	SUPPORTING STATEMENT

	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants

(40 CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart N) (Renewal), EPA ICR 1081.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0043

1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants were proposed on July 20, 1983 and promulgated on August 4, 1986.  The standards were amended on both May 31, 1990 and

October 17, 2000.  These standards apply to each glass melting furnace that uses commercial arsenic as a raw material.  These standards do not apply to pot furnaces.  Also, re-bricking is not considered construction or modification for the purposes of 40 CFR Section 61.05(a).  This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 61, subpart N.

In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports.  Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative.  These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all sources subject to NESHAP.

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part will maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least two years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records.  All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority.

In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office.

Based on consultation with industry representatives, there is an average of one affected facility at each plant site and each plant site has only one respondent (i.e., the owner/operator of the plant site).

Approximately sixteen respondents are currently subject to the regulation, and it is estimated that no additional respondents per year will become subject to the regulation over the next three years.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the current Information Collection Request (ICR) without any “Terms of Clearance.”

The burden to the “Affected Public” may be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart N) (Renewal), attached.  The burden to the “Federal Government” is attributed entirely to work performed by federal employees or government contractors; this burden may be found in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden: NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart N) (Renewal), attached.

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants.  These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction.  In addition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any owner/operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports;  C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, arsenic emissions from glass manufacturing plants cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.  Therefore, the NESHAP was promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part 61, subpart N.

2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standards ensure compliance with the applicable regulations which were promulgated in accordance with the Clean Air Act.  The collected information is also used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings. Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected facility’s initial capability to comply with the emission standards.  Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the standard at all times.  During the performance test, a record of the operating parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded and used to determine compliance in place of a continuous emission monitor.

The notifications required in the standards are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to ensure that the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the standards are being met. The performance test may also be observed.

The required semiannual reports are used to: 1) determine periods of excess emissions;  2) identify problems at the facility; 3) verify operation/maintenance procedures; 4) make compliance determinations.

3.  Non-duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part 61, subpart N.

3(a)  Non-duplication

If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If a state or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the state or a local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication exists.

3(b)  Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published in the Federal Register (73 FR 31088) on May 30, 2008.  No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

3(c)  Consultations

For this information collection, we referenced the most recent ICR, consulted with the preparer of the active ICR, and used several different resources to obtain the most recent data available.  We reviewed information available from the United States Census Bureau, the Air Facility System (AFS), and websites covering inorganic arsenic emissions from glass manufacturing.

It is our policy to respond after a thorough review of comments received since the last ICR renewal as well as those submitted in response to the first Federal Register notice.  In this case, no comments were received.

3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.  Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and emission limitations are met.  If the information required by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and noncompliance would decrease.

3(e)  General Guidelines

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

3(f)  Confidentiality

Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B - Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI) (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3(g)  Sensitive Questions

None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a)  Respondents/SIC Codes

The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are inorganic arsenic emissions from glass manufacturing plants.  The Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes for the respondents affected by the standards, which correspond to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, are listed below for source category description.

Standard (40 CFRp 61, subpart N)

SIC Codes

NAICS Codes

Flat Glass Manufacturing

3211

327211

Glass Container Manufacturing

3221

327213

Other Pressed and Blown Glass and Glassware Manufacturing

3229

327212

Mineral Wool Manufacturing

3296

327993

4(b)  Information Requested

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

(i)  Data Items

All data in this ICR that are recorded and/or reported are required by the NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal).

A source must make the following reports:

Notification Reports

Standard Citation by Section

Notification and application of construction or modification

61.06 and 61.07

Notification of anticipated date of initial startup

61.09(a)(1)

Notification of actual startup

61.09(a)(2)

Source status report

61.10(a)

Notification of initial performance emissions test

60.13(c), and 61.165(d)(2)

Report initial performance emissions test results

61.13(f), and 61.165(d)(2)

Notification of physical or operational change

61.15

Report of arsenic emission estimates

61.165(d)(3)

Report of uncontrolled arsenic emission rates

61.165(d)(4)

Request approval of control device bypass

61.165(e)

Report of results of continuous monitoring system (CMS) evaluation

61.165(f)(1)

Semiannual report of excess emissions (opacity)

61.165(f)(2)

A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping

Record continuous opacity and temperature of gas entering control device

61.165(a)(1)

Records of emission test results and other data needed to determine emissions

61.13(g), and 61.165(a)(2)

Records of CMS performance evaluations

61.165(a)(3)

Occurrence and duration of startup, shutdown, and malfunction of furnace

61.165(a)(4)

Malfunction of air pollution control device

61.5165(a)(5)

Periods when monitors are inoperative

61.165(a)(6)

Maintenance and repair of control device, CMS or monitor

61.165(a)(7)

Records of approved control device bypass

61.165(b)

Semiannual records of uncontrolled arsenic emission rate

61.165(c)

Records are required to be retained for two (2) years

61.14(f)

Electronic Reporting

Currently, respondents are using monitoring equipment that automatically records parameter data.  Although personnel at the affected facility must evaluate the data, this internal automation has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping at the plant site.

Also, regulatory agencies in cooperation with the respondents, continue to create reporting systems to transmit data electronically.  However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used.  At this time, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use electronic reporting.

(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate CMS for opacity, or for pressure drop and liquid supply pressure for wet scrubber.

Perform initial performance test, Reference Methods 1, 2, 3, 5D, and 108 test, and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of 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.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

Currently, sources are using automated monitoring equipment that provides parameter data.  Although personnel at the sources still need to evaluate the data, this type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping.

5.  The Information Collected:  Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management

5(a)  Agency Activities

EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System (AFS).

5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated.

Performance test reports are used by the Agency to discern a source’s initial capability to comply with the emission standard, and note the operating conditions under which compliance was       achieved.  Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs.  The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.

Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA’s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters. EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner/operator for two years.

5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

A majority of the respondents are large entities (i.e., large businesses).  However, the impact on small entities (i.e., small businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the regulation.  The number of small entities affected by this rule could not be determined, based on review of the following sources: the promulgated rule notice in the Federal Register (51 FR 27956) on August 4, 1986; the Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants Background Information for Proposed Standards (1983); and a search of publicly available current data sources.  Based on the Background Information document, about 70 percent of glass plants are considered to be small firms; however, arsenic usage by these small firms is not known.

Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and large entities.  The Agency considers these requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities.  To the extent that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden will be reduced.

5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden for NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal), attached.

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart included in this ICR.  The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Where appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.  Responses to this information collection are mandatory.

The 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.

6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 3,098 (Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

This ICR uses the following labor rates:

Managerial	$97.46   ($46.41 + 110%)

Technical	$83.71   ($39.86 + 110%)

Clerical	$42.55   ($20.26 + 110%)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by Occupational and Industry group.”  The rates are from Column 1, “Total compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

(ii)  Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs

The type of industry costs associated with the information collection activities in the subject standard are both labor costs which are addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous monitoring.  The capital/startup costs are one-time costs when a facility becomes subject to the regulation.  The annual operation and maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor and other costs such as photocopying and postage.

(iii)  Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

(A)

Continuous Monitoring Device

(B)

Capital/Startup Cost for One Respondent

(C)

Number of New Respondents

(D)

Total Capital/Startup Cost,

 (B X C)

(E)

Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent

(F)

Number of Respondents  with O&M

(G)

Total O&M,

(E X F)

Continuous Opacity Monitor

N/A

N/A

$0

$3,000

16

$48,000

Temperature Monitor

N/A

N/A

$0

$500

16

$8,000

Totals

$0

$56,000

The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are zero.  This is the total of column D in the above table.

The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are $56,000.  This is the total of column G.

The total respondent costs in block 14 have been calculated as the addition of the capital/startup costs, and the annual operation and maintenance costs.  The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is estimated to be $56,000 .

6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of the reported information.  EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program includes activities such as the examination of records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $4,009.

This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

Managerial	$56.02   (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6)

Technical	$41.57   (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6)

Clerical	$22.50   (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2004 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.  Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden for NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal), attached.

6(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

Based on our research for this ICR, on average over the next three years, approximately sixteen existing respondents will be subject to the standard.  It is estimated that no additional respondents per year will become subject to the standard in the next three years.  The overall average number of respondents, as shown in the table below, is 16 per year.

The number of respondents is calculated using the following table which addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents

Respondents That Submit Reports

Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports

Year

(A)

Number of New Respondents 1

(B)

Number of Existing Respondents

(C)

Number of Existing  Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports

(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents

(E)

Number of Respondents

(E=A+B+C-D)

1

0

16

0

0

16

2

0

16

0

0

16

3

0

16

0

0

16

Average

0

16

0

0

16

As shown above, the average Number of Respondents over the three year period of this ICR is 16.  The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the following table:

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity

(B)

Number of Respondents

(C)

Number of Responses

(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports

(E)

Total Annual  Responses

E=(BxC)+D

Application of construction or modification

0

0

N/A

0

Notification of anticipated startup

0

0

N/A

0

Notification of actual startup

0

0

N/A

0

Source status report

0

0

N/A

0

Notification of initial performance emission test

0

0

N/A

0

Notification of physical or operation change

0

0

N/A

0

Report of arsenic emission estimates

15

2

N/A

30

Report of uncontrolled arsenic emission rates

15

2

N/A

30

Request approval of control device bypass

1

1

N/A

1

Semiannual excess emissions (opacity)

1

2

N/A

2

Total

63

The number of Total Annual Responses is 63.  The total annual labor costs are $250,106.  Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal), attached.

6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.

(i) Respondent Tally

The total annual labor costs are $250,106.  Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal), attached.  Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 49 hours per response.

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $56,000.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

(ii) The Agency Tally

The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 99 labor hours at a cost of $4,009.  See Table 2: Annual Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal), attached.

6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in the labor hours or cost to the respondents in this ICR compared to the previous ICR.  This is due to two considerations.  First, the regulations have not changed over the past three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three years.  Secondly, the growth rate for respondents is very low, negative, or non-existent.  Therefore, the labor hours and cost figures in the previous ICR reflect the current burden to the respondents and are reiterated in this ICR.

6(g)  Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 49 hours per response.  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 valid OMB Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0375.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at http://www.regulations.gov/ which may be used to obtain a copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system, select “search,” then key in the docket ID number identified in this document.  The documents are also available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the docket center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0375 and OMB Control Number 2060-0043 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.

Table 1:  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost - NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufacturing Plants (CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal)

	Burden item

(A)

Technical

Person-

hours per

occurrence

(B)

No.  of

occurrences

per respondent

per year

(C)

Technical

Person-

hours per

respondent

per year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Respondents

per year a

(E)

Technical

person-

hours per

year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management

person-hours per

year

(Ex0.05)

(G)

Clerical

person-

hours per year

(Ex0.1)

(H)

Total Cost

 per year b

1.  Applications

N/A

2.  Survey and Studies

N/A

3.  Reporting requirements

  A.  Read Instructions c

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

$0

  B.  Required Activities

N/A

           Initial performance emission tests d

80

1

80

0

0

0

0

$0

           Repeat of performance emission tests

80

0.2

16

0

0

0

0

$0

  C.  Create information

Included in 3B

  D.  Gather existing information

Included in 3B

  E.  Write report

       Application of construction or modification

2

1

2

0

0

0

0

$0

       Notification of anticipated startup

2

1

2

0

0

0

0

$0

       Notification of actual startup

2

1

2

0

0

0

0

$0

       Source status report

2

1

2

0

0

0

0

$0

       Notification of initial performance emission          test

2

1

2

0

0

0

0

$0

       Report of initial performance emission test

Included in 3B

       Notification of physical or operation change

2

1

2

0

0

0

0

$0

       Report results of continuous monitoring                system (CMS) evaluation

Included in 3B

       Report of arsenic emission estimates e

16

2

32

15

480

24

48

$44,562

       Report of uncontrolled arsenic emission f                rates

8

2

16

15

240

12

24

$22,281

       Request approval of control device bypass g

6

1

6

1

6

0.3

0.6

$557

       Semiannual excess emissions (opacity) h

16

2

32

1

32

1.6

3.2

$2,971

SUBTOTAL Reporting

	758	37.9	75.8	$70,371

4.  Recordkeeping Requirements

  A.  Read instructions

Included in 3A

  B.  Plan activities

Included in 3B

  C.  Implement activities

Included in 3B

  D.  Develop record system

N/A

  E.  Time to enter information i

40

1

40

16

656

32.8

65.6

$60,902

          Record continuous opacity and                              temperature of gas entering control device

Included in 4E

          Records of emission test results

Included in 4E

          Records of CMS performance evaluations

Included in 4E

          Occurrence and duration of startup,                       shutdown, and malfunction of furnace

Included in 4E

          Records of malfunction of control device

Included in 4E

          Periods when monitors are inoperative

Included in 4E

          Maintain and repair of control device,                   CMS, or monitors

Included in 4E

          Records of approved control device                       bypass

Included in 4E

          Semiannual records of uncontrolled j                arsenic emission rate

40

2

80

16

1,280

64

128

$118,833

  F.  Time to train personnel

N/A

  G.  Time for audits

N/A

SUBTOTAL Recordkeeping

	1936	96.80	193.60	$179,735

Subtotal Labor Burden

2,694

134.70

269.40

$250,106

TOTAL LABOR  BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

3,098.10

$250,106

Assumptions:

a  We have assumed that there are sixteen existing sources, and that no additional new sources will become subject to the rule over the next three years.

b  This ICR uses the following labor rates:  $97.46 per hour for Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $83.71 per hour for Technical labor, and $42.55

per hour for Clerical labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19,  2005, “Table 2: Civilian Workers, by Occupational and Industry group.”  The rates are from column 1, “Total compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110% to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

c  We have assumed that it will take one hour to read instructions.

d  We have assumed that it will take eighty hours to complete performance test.

e  We have assumed that fifteen respondents will write report of arsenic emission estimates on a semiannual basis.

f  We have assumed that fifteen respondents will write report of uncontrolled arsenic emission rates on a semiannual basis.

g  We have assumed that one respondent will write report requesting approval of control device bypass once a year.

h  We have assumed that one respondent will write an excess emissions report semiannually.

i  It will take each respondent forty hours to enter information.

j  It will take each respondent forty hours twice a year to record uncontrolled arsenic emission rate.

Table 2:  Average Annual EPA Burden - NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass manufacturing Plants (CFR part 61, subpart N) (Renewal)

	Burden item

(A)

Technical

Person

Hours Per

Occurrence

(B)

Number  of

Occurrences

Per Year

(C)

Technical

Person Hours Per Plant Per

Year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Plants Per  Year a

(E)

Technical Hours

Per Year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management   Hours Per Year

(F=0.05xE)

(G)

Clerical

Hours Per

Year

(G=0.1xE)

(H)

Total

Cost,

Per Yearb

Initial performance test

     New facility c

24

1

24

0

0

0

0

$0

Repeat performance test

     New facility d

24

0.2

4.8

0

0

0

0

$0

Review reports

     New facility

          Construction or modification application

0.5

1

0.5

0

0

0

0

$0

          Notification of anticipated startup

0.5

1

0.5

0

0

0

0

$0

          Notification of actual startup

0.5

1

0.5

0

0

0

0

$0

          Source status report

0.5

1

0.5

0

0

0

0

$0

          Notification of initial performance emissions test

0.5

1

0.5

0

0

0

0

$0

          Report of initial performance emissions test results

8

1

8

0

0

0

0

$0

          Notification of physical or operational     change

0.5

1

0.5

0

0

0

0

$0

          Notification of emissions test

0.5

1

0.5

0

0

0

0

$0

          Report results of CMS evaluation

8

1

8

0

0

0

0

$0

     Existing facility

          Report of arsenic emission estimates rates e

4

1

4

15

60

3

6

$2,797

          Reports of uncontrolled arsenic emission f rates

8

1

8

1

8

0.4

0.8

$373

          Semiannual excess emissions g

6

2

12

1

12

0.6

1.2

$559

          Request approval of control device bypass h

6

1

6

1

6

0.3

0.6

$280

 Subtotals Labor Burden and Cost

86

4.3

8.6

$4,009

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST

98.90

$4,009.00

Assumptions:

a  We have assumed that there are sixteen existing sources, and that no additional new sources will become subject to the rule over the next three years.

b  This cost is based on the following hourly labor rates times a 1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead expenses: $56.02 for Managerial (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6), $41.57 for Technical (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6) and $22.50 Clerical (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6).  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2004 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.

c  We have assumed that it will take twenty four hours to perform initial performance test.

d  We have assumed that it will take twenty four hours to repeat performance test.

e  We have assumed that fifteen respondents will be required to review the report of arsenic emission estimates rates once a year.

f   We have assumed that it will take eight hours to review reports of uncontrolled arsenic emission rates once a year.

g  It is required that excess emissions reports are reviewed on a semiannual basis.

h  We have assumed that one respondent will review a report requesting approval of control device bypass once a year.

 PAGE  12


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 188 (Friday, September 27, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51211-51214]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20974]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87060; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2019-047]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To
Adopt Rule 21.21 (Solicitation Auction Mechanism)

September 23, 2019.

I. Introduction

    On July 31, 2019, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to adopt Rule 21.21, the Solicitation Auction
Mechanism (``SAM''), a solicited order mechanism for larger-sized
orders. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on August 15, 2019.\3\ On September 9, 2019, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\4\ The
Commission has received no comments regarding the proposal. This order
approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86621 (August 9,
2019), 84 FR 41779 (``Notice'').
    \4\ Amendment No. 1 revises the proposal to correct a citation
signal and to add an explanatory sentence regarding the requirements
of Rule 11a2-2(T) under the Act. Because Amendment No. 1 does not
materially alter the substance of the proposed rule change or raise
unique or novel regulatory issues, it is not subject to notice and
comment. Amendment No. 1 is available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboeedgx-2019-047/srcboeedgx2019047-6090026-191882.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    As described more fully in the Notice,\5\ the Exchange proposes to
adopt Rule 21.21 \6\ establishing a solicited order mechanism. The
proposal permits an Options Member (the ``Initiating Member'') to
execute electronically a larger-sized order it represents as agent
(``Agency Order'') against a solicited order(s) (``Solicited
Order(s)''), provided that it submits both the Agency Order and
Solicited Order(s) into the SAM.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Notice, supra note 3.
    \6\ For purposes of proposed Rule 21.21, the term ``NBBO'' means
the national best bid or national best offer at the particular point
in time applicable to the reference, and the term ``Initial NBBO''
means the national best bid or national best offer at the time a SAM
auction is initiated.
    \7\ The solicited order(s) cannot be for the same EFID as the
Agency Order or for the account of any Options Market Maker with an
appointment in the applicable class on the Exchange. The Agency
Order and Solicited Order cannot both be for the accounts of a
customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Eligibility and SAM Auction Process

    The Initiating Member may initiate a SAM in any class traded on the
Exchange.\8\ The order size of an Agency Order marked for SAM
processing must be at least the minimum size designated by the
Exchange, which may not be less than 500 standard option contracts or
5,000 mini-option contracts. The size of the Solicited Order(s) must be
for/total the same size as the Agency Order.\9\ In addition, the
Initiating Member must designate each of the Agency Order and Solicited
Order as all-or-none (``AON''),\10\ and the price of the Agency Order
and Solicited Order must be in an increment of $0.01.\11\ Also, an
Initiating Member may not designate an Agency Order or Solicited Order
as Post Only.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See proposed Rule 21.21(a)(1).
    \9\ See proposed Rule 21.21(a)(3).
    \10\ See id.
    \11\ See proposed Rule 21.21(a)(4).
    \12\ See proposed Rule 21.21(a)(5). See also Exchange Rule
21.19(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Solicited Order must stop the entire buy (sell) Agency Order at
a price that is at or better than the then-current NBO (NBB).\13\
Regarding resting orders that are on the same side as the Agency Order,
the proposal provides that if the Agency Order is to buy (sell), the
stop price must be at least $0.01 better than the Exchange best bid
(offer), unless the Agency Order is a Priority Customer order and the
resting order is a non-Priority Customer order, in which case the stop
price must be at or better than the Exchange best bid (offer).\14\
Regarding resting orders that are on the opposite side as the Agency
Order, the proposal provides that if the Agency Order is to buy (sell)
and the Exchange best offer (bid) represents (i) a Priority Customer
order on the EDGX Book, the stop price must be at least $0.01 better
than the Exchange best offer (bid); or (ii) a quote or order that is
not a Priority Customer order on the EDGX Book, the stop price must be
at or better than the Exchange best offer (bid).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See proposed Rule 21.21(b)(1).
    \14\ See proposed Rule 21.21(b)(2). The Exchange notes that
these conditions regarding orders on the same side as the Agency
Order are the same as those applicable to AIM for orders of 50
contracts or more. See Exchange Rule 21.19(b).
    \15\ See proposed Rule 21.21(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A ``SAM sweep order'' or ``SAM ISO'' is the submission of two
orders for crossing in a SAM without regard for better-priced Protected
Quotes (as defined in Exchange Rule 27.1) because the submitting
Options Member routed an ISO(s) simultaneously with the routing of the
SAM ISO to execute against the full displayed size of any Protected
Quote that is better than the stop price and has swept all interest in
the EDGX Book with a price better than the stop price. If the
Initiating Member submits a SAM sweep order to a SAM, the stop price,
SAM responses, and executions will be permitted at a price inferior to
the Initial NBBO. Any execution(s) resulting from these sweeps will
accrue to the SAM Agency Order.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed Rule 21.21(b)(4). The Exchange notes that ISOs
are similarly permitted for AIM auctions, and the proposed
definition of a SAM ISO is consistent with linkage rules. See
Exchange Rules 21.19(b)(3)(A) and 27.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange system will initiate the SAM process by sending a SAM
auction notification message detailing the side, size, price, origin
code, Auction ID, and options series of the Agency Order to all Options
Members that elect to receive SAM auction notification messages.\17\
SAM auction notification messages will not be included in the
disseminated BBO or disseminated to the Options Price Reporting
Authority (``OPRA'').\18\ The SAM auction will last for a period of
time determined by the Exchange (the ``SAM auction period''), which may
be no less than 100 milliseconds and no more than one second.\19\ An
Initiating Member may not modify or cancel an

Agency Order or Solicited Order after submission to a SAM auction.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(2).
    \18\ See id.
    \19\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(3). Pursuant to Exchange Rule
16.3, the Exchange will announce the length of the SAM auction
period via specification, Exchange Notice, or Regulatory Circular.
    \20\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any User other than the Initiating Member (determined by EFID) may
submit responses to a SAM auction that are properly marked specifying
size, side of the market, and the Auction ID for the SAM auction to
which the User is submitting the response.\21\ A SAM response may
specify a limit price or be treated as market. SAM responses must be on
the opposite side of the market as the Agency Order, \22\ and the
minimum price increment for SAM responses is $0.01.\23\ SAM buy (sell)
responses are capped at the Exchange best offer (bid), or $0.01 better
than the Exchange best offer (bid) if it is represented by a Priority
Customer order resting on the EDGX Options Book (unless the Agency
Order is a SAM ISO), that exists at the conclusion of the SAM auction.
For purposes of the SAM auction, the system will aggregate all of a
User's orders and quotes resting on the EDGX Book and SAM responses for
the same EFID at the same price.\24\ The System will cap the size of a
SAM response, or the aggregate size of a User's orders and quotes
resting on the EDGX Book and SAM responses for the same EFID at the
same price, at the size of the Agency Order (i.e., the System will
ignore size in excess of the size of the Agency Order when processing a
SAM auction).\25\ SAM responses will not be visible to SAM auction
participants or disseminated to OPRA.\26\ A User may modify or cancel
its SAM responses during the SAM auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The Exchange notes that the system will disregard any Post
Only instruction applied to a SAM response, as that instruction is
inconsistent with the purpose of a SAM response, which is to execute
against the Agency Order at the conclusion of a SAM auction (and
thus not post to the EDGX Book). See Notice, supra note 3, at 41781
n.25. As a result, the system will handle a SAM response with a Post
Only instruction in the same manner as all other SAM responses,
which is as a provider of liquidity (i.e., maker). See id.
    \22\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(5)(E). The Exchange notes that
this is the same as the corresponding provision for the Exchange's
AIM auction. See Exchange Rule 21.19(c)(5)(E).
    \23\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(5)(A).
    \24\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(5)(C). The Exchange notes that
this is the same as the corresponding provision for the Exchange's
AIM auction. See Exchange Rule 21.19(c)(5)(C). The Exchange also
notes that this (combined with the proposed size cap) is intended to
prevent an Options Member from submitting multiple orders, quotes,
or responses at the same price to obtain a larger pro-rata share of
the Agency Order. See Notice, supra note 3, at 41781.
    \25\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(5)(D). The Exchange notes that
this is the same as the corresponding provision for the Exchange's
AIM auction. See Exchange Rule 21.19(c)(5)(D). The Exchange notes
that this is intended to prevent an Options Member from submitting
an order, quote, or response with an extremely large size in order
to obtain a larger pro-rata share of the Agency Order. See Notice,
supra note 3, at 41781.
    \26\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(5)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One or more SAM auctions in the same series may occur at the same
time. To the extent there is more than one SAM in a series underway at
a time, the SAM auctions will conclude sequentially based on the exact
time each SAM commenced, unless terminated early pursuant to proposed
Rule 21.21(d). At the time each SAM concludes, the system will allocate
the Agency Order pursuant to proposed Rule 21.21(e) and will take into
account all SAM responses and unrelated orders in place at the exact
time of conclusion. In the event there are multiple SAM auctions
underway that are each terminated early pursuant to proposed Rule
21.21(d), the system will process the SAM auctions sequentially based
on the exact time each SAM commenced.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See proposed Rule 21.21(c)(1). See also Notice, supra note
3, at 41780.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Conclusion of the SAM Auction

    The SAM will conclude at the sooner of the following: (i) The end
of the SAM auction period; (ii) upon receipt by the system of a
Priority Customer order on the same side of the market with a price the
same as or better than the stop price that would post to the EDGX Book;
(iii) upon receipt by the system of an unrelated order or quote that is
not a Priority Customer order on the same side of the market as the
Agency Order that would cause the stop price to be outside of the EDGX
BBO; (iv) the market close; and (v) any time the Exchange halts trading
in the affected series, provided, however, that in such instance the
SAM auction will conclude without execution.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See proposed Rule 21.21(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An unrelated market or marketable limit order (against the EDGX
BBO), including a Post Only Order,\29\ on the opposite side of the
Agency Order received during the SAM will not cause the SAM auction to
end early and will execute against interest outside of the SAM auction.
If contracts remain from such unrelated order at the time the SAM ends,
they may be allocated for execution against the Agency Order pursuant
to proposed Rule 21.21(e).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The Exchange notes that any Post Only order resting on the
EDGX Book at the conclusion of a SAM auction that executes against
the Agency Order pursuant to proposed Rule 21.21(e) will execute in
the same manner as any other type of order resting on the EDGX Book,
which is as a provider of liquidity (i.e., maker). See Notice, supra
note 3, at 41782 n.34.
    \30\ See proposed Rule 21.21(d)(2). The Exchange notes that the
proposed reasons why a SAM auction may conclude early are the same
as those that will cause an AIM auction to conclude early. See
Exchange Rule 21.19(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Priority and Allocation

    At the conclusion of the SAM auction, the system will execute the
Agency Order against the Solicited Order or contra-side interest (which
includes orders and quotes resting in the EDGX Book and SAM responses)
at the best price(s) as follows (provided that any execution price(s)
must be at or between the EDGX BBO existing at the conclusion of the
SAM auction and at or between the Initial NBBO): \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The system will execute the Agency Order against the
Solicited Order at the stop price if there are no Priority Customer
orders (including Priority Customer AON orders) on the opposite side of
the Agency Order resting in the EDGX Book at the stop price and the
aggregate size of contra-side interest at an improved price(s) is
insufficient to satisfy the Agency Order.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The system will execute the Agency Order against contra-
side interest (and cancel the Solicited Order) if (A) there is a
Priority Customer order (including a Priority Customer AON order) on
the opposite side of the Agency Order resting on the EDGX Book at the
stop price and the aggregate size of the Priority Customer order and
other contra-side interest at the stop price or an improved price(s) is
sufficient to satisfy the Agency Order; or (B) the aggregate size of
contra-side interest at an improved price(s) is sufficient to satisfy
the Agency Order. The Agency Order execution against such contra-side
interest will occur at each price level, to the price at which the
balance of the Agency Order can be fully executed, in the following
order:
    [cir] Priority Customer orders (including Priority Customer AON
orders) on the EDGX Book (non-AON orders before AON orders, each in
time priority);
    [cir] remaining contra-side trading interest (including non-
Priority Customer orders and quotes on the EDGX Book and SAM responses)
pursuant to Exchange Rule 21.8(c);
    [cir] any nondisplayed Reserve Quantity (Priority Customer before
non-Priority Customer, each in time priority); and
    [cir] any non-Priority Customer AON orders, if there is sufficient
size to satisfy the AON order.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The system will cancel the Agency Order and Solicited
Order with no execution if (i) execution of the Agency Order against
the Solicited Order at the stop price would not be at or between the
EDGX BBO at the conclusion of the SAM auction or at or between the
Initial NBBO; or (ii) there is a Priority

Customer order (including a Priority Customer AON order) resting on the
opposite side of the Agency Order at the stop price on the EDGX Book,
and the aggregate size of the Priority Customer order and any other
contra-side interest is insufficient to satisfy the Agency Order.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e)(3). The Exchange notes that the
proposed provisions regarding the execution of the Agency Order at
the conclusion of a SAM auction are similar to the corresponding
provisions for a Cboe Options SAM, as well as current Exchange Rules
regarding priority and allocation of resting orders and quotes. See
Cboe Options Rule 6.74B(b)(2)(A); Exchange Rule 21.8.

The system will cancel or reject any unexecuted SAM responses (or
unexecuted portions) at the conclusion of the SAM auction.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Notification Requirement and Order Exposure Rule

    Proposed Rule 21.21, Interpretation and Policy .01 provides that
prior to entering Agency Orders into a SAM auction on behalf of
customers, Initiating Members must deliver to the customer a written
notification informing the customer that his order may be executed
using the SAM auction. The written notification must disclose the terms
and conditions contained in proposed Rule 21.21 and be in a form
approved by the Exchange.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See proposed Rule 21.21, Interpretation and Policy .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rule 22.12 prevents an Options Member from executing
agency orders to increase its economic gain from trading against the
order without first giving other trading interests on the Exchange an
opportunity to either trade with the agency order or to trade at the
execution price when the Options Member was already bidding or offering
on the book. However, the Exchange notes that it may be possible for an
Options Member to establish a relationship with a Priority Customer or
other person to deny agency orders the opportunity to interact on the
Exchange and to realize similar economic benefits as it would achieve
by executing agency order as principal.\37\ Accordingly, proposed Rule
21.21, Interpretation and Policy .02 provides that Options Members may
not use the SAM auction to circumvent Exchange Rule 21.19 or 22.12
limiting principal transactions. This may include, but is not limited
to, Options Members entering contra-side orders that are solicited from
(a) affiliated broker-dealers or (b) broker-dealers with which the
Options Member has an arrangement that allows the Options Member to
realize similar economic benefits from the solicited transaction as it
would achieve by executing the customer order in whole or in part as
principal.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 41783.
    \38\ See proposed Rule 21.21, Interpretation and Policy .02.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, with
Section 6(b) of the Act.\39\ In particular, the Commission finds that
the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,\40\ which requires, among other things, that the rules of a
national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposed rule change,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \40\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that allowing Options Members to enter
orders into the SAM could provide additional opportunities for such
large-sized orders to receive price improvement over the NBBO. The
Commission further believes that the proposal to establish the SAM may
allow for greater flexibility in executing large-sized orders, is not
novel, and does not otherwise raise any issues of first impression.\41\
The Commission believes that the proposal includes appropriate terms
and conditions to assure that the Agency Order is exposed to Options
Members for the possibility of price improvement over the NBBO and that
Priority Customer orders on the Exchange are protected. At the
conclusion of a SAM, the Agency Order would either be executed in full
(at a price at or between the Initial NBBO and at or between the EDGX
BBO at the conclusion of the SAM auction) or cancelled. The Agency
Order will be executed against the Solicited Order at the proposed stop
price if (i) there is insufficient size among contra-side trading
interest at a price better than the stop price to execute the Agency
Order; and (ii) there are no Priority Customer orders (including
Priority Customer AON orders) resting on the opposite side of the
Agency Order at the stop price.\42\ If there are Priority Customer
orders (including Priority Customer AON orders) and there is sufficient
size to execute the Agency Order (considering all eligible interest),
then the Agency Order will be executed against these interests and the
Solicited Order will be cancelled.\43\ If, however, there are resting
Priority Customer orders (including Priority Customer AON orders) at
the stop price, but there is not sufficient size to execute the Agency
Order in full, then both the Agency Order and the Solicited Order will
be cancelled.\44\ Finally, if there is sufficient size to execute the
Agency Order in full at an improved price equal to or better than the
Initial NBBO and the EDGX BBO at the conclusion of the SAM auction, the
Agency Order will execute at the improved price and the Solicited Order
will be cancelled. The Commission believes that the priority and
allocation rules for the SAM, which are consistent with similar
mechanisms on other exchanges, are reasonable and consistent with the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ The Commission also notes that the proposal is similar to
requirements set forth in the Cboe Options Solicitation Auction
Mechanism, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'') Solicited Order Mechanism, and
Miami International Securities Exchange LLC (``MIAX'') PRIME
Solicitation Mechanism. See Cboe Options Rule 6.74B; ISE Rule
716(d); MIAX Rule 515A(b).
    \42\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e)(1).
    \43\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e)(2).
    \44\ See proposed Rule 21.21(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Section 11(a) of the Act

    Section 11(a)(1) of the Act \45\ prohibits a member of a national
securities exchange from effecting transactions on that exchange for
its own account, the account of an associated person, or an account
over which it or its associated person exercises investment discretion
(collectively, ``covered accounts'') unless an exception applies. Rule
11a2-2(T) under the Act,\46\ known as the ``effect versus execute''
rule, provides exchange members with an exemption from the Section
11(a)(1) prohibition. Rule 11a2-2(T) permits an exchange member,
subject to certain conditions, to effect transactions for covered
accounts by arranging for an unaffiliated member to execute
transactions on the exchange. To comply with Rule 11a2-2(T)'s
conditions, a member: (i) Must transmit the order from off the exchange
floor; (ii) may not participate in the

execution of the transaction once it has been transmitted to the member
performing the execution; \47\ (iii) may not be affiliated with the
executing member; and (iv) with respect to an account over which the
member or an associated person has investment discretion, neither the
member nor its associated person may retain any compensation in
connection with effecting the transaction except as provided in the
Rule. For the reasons set forth below, the Commission believes that
Exchange Options Members entering orders into the SAM would satisfy the
requirements of Rule 11a2-2(T).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1).
    \46\ 17 CFR 240.11a2-2(T).
    \47\ This prohibition also applies to associated persons. The
member may, however, participate in clearing and settling the
transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rule's first condition is that orders for covered accounts be
transmitted from off the exchange floor. In the context of automated
trading systems, the Commission has found that the off-floor
transmission requirement is met if a covered account order is
transmitted from a remote location directly to an exchange's floor by
electronic means.\48\ The Exchange represents that its trading system
and the proposed SAM receive all orders electronically through remote
terminals or computer-to-computer interfaces.\49\ The Exchange also
represents that orders for covered accounts from Options Members will
be transmitted from a remote location directly to the proposed SAM by
electronic means. Because no Exchange Options Member may submit orders
into the SAM from on the floor of the Exchange, the Commission believes
that the SAM satisfies the off-floor transmission requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 61419
(January 26, 2010), 75 FR 5157 (February 1, 2010) (SR-BATS-2009-031)
(approving BATS options trading); 59154 (December 23, 2008), 73 FR
80468 (December 31, 2008) (SR-BSE-2008-48) (approving equity
securities listing and trading on BSE); 57478 (March 12, 2008), 73
FR 14521 (March 18, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2007-004 and SR-NASDAQ-2007-
080) (approving NOM options trading); 53128 (January 13, 2006), 71
FR 3550 (January 23, 2006) (File No. 10-131) (approving The Nasdaq
Stock Market LLC); 44983 (October 25, 2001), 66 FR 55225 (November
1, 2001) (SR-PCX-00-25) (approving Archipelago Exchange); 29237 (May
24, 1991), 56 FR 24853 (May 31, 1991) (SR-NYSE-90-52 and SR-NYSE-90-
53) (approving NYSE's Off-Hours Trading Facility); and 15533
(January 29, 1979), 44 FR 6084 (January 31, 1979) (``1979
Release'').
    \49\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 41787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Rule requires that the member and any associated person
not participate in the execution of its order after the order has been
transmitted. The Exchange represents that at no time following the
submission to the SAM of an order or SAM response is an Options Member
able to acquire control or influence over the result or timing of the
order's or response's execution.\50\ According to the Exchange, the
execution of an order (including the Agency and the Solicited Order) or
a SAM response sent to the SAM is determined by what other orders and
responses are present and the priority of those orders and
responses.\51\ Accordingly, the Commission believes that an Options
Member does not participate in the execution of an order or response
submitted to the SAM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See id. (also representing, among other things, that no
Options Member, including the Initiating Member, will see a SAM
response submitted into SAM and therefore will not be able to
influence or guide the execution of their Agency Orders, Solicited
Orders, or SAM responses, as applicable).
    \51\ See id. The Exchange notes that an Initiating Member may
not cancel or modify an Agency Order or Solicited Order after it has
been submitted into SAM, but that Options Members may modify or
cancel their responses after being submitted to a SAM. See id. at
41787 n.68. As the Exchange notes, the Commission has stated that
the non-participation requirement does not preclude members from
cancelling or modifying orders, or from modifying instructions for
executing orders, after they have been transmitted so long as such
modifications or cancellations are also transmitted from off the
floor. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 14563 (March 14,
1978), 43 FR 11542, 11547 (the ``1978 Release''). See also Amendment
No. 1, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, Rule 11a2-2(T) requires that the order be executed by an
exchange member who is unaffiliated with the member initiating the
order. The Commission has stated that this requirement is satisfied
when automated exchange facilities, such as the SAM, are used, as long
as the design of these systems ensures that members do not possess any
special or unique trading advantages in handling their orders after
transmitting them to the exchange.\52\ The Exchange represents that the
SAM is designed so that no Options Member has any special or unique
trading advantage in the handling of its orders after transmitting its
orders to the mechanism.\53\ Based on the Exchange's representation,
the Commission believes that the SAM satisfies this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ In considering the operation of automated execution systems
operated by an exchange, the Commission noted that, while there is
not an independent executing exchange member, the execution of an
order is automatic once it has been transmitted into the system.
Because the design of these systems ensures that members do not
possess any special or unique trading advantages in handling their
orders after transmitting them to the exchange, the Commission has
stated that executions obtained through these systems satisfy the
independent execution requirement of Rule 11a2-2(T). See 1979
Release, supra note 44.
    \53\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 41787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fourth, in the case of a transaction effected for an account with
respect to which the initiating member or an associated person thereof
exercises investment discretion, neither the initiating member nor any
associated person thereof may retain any compensation in connection
with effecting the transaction, unless the person authorized to
transact business for the account has expressly provided otherwise by
written contract referring to Section 11(a) of the Act and Rule 11a2-
2(T) thereunder.\54\ The Exchange represents that Options Members
relying on Rule 11a2-2(T) for transactions effected through the SAM
must comply with this condition of the Rule and that the Exchange will
enforce this requirement pursuant to its obligations under Section
6(b)(1) of the Act to enforce compliance with federal securities
laws.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ In addition, Rule 11a2-2(T)(d) requires a member or
associated person authorized by written contract to retain
compensation, in connection with effecting transactions for covered
accounts over which such member or associated persons thereof
exercises investment discretion, to furnish at least annually to the
person authorized to transact business for the account a statement
setting forth the total amount of compensation retained by the
member or any associated person thereof in connection with effecting
transactions for the account during the period covered by the
statement. See 17 CFR 240.11a2-2(T)(d). See also 1978 Release, supra
note 47, at 11548 (stating ``[t]he contractual and disclosure
requirements are designed to assure that accounts electing to permit
transaction-related compensation do so only after deciding that such
arrangements are suitable to their interests'').
    \55\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 41787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\56\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CboeEDGX-2019-047), as
modified by Amendment No. 1, is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-20974 Filed 9-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 218 (Friday, November 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56086-56087]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24605]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-4099]

Tedor Pharma, Inc., et al.; Withdrawal of Approval of 10
Abbreviated New Drug Applications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is
withdrawing approval of 10 abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs)
from multiple applicants. The applicants notified the Agency in writing
that the drug products were no longer marketed and requested that the
approval of the applications be withdrawn.

DATES: Approval is withdrawn as of December 10, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trang Tran, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave.,
Bldg. 75, Rm. 1671, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The applicants listed in the table have
informed FDA that these drug products are no longer marketed and have
requested that FDA withdraw approval of the applications under the
process described in Sec.  314.150(c) (21 CFR 314.150(c)). The
applicants have also, by their requests, waived their opportunity for a
hearing. Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated
application under Sec.  314.150(c) is without prejudice to refiling.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Application No.                Drug                Applicant
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANDA 040747.................  Benzphetamine         Tedor Pharma, Inc.,
                               Hydrochloride (HCl)   400 Highland
                               Tablets, 25           Corporate Dr.,
                               milligrams (mg) and   Cumberland, RI
                               50 mg.                02864.
ANDA 062356.................  Gentamicin Sulfate    Fresenius Kabi USA,
                               Injection USP,        LLC, Three
                               Equivalent to (EQ)    Corporate Dr., Lake
                               10 mg base/           Zurich, IL 60047.
                               milliliter (mL) and
                               EQ 40 mg base/mL.
ANDA 074097.................  Isoflurane USP,       Hospira, Inc., 275
                               99.9%.                North Field Dr.,
                                                     Bldg. H1, Lake
                                                     Forest, IL 60045.
ANDA 076484.................  Ciprofloxacin         Fresenius Kabi USA,
                               Injection USP, 200    LLC.
                               mg/20 mL and 400 mg/
                               40 mL.
ANDA 080504.................  Epinephrine and       Belmora LLC, 2231
                               Lidocaine HCl         Crystal Dr., #1000,
                               Injection, 0.01 mg/   Arlington, VA
                               mL; 2% and 0.02 mg/   22202.
                               mL; 2%.
                              Lidocaine HCl
                               Injection, 2%..
ANDA 083559.................  Mepivacaine HCl       Do.
                               Injection, 3%.
ANDA 084315.................  Dexamethasone         Watson Laboratories,
                               Acetate Injectable    Inc., Subsidiary of
                               Suspension USP, EQ    Teva
                               8 mg base/mL.         Pharmaceuticals
                                                     USA, Inc., 425
                                                     Privet Rd.,
                                                     Horsham, PA 19044.
ANDA 084850.................  Levonordefrin and     Belmora LLC.
                               Mepivacaine HCl
                               Injection, 2%; 0.05
                               mg/mL.
ANDA 086389.................  Lidocaine HCl         International
                               Viscous Oral          Medication Systems,
                               Topical Solution      Ltd., 1886 Santa
                               USP, 2%.              Anita Ave., South
                                                     El Monte, CA 91733.
ANDA 087863.................  Choledyl SA           Warner Chilcott Co.,
                               (oxtriphylline)       LLC, Subsidiary of
                               Extended-Release      Teva
                               Tablets USP, 400 mg.  Pharmaceuticals
                                                     USA, Inc., 425
                                                     Privet Rd.,
                                                     Horsham, PA 19044.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, approval of the applications listed in the table, and
all amendments and supplements thereto, is hereby withdrawn as of
December 10, 2018. Introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of products without approved new drug applications
violates section 301(a) and (d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (21 U.S.C. 331(a) and (d)). Drug products that are listed in the
table that are in inventory on December 10, 2018 may continue to be
dispensed until the inventories have been depleted or the drug products
have reached their expiration dates or otherwise become violative,
whichever occurs first.

    Dated: November 6, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-24605 Filed 11-8-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 206 (Monday, October 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 65287]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27075]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Advisory Committee;
Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: ITS Joint Program Office, Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Research and Technology, U.S. Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program Advisory
Committee (ITSPAC) will hold a teleconference on November 13, 2015,
from 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. (EST).
    The ITSPAC, established under section 5305 of Public Law 109-59,
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users, August 10, 2005, and re-established under section
53003 of Public Law 112-141, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century, July 6, 2012, was created to advise the Secretary of
Transportation on all matters relating to the study, development, and
implementation of intelligent transportation systems. Through its
sponsor, the ITS Joint Program Office (JPO), the ITSPAC makes
recommendations to the Secretary regarding ITS Program needs,
objectives, plans, approaches, content, and progress.
    The following is a summary of the meeting tentative agenda: (1)
Welcome, (2) Reflections on 2015 Advice Memorandum, (3) Planning for
March 2016 Meeting, (4) Discussion of Topics for 2016 Advice
Memorandum, (5) Summary and Adjourn.
    The teleconference will be open to the public, but limited
conference lines will be available on a first-come, first-served basis.
Members of the public who wish to participate in the teleconference
must submit a request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>not later than November 6,
2015. In addition, for planning purposes, your request must indicate
whether you wish to present oral statements during the teleconference.
    Questions about the agenda or written comments may be submitted by
U.S. Mail to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, ITS Joint Program
Office, Attention: Stephen Glasscock, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., HOIT,
Washington, DC 20590 or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>. The ITS JPO requests
that written comments be submitted not later than November 6, 2015.
    Notice of this teleconference is provided in accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act and the General Services Administration
regulations (41 CFR part 102-3) covering management of Federal advisory
committees.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on the 20 day of October 2015.
Stephen Glasscock,
Designated Federal Official, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. 2015-27075 Filed 10-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 145 (Thursday, July 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49636-49637]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17855]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. P-13212-005; Project No. P-13212-005]

 Kenai Hydro, LLC ; Notice of Scoping Meetings and Environmental
Site Review and Soliciting Scoping Comments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Application for Original License for Major
Project--Unconstructed.
    b. Project No.: 13212-005.
    c. Date filed: April 18, 2016.
    d. Applicant: Kenai Hydro, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On Grant Creek, near the Town of Moose Pass, Kenai
Peninsula Borough, Alaska. The proposed project would occupy 1,741.3
acres of federal land within the Chugach National Forest managed by the
U.S. Forest Service.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mike Salzetti, Manager of Fuel Supply &
Renewable Energy Development, 280 Airport Way, Kenai, AK 99611. (907)
283-2375.
    i. FERC Contact: Kenneth Hogan<EMAIL_ADDRESS>202-502-
8434.
    j. Deadline for filing scoping comments: October 10, 2016.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
scoping comments 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-13212-005.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person on the official service list for the
project. Further, 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.
    k. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    l. The proposed Grant Lake Hydroelectric Project would consist of:
(1) An intake structure within Grant Lake; (2) a 3,300-foot-long
tunnel; (3) a 72-inch-diameter, 150-foot-long, steel penstock; (4) a
power house containing two 2.5-megawatt Francis turbine/generator
units; (5) a 95-foot-long open channel tailrace; (6) a 3.6-acre
tailrace detention pond; (6) a 1.1-mile-long, 115-kilovolt transmission
line; (7) two miles of project access road; and (8) appurtenant
facilities.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may 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 field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support. Copies are also available for inspection and
reproduction at the Kenai Community Library at 163 Main St Loop, Kenai,
AK 99611 and at the Homer Electric Office at 280 Airport Way, Kenai, AK
99611.
    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, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Scoping Process:
    The Commission intends to prepare an Environmental assessment (EA)
on the project in accordance with the National Environmental Policy
Act. The EA will consider both site-specific and cumulative
environmental impacts and reasonable alternatives to the proposed
action.

Scoping Meetings

    FERC staff will conduct one agency scoping meeting and one public
meeting. The agency scoping meeting will be held during business hours
and will focus on resource agency and non-governmental organization
(NGO) concerns, while the public scoping meeting is primarily for
public input and will be held in the evening. All interested
individuals, organizations, and agencies are invited to attend one or
both of the meetings, and to assist the staff in identifying the scope
of the environmental issues that should be analyzed in the EA. The
times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Wednesday, September 7, at 7:00 p.m. (Local Time).
    Location: Moose Pass Community Hall, Mile 29.5 Seward Highway,
Moose Pass, AK 99631.

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Thursday, September 8, at 10:00 a.m. (Local Time).

    Location: Moose Pass Community Hall, Mile 29.5 Seward Highway,
Moose Pass, AK 99631.
    Copies of the Scoping Document (SD3) outlining the subject areas to
be addressed in the EA were distributed to the parties on the
Commission's mailing list and to Kenai Hydro's distribution list.
Copies of the SD3 will be available at the scoping meetings and may be
viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link
(see item m above).

Environmental Site Review

    The Applicant and FERC staff will conduct a project Environmental
Site Review beginning at 8:00 a.m. on September 7, 2016. All
participants interested in the environmental site review and hiking
into the location of the proposed powerhouse should meet at the Moose
Pass Community Hall on the Seward Highway at mile 29.5 by 8 a.m. on
September 7, 2016. Participants should be in good health and prepared/
able to hike without assistance for 5 miles in unimproved trail
conditions with a 200 yard section of off trail hiking in a heavily
forested area. The elevation gain for the hike is approximately 200
feet. Participants should also pack their own lunch, snacks and water,
wear rugged footwear, and be prepared for inclement and potentially
cold weather conditions. Anyone with questions about the site visit
should contact Mike Salzetti at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Those individuals planning to participate
in the site visit should notify Mr. Salzetti of their intent, no later
than August 26, 2016.

Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, the staff will: (1) Summarize the
environmental issues tentatively identified for analysis in the EA; (2)
solicit from the meeting participants all available information,
especially quantifiable data, on the resources at issue; (3) encourage
statements from experts and the public on issues that should be
analyzed in the EA, including viewpoints in opposition to, or in
support of, the staff's preliminary views; (4) determine the resource
issues to be addressed in the EA; and (5) identify those issues that
require a detailed analysis, as well as those issues that do not
require a detailed analysis.

Procedures

    The meetings are recorded by a stenographer and become part of the
formal record of the Commission proceeding on the project.
    Individuals, organizations, and agencies with environmental
expertise and concerns are encouraged to attend the meeting and to
assist the staff in defining and clarifying the issues to be addressed
in the EA.

    Dated: July 22, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-17855 Filed 7-27-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 165 (Monday, August 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 52818]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20678]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Release No. 34-70235; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2013-59]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule
Change Amending Rule 965NY, Which Governs NDX and RUT Combination
Orders

August 20, 2013.
    On June 21, 2013, NYSE MKT LLC (``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Rule
965NY, which governs NDX and RUT Combination Orders. The proposed rule
change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July 9,
2013.\3\ The Commission received two comment letters on this proposal
\4\ and a response letter from the Exchange.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69919 (July 2,
2013), 78 FR 41168.
    \4\ See comment letters to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, from Darren Story, CFA, Student Options, LLC, dated July
12, 2013; and from David Spack, Chief Compliance Officer, Casey
Securities, LLC, dated August 2, 2013.
    \5\ See comment letter to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, from Janet McGinness, EVP & Corporate Secretary, NYSE
Euronext, dated August 19, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \6\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day for this filing is August 23, 2013. The Commission is now
extending the time period for Commission action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has
sufficient time to consider this proposed rule change, the comment
letters that have been submitted in connection with this proposed rule
change, and the Exchange's response letter.
    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\7\ designates October 7, 2013 as the date by which the Commission
should either approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-
NYSEMKT-2013-59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-20678 Filed 8-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76026-76027]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30994]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14424-000]

Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority; Notice of Preliminary
Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments and
Motions To Intervene

    On June 12, 2012, Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority (THREA)
filed an application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power
Act, proposing to study the feasibility of the Walker Lake
Hydroelectric Project, to be located on Walker Lake, near Haines,
Haines Borough, Alaska. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if
issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) Two rock-filled dams
approximately 15-foot-wide, and 250- and 325-foot-long, respectively,
creating a usable capacity of Walker Lake of

4,300 acre-feet at a normal maximum operating elevation of 1,195 feet
above mean sea level (msl); (2) a concrete spillway and diversion
channel for controlled releases to Walker Creek; (3) a concrete intake
at elevation 1,170 feet msl diverting flow into the penstock; (4) a 24-
inch-diameter, 11,000-foot-long penstock, of which approximately 10,000
feet would be buried and 1,000 feet would be above ground; (5) a
powerhouse containing one generating unit with an installed capacity of
one megawatt and 780 feet of net head; (6) a 50-foot-long tailrace
connecting the powerhouse with the Little Salmon River; (7) a 4-mile-
long, 12.5-kilovolt transmission line extending from the project to an
interconnection location near the Klehini River Bridge; and (8)
appurtenant facilities. The estimated annual generation of the Walker
Lake Project would be 3,615 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Richard George, P.O. Box 40, Angoon, AK,
99820, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Matt Buhyoff,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Competing Application: This application competes with Project No.
14346-000 filed January 11, 2012. Competing applications or a notice of
intent to file a competing application had to be filed on or before May
14, 2012. On May 11, 2012, THREA filed a notice of intent to file a
competing application; therefore, its competing application had to be
filed on or before June 13, 2012.
    Deadline for filing comments and motions to intervene: 60 days from
the issuance of this notice. Comments and motions to intervene may be
filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii)
and the instructions on the Commission's Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to
6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic
filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an
original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    More information about this project can be viewed or printed on the
``eLibrary'' link of Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-14424) in the docket
number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-
866-208-3372.

    Dated: December 19, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-30994 Filed 12-21-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P