``an opportunity to
engage in productive discussions as proposed by Governor Martinez.'' In
response to these requests, EPA stayed the effectiveness of its rule
for 90 days. 77 FR 41697 (July 16, 2012). This temporary stay is set to
expire on October 15, 2012.
    We now believe that additional time is warranted so that the State
of New Mexico can provide additional information required for EPA to
consider the state's alternative and for further discussions among the
stakeholders. The extension of time will allow EPA, the State of New
Mexico and stakeholders to discuss New Mexico's new plan proposal, or
additional ideas that could prove beneficial in creating a state plan
that would ultimately satisfy the requirements of the CAA.

II. Today's Final Rule

A. Issuance of a Stay and Delay of the Effectiveness of the NM FIP Rule

    Pursuant to section 705 of the APA, the EPA hereby extends the
existing administrative stay of the effectiveness of the NM FIP Rule
for a period of an additional 45 days beyond the current expiration
date of October 15, 2012. By this action, we are extending the
administrative stay of the effectiveness of the rule published in the
Federal Register on August 22, 2011 (76 FR 52388). This stay of
effectiveness will remain in place for an additional 45 days, which
will expire on November 29, 2012. This action adds a note to 40 CFR
52.1628 that there is a 135 day stay of the effectiveness of the NM FIP
Rule, but, in its substance, it does not alter any future compliance
requirements. There are no compliance obligations under the terms of
the NM FIP that arise during the 135 day period.
    Under section 705 of the APA, ``an agency * * * may postpone the
effective date of [an] action taken by it pending judicial review.''
This source of authority requires an Agency finding that ``justice
requires'' a temporary stay of rule requirements. Accordingly, as
groundwork for the mentioned discussions among the Agency, the State of
New Mexico, and other stakeholders, EPA now finds that justice requires
an additional 45-day stay of the rule's effectiveness. Our extension of
the temporary stay of the effectiveness of the NM FIP Rule applies only
to any requirements established in 40 CFR 52.1628 during the duration
of the stay, as described previously in the initial 90-day stay.

B. Basis for Making This Action Effective October 15, 2012

    The EPA also believes that there is good cause to make today's
action effective immediately, rather than effective within 30 days,
within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). One purpose of the 30-day
waiting period prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) is to give affected
parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare before
the final action takes effect. Whereas here, this action extends the
stay that is already in effect, and any delay in its effectiveness will
result in unnecessary delays for productive negotiations. Therefore,
balancing the necessity for immediate implementation against principles
of fundamental fairness, which require that all affected persons be
afforded a reasonable amount of time to prepare for the effective date
of this action, EPA has determined that it is unnecessary,
impracticable and contrary to the public interest to delay this action.
Additionally, since this action does not ``implement, interpret, or
prescribe law or policy,'' within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 551(4), nor
makes changes to substantive requirements, EPA concludes that it does
not constitute a substantive rulemaking. Therefore, it is not subject
to notice and comment requirements.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review 13563

    This action will extend the current administrative stay of the NM
FIP for an additional 45 days and imposes no additional requirements.
This type of action is exempt from review under Executive Orders 12866
(58 FR 51735,

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, a ``collection of information'' is
defined as a requirement for ``answers to * * * identical reporting or
recordkeeping requirements imposed on ten or more persons * * *.'' 44
U.S.C. 3502(3)(A). Because the temporary stay is for the effectiveness
of a rule that applies to a single facility, (SJGS), the Paperwork
Reduction Act does not apply. See 5 CFR part 1320(c).
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for our
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
which generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis for any rule that will have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The RFA applies only to rules
subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the APA or
any other statute. This action is not subject to notice and comment
requirements under the APA or any other statute because, although
subject to the APA, this action does not ``implement, interpret, or
prescribe law or policy,'' within the meaning of APA Sec.  551(4).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. EPA has determined that this temporary stay does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures that exceed the
inflation-adjusted UMRA threshold of $100 million by State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector in any 1-year. Therefore, this
action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the
UMRA.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action will
extend the current administrative stay of the NM FIP for an additional
45 days and imposes no additional requirements.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This temporary stay does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and the states, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This action merely is an
extension to stay the effectiveness of a final rule. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    EPA will consult and coordinate with Tribes regarding BART
alternatives during the stay, however, this temporary stay does not
have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), because it neither imposes substantial direct
compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempts tribal law.
Furthermore, this action does not ``implement, interpret, or prescribe
law or policy,'' within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 551(4), and therefore,
it does not constitute a substantive rulemaking. As such, this action
only grants a 90-day stay of the effectiveness of the NM FIP Rule
without altering any future established compliance requirements.
Therefore, the requirements of section 5(b) and 5(c) of the Executive
Order do not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This extension of a temporary stay is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is not a rule of general applicability, it is
not economically significant as defined under Executive Order 12866,
and does not have a disproportionate effect on children.
    Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This extension of a temporary stay is not subject to the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''). Section
12(d) of the NTTAA, Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note),
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    This extension of a temporary stay is not subject to Executive
Order 12898. Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994),
establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main
provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable
and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
change the substance of 40 CFR 52.1628.

K. Congressional Review Act

    This action is not subject to the Congressional Review Act
(``CRA''). The CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The Section 804 (3) of the CRA defines ``rule'' as
having the same meaning given to such term in section 551 of the APA.
See 5 U.S.C. 551(4). Since this action is not designed to implement,
interpret, or prescribe law or policy, within the meaning of APA, this
action is exempted from the reporting requirements of the CRA.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
dioxide, Visibility, Interstate transport of pollution, Regional haze,
Best available control technology.

    Dated: October 12, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-26089 Filed 10-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 140 (Friday, July 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42718-42719]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17655]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Commission Staff Attendance

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby gives notice that
members of the Commission's staff may attend the following meetings
related to the transmission planning activities of the Southwest Power
Pool, Inc. (SPP):

Order 1000 Tariff Draft Task Force

July 24, 2012
    2:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m. CDT
July 25, 2012
    9:30 a.m.-1 p.m. CDT

    The above-referenced meetings will be held at:

AEP Offices, 1201 Elm Street, 8th Floor, Dallas, TX 75270.

    The above-referenced meetings are open to stakeholders.
    Further information may be found at www.spp.org.
    The discussions at the meetings described above may address matters
at issue in the following proceedings:

Docket No. ER09-35-001, Tallgrass Transmission, LLC
Docket No. ER09-36-001, Prairie Wind Transmission, LLC
Docket No. ER09-548-001, ITC Great Plains, LLC
Docket No. ER11-4105-000, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. EL11-34-001, Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1179-000, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1415-000, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1460-000, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1610-000, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-1772-000, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-2176-000, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    For more information, contact Luciano Lima, Office of Energy
Markets Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (202) 502-
6210 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 12, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-17655 Filed 7-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 231 (Monday, December 4, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57248-57249]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26031]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP17-458-000]

Midship Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review of the Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate
Pipeline Project

    On May 31, 2017, Midship Pipeline Company, LLC (Midship Pipeline)
filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC or Commission) in Docket No. CP17-458-000 requesting a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to section
7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and part 157 of the Commission's
regulations to construct, own, operate, and maintain a new 233.6-mile-
long natural gas pipeline system and associated facilities in Oklahoma.
The proposed project, known as the Midcontinent Supply Header
Interstate Pipeline Project (MIDSHIP Project), would provide 1,440
million standard cubic feet per day of natural gas transportation
capacity from the Anadarko Basin in Oklahoma to existing natural gas
pipelines near Bennington, Oklahoma, for transport to growing Gulf
Coast and Southeast markets.
    FERC issued its Notice of Application for the MIDSHIP Project on
June 14, 2017. Among other things, the notice alerted other agencies
issuing federal authorizations of the requirement to complete all
necessary reviews and to reach a final decision on the request for a
federal authorization within 90 days of the date of issuance of the
Commission staff's final environmental impact statement (EIS) for the
MIDSHIP Project. This notice identifies the FERC staff's planned
schedule for completion of the final EIS for the MIDSHIP Project, which
is based on an issuance of the draft EIS in February 2018.

Schedule for Environmental Review

    Issuance of Notice of Availability of the final EIS: June 21, 2018.
    90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline: September 19, 2018.
    If a schedule change becomes necessary, an additional notice will
be provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
MIDSHIP Project's progress.

Background

    On November 9, 2016, the Commission staff granted Midship
Pipeline's request to use FERC's pre-filing environmental review
process and assigned the MIDSHIP Project Docket No. PF17-3-000. On
January 27, 2017,

the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement for the Planned Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate
Pipeline Project, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and
Notice of Public Scoping Sessions. On March 22, 2017, the Commission
issued a Supplemental Notice to seek comments on additional facilities
identified by Midship Pipeline as part of the MIDSHIP Project. The
notices were sent to federal, state, and local government
representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and
public interest groups; Native American Tribes; affected property
owners; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers.
Major issues raised include the potential for induced seismicity;
possible alternative routes; and potential impacts on agricultural
lands, cattle grazing, threatened and endangered species, surface water
and groundwater resources, air quality and noise, and safety. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency is a cooperating agency in the
preparation of the EIS.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EIS and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents via email. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Additional information about the MIDSHIP Project is available from
the Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). Using the eLibrary link, select General
Search from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date range and Docket
Number excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP17-458), and follow the
instructions. For assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can
be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at
[email protected]. The eLibrary link on the FERC Web site also
provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: November 28, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-26031 Filed 12-1-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Johnd Bachmann 01/ 16/ 2004 04: 02 PM To: Amy_ L._ Farrell@ omb. eop. govJeff Holmstead/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Bill Wehrum/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Stephanie Daigle/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Don Zinger/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Peter Tsirigotis/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Lisaa Jones/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Sarah Dunham, Sam Napolitano, Lydia Wegman/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA cc: Sarah Dunham, Scott Mathias/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Kevin Culligan/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Joe Paisie/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Norm Possiel/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Mikhail Adamantiades/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA Subject: Remaining IAQR TSD/ Background materials To avoid file size problems and confusion, I'm sending these documents in two sets. The first are the IPM Run List/ Non EGU sources/ Monitoring costs documents. The second will be air quality analyses and modeling TSDs, the latter of which is accompanied by numerous appendices.

John Bachmann U. S. EPA C404 04 Research Triangle Park, NC27711 Voice 919 541 5359 Fax 919 541 2464 email Bachmann. JohnD@ epa. gov


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40220-40223]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15927]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69872]

Order Pursuant to Section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 Granting Exemption From the Clearing Agency Registration
Requirement Under Section 17A(b) of the Exchange Act for ICE Clear
Europe Limited in Connection With Its Proposal To Clear Contracts
Traded on the LIFFE Administration and Management Market

June 27, 2013.

I. Introduction

    Section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act'') \1\ sets forth the framework for the regulation of the clearance
and settlement of securities transactions and directs the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') to facilitate the
establishment of a national system for the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions. Pursuant to
Section 17A(b)(1) of the Exchange Act,\2\ absent an exemption, a
clearing agency that makes use of the mails or any means or
instrumentality of interstate commerce to perform the functions of a
clearing agency with respect to any security (other than an exempted
security) is required to register with the Commission. The Commission
has required a foreign clearing agency to register or obtain an
exemption from clearing agency registration if the foreign clearing
agency provides clearance and settlement services for U.S. securities
directly to U.S. persons.\3\ The Commission, by rule or order, upon its
own motion or upon application, may conditionally or unconditionally
exempt any clearing agency or security or any class of clearing
agencies or securities from any provisions of Section 17A or the rules
or regulations thereunder, if the Commission finds that such exemption
is consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors,
and the purposes of Section 17A, including the prompt and accurate

clearance and settlement of securities transactions and the
safeguarding of securities and funds.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(1).
    \3\ See Cross-Border Security-Based Swap Activities; Re-Proposal
of Regulation SBSR and Certain Rules and Forms Relating to the
Registration of Security-Based Swap Dealers and Major Security-Based
Swap Participants, Exchange Act Release No. 69490 (May 1, 2013), 78
FR 30967 (May 23, 2013), Part V.B, n. 682; and Exemption of Certain
Foreign Brokers or Dealers, Exchange Act Release No. 58047 (Jun. 27,
2008), 73 FR 39182 (Jul. 8, 2008), Part III.F.3 (both discussing the
Commission's approach to the registration of foreign clearing
agencies).
    \4\ See Section 17A(b)(1) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78q-
1(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'') is an indirectly
wholly-owned subsidiary of IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. (``ICE'').
Incorporated in England and Wales in 2007 as a private limited company,
ICE Clear Europe is subject to supervision by the Bank of England as a
Recognised Clearing House (``RCH'') in the United Kingdom. Pursuant to
Section 763(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act,\5\ on July 16, 2011, ICE Clear
Europe became registered with the Commission as a clearing agency
solely for the purpose of clearing security-based swaps (``SBS'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act of 2010, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
    \6\ Section 763(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act amended Section 17A of
the Exchange Act by adding new Section 17A(l) to the Exchange Act,
15 U.S.C. 78q-1(l), which provides that (i) a depository institution
registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC'')
that cleared swaps as a multilateral clearing organization prior to
the date of enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act and (ii) a derivatives
clearing organization registered with the CFTC that cleared swaps
pursuant to an exemption from registration as a clearing agency
prior to the date of enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act will be deemed
registered with the Commission as a clearing agency solely for the
purpose of clearing SBS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the proposed merger of ICE with NYSE Euronext,
ICE Clear Europe filed with the Commission a proposed rule change under
Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4 \8\ thereunder to
clear futures and options contracts traded on the LIFFE Administration
and Management Market (``LIFFE A&M''), including contracts traded over-
the-counter and processed through LIFFE A&M's BClear \9\ service.\10\
The contracts traded on LIFFE A&M proposed to be cleared by ICE Clear
Europe (``LIFFE Contracts'') include instruments that constitute
securities for the purposes of U.S. securities laws (``LIFFE Securities
Products''), including U.S. securities, which for purposes of the
Proposal, include futures or options on underlying U.S. equities and
equity indices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \9\ BClear is a service operated by LIFFE A&M, which enables
LIFFE A&M clearing members to report certain bilaterally agreed off-
exchange trades to LIFFE A&M. After ICE Clear Europe launches its
clearing business for LIFFE A&M, trades would be eligible for
clearing by ICE Clear Europe upon being reported.
    \10\ On May 13, 2013, ICE Clear Europe filed a proposed rule
change with the Commission. On May 22, 2013, ICE Clear Europe
submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change to, among
other things, clarify the scope of products proposed to be cleared,
add new Rule 207(f) prohibiting broker-dealer/futures commission
merchant Clearing Members and other Clearing Members organized in
the U.S. from clearing LIFFE Contracts that are futures or options
on underlying U.S. securities, add additional clarification
surrounding the operation of the combined F&O Guaranty Fund and the
margining of LIFFE Contracts, and supplement the statutory basis for
the proposed rule change. See Exchange Act Release No. 69628 (May
23, 2013), 78 FR 32287 (May 29, 2013) (SR-ICEEU-2013-09) (``Original
Filing''). On June 4, 2013, ICE Clear Europe submitted Amendment No.
2 to the proposed rule change to set forth more fully the statutory
basis for the proposed rule changes and to make certain additional
rule changes relevant to changes in margin requirements. See
Exchange Act Release No. 69703 (Jun. 5, 2013), 78 FR 35335 (Jun. 12,
2013) (SR-ICEEU-2013-09) (``Amendment No. 2''). On June 20, 2013,
ICE Clear Europe filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change,
which modified proposed Rule 207(f) to further define the persons
that are subject to the restriction from clearing U.S. securities to
include any clearing member having a U.S. residence, based upon the
location of its executive office or principal place of business,
including, without limitation, (i) a U.S. bank (as defined by
Section 3(a)(6) of the Exchange Act) and (ii) a foreign branch of a
U.S. bank or U.S. registered broker-dealer. The initial rule filing
and all subsequent amendments filed are collectively referred to
hereinafter as the ``Proposal.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this context, ICE Clear Europe has filed with the Commission an
application on Form CA-1 for exemption from clearing agency
registration under Section 17A(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 17Ab2-1
thereunder in connection with ICE Clear Europe's proposed clearing
activity involving LIFFE Securities Products.\11\ Based on the rules
and procedures contained in the Proposal, the representations made and
information submitted by ICE Clear Europe in the Proposal, its Form CA-
1 application, including the ICE Clear Europe Letter, and additional
supplemental materials (collectively, the ``Exemptive Application''),
and for the reasons discussed in this Order, the Commission is
exempting ICE Clear Europe from the registration requirement under
Section 17A(b)(1) of the Exchange Act solely with respect to ICE Clear
Europe's provision of clearance and settlement services for LIFFE
Securities Products, subject to certain conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ICE Clear Europe's Form CA-1 incorporates a letter from
Paul Swann, President, ICE Clear Europe, to Elizabeth Murphy,
Secretary, SEC, dated June 11, 2013, requesting exemptive relief
from clearing agency registration in connection with the clearing of
LIFFE Securities Products (``ICE Clear Europe Letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

A. Applicable Standards

    Section 17A(b)(1) of the Exchange Act \12\ prohibits any clearing
agency from directly or indirectly making use of the mails or any means
or instrumentality of interstate commerce to perform the functions of a
clearing agency with respect to any security (other than an exempted
security), unless it is registered with the Commission. Section
17A(b)(1) further provides that the Commission, by rule or order, may
conditionally or unconditionally exempt any clearing agency or security
or any class of clearing agencies or securities from any provisions of
Section 17A of the Exchange Act or the rules or regulations thereunder,
if the Commission finds that such exemption is consistent with the
public interest, the protection of investors, and the purposes of
Section 17A, including the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement
of securities transactions and the safeguarding of securities and
funds.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(1).
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has required a foreign clearing agency to register,
or obtain an exemption from clearing agency registration, when the
foreign clearing agency provides clearance and settlement services for
U.S. securities directly to U.S. persons.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra n. 3. See, also, e.g., Order Approving
Application for Exemption from Registration as a Clearing Agency,
Exchange Act Release No. 38328 (Feb. 24, 1997), 62 FR 9225 (Feb. 28,
1997) (granting an exemption from registration as a clearing agency
under Section 17A in connection with performing the functions of a
clearing agency with respect to transactions involving U.S.
government and agency securities for U.S. entities); Order Approving
Application for Exemption from Registration as a Clearing Agency,
Exchange Act Release No. 39643 (Feb. 11, 1998), 63 FR 8232 (Feb. 18,
1998); and Order Approving Application to Modify an Existing
Exemption from Clearing Agency Registration, Exchange Act Release
No. 43775 (Dec. 28, 2000), 66 FR 819 (Jan. 4, 2001).
    Cf. Order Approving Proposed Rule Change to Allow The Depository
Trust Company to Provide Settlement Services to European Central
Counterparty Limited for U.S. Securities Traded on European Trading
Venues, Exchange Act Release No. 61593 (Feb. 25, 2010), 75 FR 9987
(Mar. 4, 2010) (SR-DTC-2009-17) (approving a proposed rule change to
allow The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') to provide settlement
services to European Central Counterparty Limited, a separately
incorporated foreign subsidiary of The Depository Trust and Clearing
Corporation and a RCH, for U.S. securities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. ICE Clear Europe's Request for Exemption

    ICE Clear Europe is a foreign clearing agency registered in the
U.S. solely for the purpose of clearing SBS. The Commission has not
previously addressed the registration requirements applicable to a
foreign clearing agency registered solely for the purpose of clearing
SBS that proposes to clear non-SBS securities products. However, the
Commission believes that the proposed clearing of the LIFFE Securities
Products would exceed the scope of activities permitted by ICE Clear

Europe's registration as a SBS clearing agency under Section 17A(l) of
the Exchange Act, and therefore ICE Clear Europe may not clear the
LIFFE Securities Products pursuant to its existing Commission
registration. In addition, because the LIFFE Securities Products
include certain products that are considered U.S. securities, and ICE
Clear Europe clearing members include financial institutions that are
organized or resident in the United States, the Commission has
determined that ICE Clear Europe must register or seek an exemption
from registration as a clearing agency under Section 17A(b)(1) of the
Exchange Act prior to providing clearing services for the LIFFE
Securities Products.
    In light of the Commission's precedents pertaining to registration
requirements for foreign clearing agencies, ICE Clear Europe is
proposing to amend its rule book to prohibit U.S. clearing members
(``U.S. participants'') from clearing U.S. securities. Specifically,
new ICE Clear Europe Rule 207(f) would prohibit U.S. participants \15\
from clearing U.S. securities. In addition, ICE Clear Europe has
developed policies and procedures to enforce proposed Rule 207(f),
including market access controls that prevent U.S. participants from
creating or holding cleared positions in U.S. securities and,
consequently, from engaging in any clearing-related activity (including
give-ups or take-ups in respect of those products).\16\ In addition,
when a new U.S. participant is approved for clearing, LIFFE A&M and ICE
Clear Europe will be jointly responsible to ensure that these access
limitations are properly in place.\17\ ICE Clear Europe represents that
it will report any incidents not in compliance with such proposed Rule
207(f).\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The term ``U.S. participant'' was previously defined for
the limited purposes of a clearing agency exemptive order as a
person having a U.S. residence, based upon the location of its
executive office or principal place of business, including, without
limitation, (i) a U.S. bank (as defined by Section 3(a)(6) of the
Exchange Act), (ii) a foreign branch of a U.S. bank or U.S.
registered broker-dealer, and (iii) any broker-dealer registered as
such with the Commission even if such broker-dealer does not have a
U.S. residence. See Exchange Act Release No. 39643 (Feb. 11, 1998),
63 FR 8232 (Feb. 18, 1998) (order exempting Euroclear Bank's
predecessor, Morgan Guaranty Trust Company, as operator of the
Euroclear system, from clearing agency registration), n. 62.
Consistent with this definition of U.S. participant, ICE Clear
Europe's Proposal contains rule changes that would prohibit a person
(i) that is a FCM/BD, (ii) organized in the United States of
America, or (iii) having a U.S. residence, based on the location of
its executive office or principal place of business, including,
without limitation, a U.S. bank (as defined by Section 3(a)(6) of
the Exchange Act) or a foreign branch of a U.S. bank or U.S.
registered broker-dealer, from participating in clearing U.S.
securities.
    \16\ See Amendment No. 2 at 35337.
    \17\ Id.
    \18\ See Exemptive Application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with its clearing of the LIFFE Contracts, ICE Clear
Europe has represented that it is not seeking an exemption from
substantive regulation that it is currently subject to as a registered
clearing agency.\19\ ICE Clear Europe states that it will clear LIFFE
Contracts in a manner consistent with the requirements of Section 17A
of the Exchange Act and Rule 17Ad-22 thereunder, including the
requirements as to financial resources, operational and managerial
resources, participant requirements, settlement procedures,
safeguarding of funds and default procedures, among others.\20\ ICE
Clear Europe further represents that it will manage its clearing
activities involving the LIFFE Contracts, including LIFFE Securities
Products, to the standards applicable to registered clearing
agencies.\21\ ICE Clear Europe has noted that, since ICE Clear Europe
is a registered clearing agency for SBS, ICE Clear Europe's clearing of
LIFFE Contracts, including LIFFE Securities Products, will be subject
to the requirements under the Exchange Act applicable to a registered
clearing agency, including the rule approval requirements under Section
19(b) of the Exchange Act, regardless of whether ICE Clear Europe is
exempt from the registration requirement of Section 17A(b)(1).\22\ ICE
Clear Europe also acknowledges the Commission's current supervision and
examination authority over ICE Clear Europe's business generally,
including the authority to conduct regular on-site examination.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.
    \20\ Id. See also Original Filing, supra n. 10.
    \21\ See Exemptive Application.
    \22\ Id.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its exemptive request, ICE Clear Europe has expressed concerns
that a delay in its ability to clear the LIFFE Contracts beginning July
1, 2013, would cause disruption to the market for these products.\24\
In addition, ICE Clear Europe noted that by September 2013, all
European clearing agencies will need to apply for authorization under
the European Markets and Infrastructure Directive (EMIR).\25\ ICE Clear
Europe states that the current LIFFE A&M clearing arrangements are not
built out for EMIR compliance, and therefore LIFFE A&M, ICE Clear
Europe, LCH.Clearnet Limited, and market participants are relying on
this transition taking place to be compliant with EU law.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id.
    \25\ Id.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Effect of Exemption

    Based on ICE Clear Europe's representations to clear LIFFE
Contracts in a manner consistent with the standards applicable to
clearing agencies registered under Section 17A, and the Commission's
existing authority over ICE Clear Europe as a registered clearing
agency under Section 17A(l), granting an exemption from the clearing
agency registration requirement under Section 17A(b) to ICE Clear
Europe for the clearing of LIFFE Securities Products would operate as
an exemption from the registration process and not from the
Commission's statutory authority to substantively oversee and regulate
such activities.
    Furthermore, ICE Clear Europe's proposed limitations to prevent
U.S. participants from clearing U.S. securities, including proposed
Rule 207(f) and related policies, procedures, and market access
controls, are consistent with clearing arrangements involving foreign
clearing agencies for which the Commission has granted exemptive relief
from registration requirements under Section 17A(b).\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See supra n. 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An exemption granted to ICE Clear Europe from the clearing agency
registration requirement under Section 17A(b)(1) of the Exchange Act
provides legal certainty for ICE Clear Europe as to its activities
associated with the clearing of LIFFE Securities Products, avoids
disruption in the European markets, and facilitates compliance with
EMIR, consistent with promoting the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions. In addition, the Commission's continued
supervision over ICE Clear Europe as a registered clearing agency,
notwithstanding the exemption from the registration requirement,
permits the Commission to oversee that ICE Clear Europe provides
clearance and settlement services with respect to LIFFE Contracts,
including LIFFE Securities Products, in a manner consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act. Accordingly, based on
the foregoing, the amended rules and procedures contained in the
Proposal, and the representations made by ICE Clear Europe in its
Exemptive Application, the Commission finds that an exemption from
registration with respect to the clearing activity for the LIFFE
Securities Products under Section 17A(b)(1) is

consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, and
the purposes of Section 17A, including the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and the
safeguarding of securities and funds.

III. Scope and Modification of Order

    This exemption granted by this order is solely with respect to the
registration requirement in Section 17A(b)(1) applicable to the
clearance and settlement services to be provided by ICE Clear Europe
for LIFFE Securities Products as described in ICE Clear Europe's
Proposal, and does not in any way affect the Commission's existing
supervisory authority over ICE Clear Europe as a registered clearing
agency. ICE Clear Europe as a registered clearing agency continues to
be subject to the applicable provisions of the Exchange Act, including
Sections 17A,\28\ 17(a),\29\ 17(b),\30\ and 19(b),\31\ and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to clearance and settlement
activities and registered clearing agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(a).
    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(b).
    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission may modify by order the terms, scope, or condition
of this exemptive order if the Commission determines that such
modification is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for
the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Exchange Act. Furthermore, the Commission may limit,
suspend, or revoke this exemption if the Commission finds that ICE
Clear Europe has violated or is unable to comply with the conditions of
this Order or applicable provisions in the Exchange Act with respect to
a registered clearing agency, if such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act.

IV. Conclusion

    The Commission finds that ICE Clear Europe's application for
exemption from the registration requirement under Section 17A(b)(1) is
consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, and
the purposes of Section 17A.
    It is hereby ordered, pursuant to Section 17A(b)(1) of the Exchange
Act, that the application for exemption from registration under Section
17A(b)(1) filed by ICE Clear Europe Limited be, and hereby is, approved
within the scope described in this order subject to the following
conditions:
    (1) ICE Clear Europe shall have rules, policies, and procedures
reasonably designed to prohibit the clearing of U.S. securities by U.S.
participants, including market access controls preventing U.S.
participants from creating or holding cleared positions in U.S.
securities and, consequently, from engaging in any clearing-related
activity for such products.
    (2) ICE Clear Europe shall immediately notify the Commission of
incidents of non-compliance with its rules, policies, or procedures
prohibiting U.S. participants from clearing U.S. securities, whether
intentional or otherwise, including any failure of any operational
controls proposed by ICE Clear Europe to prevent U.S. participants from
creating or holding cleared positions in U.S. securities.
    (3) ICE Clear Europe shall clear LIFFE Contracts, including LIFFE
Securities Products, in a manner consistent with the requirements of
Section 17A of the Exchange Act and Rule 17Ad-22 thereunder.
    (4) ICE Clear Europe, as a registered clearing agency, shall
continue to be subject to the applicable provisions of the Exchange
Act, including Sections 17A,\32\ 17(a),\33\ 17(b),\34\ and 19(b),\35\
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to clearance and
settlement activities and registered clearing agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(a).
    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78q(b).
    \35\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).

    By the Commission.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15927 Filed 7-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 190)]
[Notices]
[Page 57580]
[DOCID:fr03oc05-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER05-1232-000]

J. P. Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation; Notice of Issuance of
Order

September 23, 2005.
    J. P. Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation (Ventures Energy) filed an
application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate
tariff. The proposed rate tariff provides for wholesale sales of
energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. Ventures
Energy also requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In
particular, Ventures Energy requested that the Commission grant blanket
approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities and
assumptions of liability by Ventures Energy.
    On September 20, 2005, the Commission granted the request for
blanket approval under part 34, subject to the following:
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket approval
of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by Ventures
Energy should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protests, is October 20, 2005.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Ventures Energy is authorized to issue securities and assume
obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or
otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that
such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the
corporate purposes of Ventures Energy, compatible with the public
interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approval of Ventures Energy's issuances of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Commission's Order are available
from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5358 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P